The start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine (Part 1)

vividtiger72 said:How many people in the European Union actually know the first thing about handling a weapon? You can't just call up millions of civilians who have never even laid eyes on a rifle and expect them to hold a line. At this rate, we're just volunteering to be cannon fodder.

I'm really curious to see what the anti-conscription crowd has to say now.👍
Better Safe Than Sorry.

rowdytiger13 said:Slovakia is shipping out artillery shells and fuel worth about $12 million.
That includes 12,000 rounds of 120mm ammunition, 10 million liters of diesel, and 2.4 million liters of jet fuel.
The Netherlands is sending 200 anti-aircraft missiles—specifically Stingers, per Kyiv's request.
The Czech Republic is providing weapons and ammo valued at $9.2 million, and they’ve made it clear this isn't their last move; more is on the way.
Meanwhile, the State Department has been ordered to release $350 million in funds to support Ukraine.
The Slovakian government is also chipping in with military gear like helmets, rifles, and ammunition.
granitebison keeps the weapons flowing.
Germany isn't even worth mentioning.

They're finally getting moving too:

link

BREAKING: Germany dropping longstanding block against lethal weapons transfers to allow 400 RPGs to be sent to Ukraine from Netherlands to help repel Russian invaders. Potentially major shift in European military assistance for Ukraine. Story soon at

Somewhere out in Ukraine—people actually trying to stop Russian tanks by putting themselves in the way. Just incredible.

Thomas Nelson25 said:Look, what can you do? The regime is just pure repression.

I’m sitting here reading about death penalties for "traitors"... if you read between the lines, it's pretty clear... it's a direct message to the Russian people... the point is simple: shut up and follow the leader.

Hold on—are we saying those terrible, primitive Russians are threatening to bring back the death penalty?
Isn't that basically what democratic America already has neatly in place?

I honestly have no clue who Ivan Čović is. But based on his comment, it looks like he actually knows quite a bit about the situation in Ukraine and how Ukrainians really feel about Putin and this whole war. It seems like the Ukrainians themselves are starting to realize that the USA pulled them into this conflict.

https://i.postimg.cc/MK7tVmck/1.png

https://i.postimg.cc/4xXP5HtY/2.png

Sam Martinez9 said:In my view, he isn't even planning on a retreat. After all, he already issued threats against Sweden and Finland regarding their potential entry into NATO. I want to emphasize that—these are direct threats made toward sovereign European nations.

So, what do you suppose happens if Sweden and Finland rush headlong into NATO?

Sweden and Finland were the ones who made the first move.

Charles Davis9 said:Russia is claiming that not a single one of their soldiers has died🤣.

More of them came back home than were even sent over there in the first place. 🤣
They basically just cloned themselves on the way.

I honestly can't wrap my head around why the Russians are so incredibly fixated on Ukraine.
If they were just looking for a target to vent all that misplaced aggression on, they would have been much better off picking a fight with the Scandinavians or the Baltic states, who—let's be honest—likely harbor far more resentment toward them than anyone in Ukraine ever could.

Laura Scott7 said:Look, it’s pretty simple if you actually bother to look at the big picture: Russia is just looking out for its own backyard, especially after being backed into a corner by NATO constantly pushing its borders right up against Ukraine. Putin laid out the terms clearly—he wanted a guarantee that Ukraine wouldn't be joining NATO, plain and simple. But instead of taking that seriously, these folks got way too cocky, acting like Russia was some minor player in the Middle East that they could just push around. Now, they’re trying to flip the script and spin this whole thing to make it look like Russia just attacked Ukraine out of nowhere without any provocation. Give me a break... what a joke. And don't even get me started on those EU sanctions; as if they’ll actually do anything when half the stuff they produce is already being bought up by India and China anyway. But hey, the absolute best part of this circus? The USA won't even stop importing oil because heaven forbid they actually try to do something to keep energy prices from skyrocketing, right? Total joke.

Accurate analysis. Most people just haven't followed the situation closely enough to know what's actually happening. You could try explaining it to them until tomorrow, but they've already decided they hate Russia, so there's no point. 🙄

Not to mention that most people get their info on this conflict from Western media outlets owned by Westerners who fled Ukraine the second things got messy, or who left everyone else behind despite promising protection 😁. How could those kinds of media outlets possibly provide objective news? Especially after the pandemic, you can see how all the mainstream Western media outlets just push the exact same narrative. It's pure propaganda, just from the other side.

Steven Bennett5 said:From what we can see, the Russians have definitely achieved their strategic goals so far:

They've effectively pushed Ukraine away from any consideration of joining NATO or even the EU for a long time.
The fighting is happening on Ukrainian soil.

The forces prepared for the assault—maybe around 150,000 to 170,000 soldiers—simply aren't enough to "conquer" a nation of this size. But clearly, that isn't the goal here.

The aim is to squeeze Kyiv, to pressure that comedian and his boxer buddy to back down and save their people and their country.
The goal is to get Ukraine—either this current administration or likely whoever follows—to sign an unconditional agreement to remain militarily neutral.

You don't actually need to "occupy" all of Ukraine to achieve any of that!

Secondly, nobody really has reliable intel from the ground right now, which, unlike American or Western interventions in places like Iraq or Syria, is a relatively new factor.

It would be naive to fall for the nonsense on our mainstream news outlets claiming the operation is failing just because it’s only day three.
Operations like this aren't planned to last only three or four weeks.
Even in Chechnya (the second war, which the Russians won), it didn't wrap up in five or six days...
The Russians probably haven't even deployed their second or third waves of assault forces yet.
Will they actually march into the center of Kyiv and hold it under siege? Honestly, who knows.

As for casualties, of course there are losses on both sides. This is a war, not a ballet recital!

A 2-3% loss rate in an offensive operation of this scale is practically expected—if you assume there are 150,000 Russian troops involved, you can do the math yourselves.

Back home, during Storm, we had over 120 dead. Just near Turin by Karlovac, we lost about 10 people to mortars during the first attempt at a breakthrough. And generally speaking, those 120 or so people were killed by an enemy that often wasn't even putting up a decisive defense! They were mostly retreating.
Now, try putting that into the context of this current offensive operation!

All of this was discussed before the war even started—nothing has actually been achieved during the invasion over these last three days.

Steven Bennett5 said:From what we can see, the Russians have definitely achieved their strategic goals so far:

They've effectively pushed Ukraine away from any consideration of joining NATO or even the EU for a long time.
The fighting is happening on Ukrainian soil.

The forces prepared for the assault—maybe around 150,000 to 170,000 soldiers—simply aren't enough to "conquer" a nation of this size. But clearly, that isn't the goal here.

The aim is to squeeze Kyiv, to pressure that comedian and his boxer buddy to back down and save their people and their country.
The goal is to get Ukraine—either this current administration or likely whoever follows—to sign an unconditional agreement to remain militarily neutral.

You don't actually need to "occupy" all of Ukraine to achieve any of that!

Secondly, nobody really has reliable intel from the ground right now, which, unlike American or Western interventions in places like Iraq or Syria, is a relatively new factor.

It would be naive to fall for the nonsense on our mainstream news outlets claiming the operation is failing just because it’s only day three.
Operations like this aren't planned to last only three or four weeks.
Even in Chechnya (the second war, which the Russians won), it didn't wrap up in five or six days...
The Russians probably haven't even deployed their second or third waves of assault forces yet.
Will they actually march into the center of Kyiv and hold it under siege? Honestly, who knows.

As for casualties, of course there are losses on both sides. This is a war, not a ballet recital!

A 2-3% loss rate in an offensive operation of this scale is practically expected—if you assume there are 150,000 Russian troops involved, you can do the math yourselves.

Back home, during Storm, we had over 120 dead. Just near Turin by Karlovac, we lost about 10 people to mortars during the first attempt at a breakthrough. And generally speaking, those 120 or so people were killed by an enemy that often wasn't even putting up a decisive defense! They were mostly retreating.
Now, try putting that into the context of this current offensive operation!

It seems obvious that Putin was planning a forced change in leadership—much like the regime shifts we saw play out in Afghanistan.
He ran out of steam before he even had a chance to get moving.

Steven Bennett5 said:From what we can see, the Russians have definitely achieved their strategic goals so far:

They've effectively pushed Ukraine away from any consideration of joining NATO or even the EU for a long time.
The fighting is happening on Ukrainian soil.

The forces prepared for the assault—maybe around 150,000 to 170,000 soldiers—simply aren't enough to "conquer" a nation of this size. But clearly, that isn't the goal here.

The aim is to squeeze Kyiv, to pressure that comedian and his boxer buddy to back down and save their people and their country.
The goal is to get Ukraine—either this current administration or likely whoever follows—to sign an unconditional agreement to remain militarily neutral.

You don't actually need to "occupy" all of Ukraine to achieve any of that!

Secondly, nobody really has reliable intel from the ground right now, which, unlike American or Western interventions in places like Iraq or Syria, is a relatively new factor.

It would be naive to fall for the nonsense on our mainstream news outlets claiming the operation is failing just because it’s only day three.
Operations like this aren't planned to last only three or four weeks.
Even in Chechnya (the second war, which the Russians won), it didn't wrap up in five or six days...
The Russians probably haven't even deployed their second or third waves of assault forces yet.
Will they actually march into the center of Kyiv and hold it under siege? Honestly, who knows.

As for casualties, of course there are losses on both sides. This is a war, not a ballet recital!

A 2-3% loss rate in an offensive operation of this scale is practically expected—if you assume there are 150,000 Russian troops involved, you can do the math yourselves.

Back home, during Storm, we had over 120 dead. Just near Turin by Karlovac, we lost about 10 people to mortars during the first attempt at a breakthrough. And generally speaking, those 120 or so people were killed by an enemy that often wasn't even putting up a decisive defense! They were mostly retreating.
Now, try putting that into the context of this current offensive operation!

And yet, even taking Kyiv—which he hasn't actually managed to do—wouldn't be enough for him.

Steven Bennett5 said:From what we can see, the Russians have definitely achieved their strategic goals so far:

They've effectively pushed Ukraine away from any consideration of joining NATO or even the EU for a long time.
The fighting is happening on Ukrainian soil.

The forces prepared for the assault—maybe around 150,000 to 170,000 soldiers—simply aren't enough to "conquer" a nation of this size. But clearly, that isn't the goal here.

The aim is to squeeze Kyiv, to pressure that comedian and his boxer buddy to back down and save their people and their country.
The goal is to get Ukraine—either this current administration or likely whoever follows—to sign an unconditional agreement to remain militarily neutral.

You don't actually need to "occupy" all of Ukraine to achieve any of that!

Secondly, nobody really has reliable intel from the ground right now, which, unlike American or Western interventions in places like Iraq or Syria, is a relatively new factor.

It would be naive to fall for the nonsense on our mainstream news outlets claiming the operation is failing just because it’s only day three.
Operations like this aren't planned to last only three or four weeks.
Even in Chechnya (the second war, which the Russians won), it didn't wrap up in five or six days...
The Russians probably haven't even deployed their second or third waves of assault forces yet.
Will they actually march into the center of Kyiv and hold it under siege? Honestly, who knows.

As for casualties, of course there are losses on both sides. This is a war, not a ballet recital!

A 2-3% loss rate in an offensive operation of this scale is practically expected—if you assume there are 150,000 Russian troops involved, you can do the math yourselves.

Back home, during Storm, we had over 120 dead. Just near Turin by Karlovac, we lost about 10 people to mortars during the first attempt at a breakthrough. And generally speaking, those 120 or so people were killed by an enemy that often wasn't even putting up a decisive defense! They were mostly retreating.
Now, try putting that into the context of this current offensive operation!

Is Chechnya really considered a success?
Grozný is so much smaller than Kyiv—it’s almost laughable—that they managed to take it in just a week.

Steven Bennett5 said:From what we can see, the Russians have definitely achieved their strategic goals so far:

They've effectively pushed Ukraine away from any consideration of joining NATO or even the EU for a long time.
The fighting is happening on Ukrainian soil.

The forces prepared for the assault—maybe around 150,000 to 170,000 soldiers—simply aren't enough to "conquer" a nation of this size. But clearly, that isn't the goal here.

The aim is to squeeze Kyiv, to pressure that comedian and his boxer buddy to back down and save their people and their country.
The goal is to get Ukraine—either this current administration or likely whoever follows—to sign an unconditional agreement to remain militarily neutral.

You don't actually need to "occupy" all of Ukraine to achieve any of that!

Secondly, nobody really has reliable intel from the ground right now, which, unlike American or Western interventions in places like Iraq or Syria, is a relatively new factor.

It would be naive to fall for the nonsense on our mainstream news outlets claiming the operation is failing just because it’s only day three.
Operations like this aren't planned to last only three or four weeks.
Even in Chechnya (the second war, which the Russians won), it didn't wrap up in five or six days...
The Russians probably haven't even deployed their second or third waves of assault forces yet.
Will they actually march into the center of Kyiv and hold it under siege? Honestly, who knows.

As for casualties, of course there are losses on both sides. This is a war, not a ballet recital!

A 2-3% loss rate in an offensive operation of this scale is practically expected—if you assume there are 150,000 Russian troops involved, you can do the math yourselves.

Back home, during Storm, we had over 120 dead. Just near Turin by Karlovac, we lost about 10 people to mortars during the first attempt at a breakthrough. And generally speaking, those 120 or so people were killed by an enemy that often wasn't even putting up a decisive defense! They were mostly retreating.
Now, try putting that into the context of this current offensive operation!

All five, perhaps—but so far, the Russians haven't achieved anything at all.

Steven Bennett5 said:From what we can see, the Russians have definitely achieved their strategic goals so far:

They've effectively pushed Ukraine away from any consideration of joining NATO or even the EU for a long time.
The fighting is happening on Ukrainian soil.

The forces prepared for the assault—maybe around 150,000 to 170,000 soldiers—simply aren't enough to "conquer" a nation of this size. But clearly, that isn't the goal here.

The aim is to squeeze Kyiv, to pressure that comedian and his boxer buddy to back down and save their people and their country.
The goal is to get Ukraine—either this current administration or likely whoever follows—to sign an unconditional agreement to remain militarily neutral.

You don't actually need to "occupy" all of Ukraine to achieve any of that!

Secondly, nobody really has reliable intel from the ground right now, which, unlike American or Western interventions in places like Iraq or Syria, is a relatively new factor.

It would be naive to fall for the nonsense on our mainstream news outlets claiming the operation is failing just because it’s only day three.
Operations like this aren't planned to last only three or four weeks.
Even in Chechnya (the second war, which the Russians won), it didn't wrap up in five or six days...
The Russians probably haven't even deployed their second or third waves of assault forces yet.
Will they actually march into the center of Kyiv and hold it under siege? Honestly, who knows.

As for casualties, of course there are losses on both sides. This is a war, not a ballet recital!

A 2-3% loss rate in an offensive operation of this scale is practically expected—if you assume there are 150,000 Russian troops involved, you can do the math yourselves.

Back home, during Storm, we had over 120 dead. Just near Turin by Karlovac, we lost about 10 people to mortars during the first attempt at a breakthrough. And generally speaking, those 120 or so people were killed by an enemy that often wasn't even putting up a decisive defense! They were mostly retreating.
Now, try putting that into the context of this current offensive operation!

This whole operation is a joke.

Nobody actually believed the Russians would attack Ukraine with the same troop numbers we used back during Storm—though, to be fair, our guys were reservists while theirs are professionals.
We are talking about a territory sixty times larger, with two hundred times more people.

Richard Wilson4 said:🤣

Actually, the US was doing everything in its power to keep America together back in '91.

Right. As if the USA didn't do absolutely everything in its power to try and save America, and even the USSR for that matter.

Tyler Jones6 said:would say: China sees the writing on the wall—so long, Putin!

If even 10% of this reporting holds water, I guess the Ukrainians could liberate Crimea too; there’s really no reason for them to stop now.

The Ukrainians aren't going to be liberating anything—unless NATO decides to actually jump into the war.

And we all know that isn't happening. I mean, Russia is still considered the biggest nuclear power on the planet. The stakes are just way too high...

neonheron9 said:So those Russian paratroopers from yesterday, rolling in with their tank and truck... they never stood a chance.

https://old.reddit.com/r/CombatFoota...les_in_obolon/

So, let me get this straight: enemy tanks roll through the capital following all the local traffic laws, only to pull over and find a nice, quiet parking spot at the end of the day? Right. Sure. Just another day in paradise.

Justin Kern67 said:As clever as you think you're being, you're actually making a valid point. From 2014 to the present day, Russia has been systematically and continuously scaling back its trade with the West while simultaneously stockpiling gold and reserves. It is quite obvious they have been preparing for this exact scenario for the last seven years.

True, but that’s just cushioning the blow. It won't stop the long-term fallout from sanctions.

Relying solely on China as a strategic partner is even riskier than depending entirely on selling energy to the European Union. Russia and China have conflicting interests in plenty of areas, and frankly, the West is still much more financially vital to China than Russia is.

northernangler8 said:I honestly have no clue who Ivan Čović is. But based on his comment, it looks like he actually knows quite a bit about the situation in Ukraine and how Ukrainians really feel about Putin and this whole war. It seems like the Ukrainians themselves are starting to realize that the USA pulled them into this conflict.

https://i.postimg.cc/MK7tVmck/1.png

https://i.postimg.cc/4xXP5HtY/2.png

Posting image links without a brief description—or failing to note if the content is NSFW—is against the forum rules.☕

Melissa Ward said:What is Ukraine, really, if not just a rebranded version of the old Soviet State? I mean, look at the facts! The Americans absolutely dismantled the USSR, much like how they tore through America. It’s wild when you think about it. One minute, you have this massive global superpower, and then suddenly, in the 90s, it’s nothing more than a total joke... at least until Putin stepped up to take charge.

Targeting major cities across Europe? Once those first nuclear weapons start falling, there’s absolutely no turning back. It’s over. Period. Everyone knows that. You don't just pull that trigger unless you've been backed into a corner and it's truly your absolute last resort. It's like playing a game of high-stakes poker where you bet everything on one final, desperate hand—once the cards are on the table, the game is done!

🤣🤣

bonaventuraduda As I was saying:
Let’s be realistic here—the forces mobilized for an offensive, numbering somewhere in the ballpark of 150,000 to 170,000 soldiers, simply aren't enough to actually "conquer" a country of this scale. It just isn't mathematically feasible. But then again, looking at the broader strategic picture, it’s becoming increasingly obvious that total conquest wasn't even the primary objective to begin with, was it?

The only thing that’s abundantly clear at this point—if we're being honest with ourselves—is that things are absolutely not going according to plan.

The ultimate objective here is to keep Kyiv under constant pressure—to squeeze them just enough that both that comedian and his boxer buddy finally decide to back off and save their people and their country.

Komedijas was elected by the people—and right now, he’s busy running for his life through pure chaos. It’s a tragicomedy playing out in real time, with the clown sitting in the Kremlin, though I honestly couldn't tell you whose seat is shaking harder at this exact moment.

Does everything really require an "occupation" of all of Ukraine? One has to wonder if the scale of the response is ever actually proportional to the situation at hand.

It’s a necessity—because clearly, whether you’re looking at the South or the East, there isn't a single soul willing to buckle under a Russian boot, let alone in the heart of the country or out West.

Furthermore, let’s be honest—nobody actually has a clear line of sight on what is happening on the ground right now. It’s all guesswork and speculation. And that brings us to a rather striking realization: unlike the pattern we saw with American interventions in places like Iraq or Syria, this situation introduces a completely new variable that we haven't dealt with before.

During those initial days of American wars, things were nothing short of chaotic—absolute mayhem, really. It’s one of those situations where the fog of war is thick enough to cut with a knife. Honestly, the longer you wait and let the dust settle, the clearer the picture becomes; you finally start to grasp what is actually happening once the immediate madness subsides.

It would be incredibly naive to swallow the nonsense being peddled by our mainstream news outlets—those pundits who seem convinced that because this operation isn't unfolding exactly according to their predictable little scripts by day three, it somehow isn't going according to plan.

It is frankly naive to believe that a limited "military operation against a fascist regime"—which supposedly isn't directed at a brotherly people—could ever actually look like this.

You don't just wake up one morning and decide to pull off an operation like this—it isn't something that gets sketched out on a napkin over coffee. A maneuver of this magnitude requires at least three to four weeks of meticulous, behind-the-scenes planning.

Even Putin can't seem to manage even a single month of sustained warfare against his "brotherly" neighbors in Ukraine.

Even back in Chechnya—during that second war that the Russians eventually won—it didn't even last five or six days...

It ended up dragging on five times longer than anyone had originally anticipated—and if you ask me, the sheer scale of the destruction was easily ten times worse than what was initially projected.

It seems the Russians haven't even begun to roll out their second or third waves of assault forces just yet—if my read on the situation is correct.

It’s the truth. Honestly, the Russians haven't even begun their offensive against those regions where people are fighting most fiercely to avoid living under the Russian boot.

Will they actually push all the way into the heart of Kyiv? And if they do, are they planning to just hold them there in a sort of encirclement? Honestly, at this stage, nobody really knows.

The downtown core should have been under their control by now—every single unit was focused on hitting that specific objective as quickly as possible. And honestly, let’s be real: seizing control of the capital's center is pretty much the textbook first step for any "military operation" aimed at toppling a "fascist regime." It’s all part of a lightning strike strategy where time is the one thing the Russians simply can't afford to lose.

When it comes to casualties, let’s be realistic—there are losses on both sides. This is a war, after all, not a ballet recital.

It’s a tragedy, really.

Sam Martinez9 said:Which would essentially give Putin an excuse to strike European cities with nuclear weapons. It’s sheer stupidity; NATO and the West have to look out for the rest of Europe and the world too—they can't just drag us all into a third nuclear war.

There needs to be another way to get rid of Putin.

So, what? You think you'll find some idiot among the Russians willing to pull that off?
They know perfectly well they'd all be wiped out in that madness
unless his inner circle removes him first... honestly, god help us, the man is insane.

Here’s the first red flag out of Denmark.

https://www.berlingske.dk/politik/da...lp-til-ukraine

Denmark is handing over $7 million in humanitarian aid to Ukraine.

Yet just two weeks ago, they could barely scrape together about $300 to help 200,000 households cover basic heating and energy costs. It wasn't nearly enough.

And get this—they only gave seniors a measly 15-cent raise this year.

The usual excuses: "we don't have the budget," "COVID did this," etc. But suddenly, $7 million for Ukraine appears out of thin air in just a couple of days.

Tyler Jones6 said:The proposed $6.4 billion emergency aid package for Ukraine appears to have both Democratic and Republican backing.

Out of that $6.4 billion total—I suppose we should look at the breakdown—$3.5 billion is earmarked for military aid via the Pentagon, while the remaining $2.9 billion is intended for economic and humanitarian support.

Way to go, America!

The White House asked Congress on Friday to provide $ 6.4 billion to Help Ukraine in its fight against Russia's invasion, according to multiple reports.

The funding would be divided—with $3.5 billion directed to the Pentagon and $2.9 billion allocated toward security assistance, humanitarian relief, economic stabilization, and regional initiatives—an administration official told Axios.

"As The President and bipartisan members of Congress have made clear , The United States is committed to supporting The Ukrainian People as They defend their country and democracy," Office of Management and Budget said in a statement.

I am practically encouraging my colleagues to go on strike, mess with their bosses, and simply refuse to work.

If everyone except me ends up getting fired, I shall personally send them aid in the form of $33 ice cream money for their children.

As for any promised assistance, I intend to conveniently forget it exists, playing the part of the fool—deaf, blind, and utterly oblivious—even though I have always been the mastermind pulling the strings from the shadows.

Instead of rehiring them, I will simply employ my own friends and relatives; my personal economic and political interests will naturally take precedence over the needs of naive, gullible, and useful idiots.

I find myself feeling nothing but utter contempt for these B@B scumbags and their so-called "aid."

Hypocrites... stench... filth... manipulators... and now the ringleaders are pretending to be saints, so how exactly does one