Russia’s military is incompetent.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: JBurns

Its also safe to assume they didnt start the war using the latest and greatest hardware.

Do they even have the latest and greatest equipment. Back in the late 90s was the best time for USSR to attack the US, our equipment was old and and in shambles. Our military was cut down to smaller numbers with most of the experienced leaving. It was not a good time for us then. Think about Russia that hasn't really had to fight a war since their Afghanistan.

You are starting to convince me there is some kernel of truth/fact about the apparent lack of preparedness by the Russian military being, at least on some level, due to neglect, less funding, and frankly being out of practice for a long time.

My intuition tells me that, at least on some level, the tactics and actions we're seeing there from the Russians are meant, deliberately, to move at a slow pace, and not overwhelm and destroy all the civilian infrastructure, even if they incur more damage and loss, which is very very strange. Why they're doing this is anybody's guess.

If you want to absorb territory, you probably don't want to p!ss off the current occupants, and don't do things like, e.g. totally discount, disband and splinter the domestic military of where you're operating (to avoid creating a hugely successful insurgency), for example, how the standing Iraqi army during Gulf War 2 was dissolved and scattered after Iraq was pacified.

Of course that would be a prelude for a long slog for those hoping for Ukrainian independence, but then again, based on the dealings of Romneys and Bidens and Nulands in Ukraine....how independent /WERE/ they before?

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: JinMI

14k dead. 3k civilians in the past 8 years.

Not a justification mind you but perhaps part of trying to reason out the strategy.

How many were killed by Putin's mercs who started the proxy war?

How many? The number is Ukranians that I shared but if you want to dissect, thats fine by me.

Then we can dissect the breakdown of the Minsk accords (1 and 2) etc.

None of it will justify but if it helps into rationalizing why and more importantly how to end it, im all for it.

a reply to: khnum

What the Media wont admit is that the Ukrainian air force doesn't control the skies.
The Russians do.

a reply to: Xtrozero

I think we need to look at Putin to explain this i see a couple of important factors. Lets start with Georgia that is where the first cracks in the armor atarted to show. Though they were successful we saw a highy disorganized military in action. However this did do one thing it proprd up Putin as at the time opisition parties were gaining power. Various causes of Russia’s aggressiveness have been suggested, but the most important one focuses on Russian decline, and whether this has made the country more dangerous.For Putin his sense of national pride is directly determined by his military prowess. Lets be honest Russia couls not compete in any other catagory effectively. Economically russia had peaked trchnology he had ecome more and more dependent on the west. Even agriculturally again dependent on the west. This is why he has aout 6 months until Russian economy emplodes.

The Kremlin had undertaken substantial military modernization, while much of the rest of Europe has continued its post-Cold War disarmament. However i think Putin realized even there they cant compete with the rest. Look at military expenditures Russia peaked at 62 billion sounds ike a lot doesnt it? The US that same year spent 778 billion China 255 billion Even India surpassed Russia with its $73 billion military budget.So from this point forward his military prowess will continue to decline. Add in Russian coruption from military officers and you end up with a pig wearing lipstick.

Like a cornered animal, declining powers are often the most dangerous ones think Austria Hungary they started World War I by declaring war on Serbia. Russians appear to be planning a tank and artillery campaign reminiscent of World War II; if so, their war machine is as outdated as Putin’s view of Ukraine.

Modern warefare has simply left the Russian armed forces behind by sevral decades. And we are currently seeing the last gasp of his regime.

originally posted by: vNex92
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

but how did invading Ukraine make Russia safer from this apparent NATO aggression?

Remember what NATO, US did in Kosovo after the conflict? did they build a base? the US has at least one base in the province.

Think and use that as an example.

I really don’t think they’re going to allow Russia to build a military base in Ukraine.

I maybe wrong, but it just isn’t looking good for Russia and Putin at this point... the phrase ‘pissing in in wind’ comes to mind.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: JinMI

Theres been a nazi element within for a long time.

OK, and so my post stand true still. It is interesting in your link we are talking 200 of these Nazis were in the Azov Battalion. I'm sure 200 is justification to subjugate 44 million. I'm also sure over 8 years their numbers grew fighting Putin's proxy war, but we are still talking much smaller numbers than what people are suggesting.

So, again, what is the acceptible number? 900 at its max is what i understand the azov battalion to be.

Keep in mind, when i ask for the acceptible number of nazis, im also implying armed and funded, in part by our govt?

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: JinMI

Ukrainian losses 130 aircraft,99 helicopters,2132 tanks and other armoured vehicles,2028 other automotive equipment,441 UAV's,241 multiple rocket launchers,913 field artillery and mortars and 243 anti aircraft systems.

The Main Stream Media seems to of missed the above part out

Im not dismissing it, im trying to wrap my head around a plan that costs russia 20k soldiers.

To a psycopath, those are acceptible.

Im still of the belief that putin wants exactly what he stated. An independant Donbass, recognization of crimea as russian soil and a neutral ukraine.

originally posted by: vNex92
a reply to: khnum

What the Media wont admit is that the Ukrainian air force doesn't control the skies.
The Russians do.

Then why are russians so afraid to fly their mighty fleet there?

russia is mostly launching standoff cruise missiles from russian air space, and even some of those cruise missiles are getting shot down every day.

Cute propaganda attempt though.

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

originally posted by: vNex92
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

but how did invading Ukraine make Russia safer from this apparent NATO aggression?

Remember what NATO, US did in Kosovo after the conflict? did they build a base? the US has at least one base in the province.

Think and use that as an example.

I really don’t think they’re going to allow Russia to build a military base in Ukraine.

I maybe wrong, but it just isn’t looking good for Russia and Putin at this point... the phrase ‘pissing in in wind’ comes to mind.

I agree this gamble may cost him Crimea as well. I can see a situation with those harpoons they just received removing the black sea fleet and Russia unable to send additional support due to Turkey. They will only allow ships to enter if they have exited and stationed there. And looking at the latest maps on units Ukraine has 3 bats in reserve they havnt used yet And there is only 1 light infrantry brigade etween them and Crimea. They already pushed them further south depends on if Ukraine wants to take the gamble itself and go on the offensive.

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

originally posted by: vNex92
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

but how did invading Ukraine make Russia safer from this apparent NATO aggression?

Remember what NATO, US did in Kosovo after the conflict? did they build a base? the US has at least one base in the province.

Think and use that as an example.

I really don’t think they’re going to allow Russia to build a military base in Ukraine.

I maybe wrong, but it just isn’t looking good for Russia and Putin at this point... the phrase ‘pissing in in wind’ comes to mind.

Thus why crimea was so important to russia.

The black sea fleet.

originally posted by: PatriotGames4u

originally posted by: vNex92
a reply to: khnum

What the Media wont admit is that the Ukrainian air force doesn't control the skies.
The Russians do.

Then why are russians so afraid to fly their mighty fleet there?

russia is mostly launching standoff cruise missiles from russian air space, and even some of those cruise missiles are getting shot down every day.

Cute propaganda attempt though.

Simple answer Ukraines air defence is almost entirely intact. While the early VKS failure to establish air superiority could be explained by lack of early warning, coordination capacity and sufficient planning time, the continued pattern of activity suggests a more significant conclusion: that the VKS lacks the institutional capacity to plan, brief and fly complex air operations at scale. Even in Syria they flew in small numbers and to take out an air defence system requires a lot of coordination.

I didn't read most of the 7 pages but I have a feeling that everything thus far has been (for the most part) intentional. I'm guessing I'm not the only one of that opinion.

I find it hard to believe that Russia has supply problems that immediately, in my mind, draw comparisons to North Korea and their "15 year outdated rations" and whatnot.

It seems more likely to me that, much like WW2, the people in power don't give a rat's ass about their newer/lower grade soldiers and any number of those lost (though I do believe the 20k figure is grossly overstated) are worth lulling the world into a false sense of "Russia's military is garbage" and thus underestimating their capabilities.

I could very well be wrong but I find other explanations hard to believe currently. Let's watch what happens after they regroup and make another push, probably utilizing better trained soldiers, better tactics and better supplies/munitions.

a reply to: JinMI

They accepted 8.8 million dead and 23 million sick and injured in WW2,they obviously accept higher casualties than most militaries

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

Yeah I don't really see how we have much of a say in the matter.

Since Biden decided to prematurely evacuate Ukraine (like Afghanistan) we will never know whether Putin would have been deterred in the first place.

Although he may have done so on purpose. A much needed distraction from his monumental domestic and foreign policy failures, mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic, embattled economy, mounting scandals, his son's legal troubles and consistently poor polling mere months before the midterms.

Seems everyone forgot about Russia's sudden leapfrogging the US/NATO on hypersonic weapons as well? Just like the situation on the ground, it was impossible and silly propaganda until one day "oh yeah, you know what, that was a real hypersonic weapon"

Same wishy washy flip floppy crap the left did when Trump tried to ban travel from the source of COVID-19 (China). His China-centric ban made complete sense, yet the left still whined and cried and shouted "racist!" until being forced to acknowledge that Trump made the right move. Same as their constant insistence of Trump's supposed malfeasance RE: COVID, they called everything he did wrong while ginning up maximum fear and themselves having absolutely nothing of value to offer. Just like we said at the time. Fastforward and Biden's in office and guess what? Democrats really didn't have a plan then and they still don't have one now!

And while they were focused on making an even bigger mockery of this country with their sham 1/6 hearings, Biden was on television babbling on about the former President of the US while Putin was tricking him into handing over the initiative! Trump tried warning him, and instead of taking notes like he should have, he made an egregious error in strategy.

a reply to: Xtrozero

They seem to have some pretty new stuff, none of which is claimed by any side to have been deployed. Old aircraft and S-300 missiles? Tanks? Really?

The hypersonic missile seemed like a message to me, I could be wrong I'm not any sort of expert

Just seems to me we have barely seen a fraction of what Russia is capable of. And we all know how the left is. They think narrative equals reality. They think if they keep repeating that Ukraine is winning then it will eventually just materialize into reality.

I prefer a reality based approach

a reply to: vNex92

It really is ironic. Biden is a joke and the US itself has absolutely no moral authority to lecture ANYONE anywhere about warmongering. We just don't.

Unlike 2001, we have the lens of history

Those wars were wrong and we objectively know this now
The people who supported them, who are mostly still suckling off the public teat, are still in power and were wrong
They are often wrong
And they never admit it

They are a waste of oxygen. US politicians are a waste.

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: JinMI

They accepted 8.8 million dead and 23 million sick and injured in WW2,they obviously accept higher casualties than most militaries

Thank god they did

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Xtrozero

They seem to have some pretty new stuff, none of which is claimed by any side to have been deployed. Old aircraft and S-300 missiles? Tanks? Really?

The hypersonic missile seemed like a message to me, I could be wrong I'm not any sort of expert

Just seems to me we have barely seen a fraction of what Russia is capable of. And we all know how the left is. They think narrative equals reality. They think if they keep repeating that Ukraine is winning then it will eventually just materialize into reality.

I prefer a reality based approach

That hypersonic toy was supposedly russia's latest and greatest, they are holding the 57s back for now, but that's likely to keep them from getting shot down.

What else is russia holding back?

Mariupol is around 48 hours from falling. Lets ser how shambling their army is then.

Underestimating someone is never smart. I know, liberals will be shocked. Susan Collins can clutch pearls and be very concerned.

a reply to: JBurns

If Mariupol falls, im guessing that the peace table will be full of ready to talk leaders.