As they do politics
Or rape for that matter
It would be interesting to see a full cost/benefit analysis for Religion
IMO good things are done with or without religion
As are bad
History shows us religions tend to act on their own self interest, be that “good” or “bad”
Religious leadership, as other forms of politics, often attracts bad apples
Absolutely. The information war at a civilian level is obviously running thick and fast in this conflict but NATO can view live satellite imagery at its leisure, plus there’s other relatively decent INT via unedited footage from drones and civilians being presented online, plus whatever official INT is being gathered in the AO as the war progresses. Obviously the minutiae of losses will be impossible to guess but we can get a good idea of Russian performance at a strategic and tactical level and so far it’s been a total shambles.
Even in defensive NATO exercises where the Russian Opfor are designed to be slow and inept, they still vastly outperform the real thing.
This doesn’t mean I think that Russia will lose, it certainly has the numbers and of course there’s always the vague threat of nukes. Also, Ukraine will really feel the pinch when Western interest will most likely wane when the energy and food crisis sets in later in the year and Ukraine will start to fold.
Either way, the invasion has been an embarrassment for Russia and its status in the top three has pretty much been removed.
I think that’s going a bit far. It certainly has had embarrassing incidents and issues highlighted in media coverage e.g. claiming guys were rolling in without modern optics and armor etc. (which we did in the GWOT, it was a pretty big scandal early on in the Iraq invasion, remember the whole Dragonskin Armor shenanigans and guys welding literal trash to their unarmored HMMWVs?) but there has been a lot of “We are advancing in reverse!”, “Moscow siege in two weeks!” going on here and a lot of IO. Unless you have access to JWICS and you’re read on to a few SAPs you’re probably seeing 90% bullshit (and I’m not claiming to have access to any more accurate coverage than is available to most everyone).
But looking how media coverage of Zelensky is getting here, and the Amnesty International report, that might change with the west possibly looking to step back and let Zelensky be the fall guy for the whole thing.
1 Like
Russia now controls 20% of Ukraine territory
It’s hard to paint that as a loss IMHO
Exactly.
“View 35 Hidden Replies?”. No fucking thanks. There’s no value in it.
Russia is in the process of mindfucking the entire world, particular you “Westies”. Fat rich pig nations being led to the slaughter, basting yourselves in the glaze of arrogance.
100% Putin said he only wanted to “liberate” those two regions in the donbass.
It was the rest of the world that said “HES TRYING TO TAKE OVER UKRAINE”
Regardless if that was his intention or not he has achieved exactly what he said he set out to do.
The Russian military before the invasion was rated as one of the best in the world, potentially anyway; or arguably one of the most dangerous. The Ukrainian military wasn’t even close to that.
Since the invasion, the Russian military has proven to be the paper tiger it was rumoured to be, big time. Yes, Ukraine’s support from the West has been critical in its survival but even with Russia’s vastly larger force, large border, an army and doctrine designed for massive land grabs, local support in the Donbas and a foothold in the Crimea it’s still highlighted some catastrophic failures at every level which has cost not only the Russian military dearly but also the political, cultural and economic aspects of the country as well.
I can’t remember the exact timings but security analysts and the military intelligence community across NATO predicted Ukraine’s defeat to be measured in days or weeks going off what was known of Russia’s forces at that time and everyone was shocked at how inept the Russian military has turned out to be.
In all honesty, Russia probably will be able to hold parts of the east long enough to annex it and Putin will chalk it up as a win but long term, this has been a disaster for his country.
That land is mostly Donbas anyway. Going off the scale and direction of the invasion, it’s mainly been a strategic cluster fuck.
He’s purposefully kept his intensions either vague or has changed them since the very beginning. By not setting specific conditions for victory, he can pretty much say whatever he pleases and up until the northern assault and blitzkrieg failed, he really was trying to topple the state so those fears of a take over were justified.
The ‘liberation’ of Donbas was flimsy justification to assist with the invasion, it’s a common strategy which Russia conducts in all of its ex-states. He’ll no doubt annex it soon but if it was liberation he wanted, why attack Ukraine on 3-4 separate fronts and why is Russia still trying to push west, albeit slowly.
This winter will most likely force the current war of attrition between the two sides and we’ll see what happens.
How is this vague ?
The same is happening today. They did not leave us any other option for defending Russia and our people, other than the one we are forced to use today. In these circumstances, we have to take bold and immediate action. The people’s republics of Donbass have asked Russia for help.
In this context, in accordance with Article 51 (Chapter VII) of the UN Charter, with permission of Russia’s Federation Council, and in execution of the treaties of friendship and mutual assistance with the Donetsk People’s Republic and the Lugansk People’s Republic, ratified by the Federal Assembly on February 22, I made a decision to carry out a special military operation.
The purpose of this operation is to protect people who, for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kiev regime. To this end, we will seek to demilitarise and denazify Ukraine, as well as bring to trial those who perpetrated numerous bloody crimes against civilians, including against citizens of the Russian Federation.
It is not our plan to occupy the Ukrainian territory
In order to stretch the numerically inferior Ukraine forces thin over a long front and reduce resistance over all and mitigate RF’s logistic disadvantage by straining Ukraine’s supply lines
Obviously
Whatever helps boost your self-esteem, man.
Non-sequitur much?
I admit, I’m not giving any detailed explanations, though.
If my other choice is cog in the machine. I prefer the chaos.
Because that’s not what’s happening. Assaulting capitols, invading a country on 4 axes, knowingly targeting civilians, attempting to choke trade and wreck an economy and getting bogged down in a war of attrition whilst still trying to gain ground is not a liberation, nor is it ‘demilitarising’ or ‘de Nazi’ing’. These are excuses. A ‘special military operation’ is a meaningless description and that’s for a reason.
Are you being ironic or are you serious?
How do you mean?
We are all cogs in randomness and chaos.