War in Ukraine

#50,476
#50,476
LouderVol said:
My strategy would be to take them apart piece by piece. Moscow is a trap. Yeah it would take decades, and the death toll from conventional fighting would be higher, but I think that's the only way to make sure Russia stays down.

Release as many nation states as you can, so you arent occupying all the territory. And it also breaks down Russias ability to retake "Russia" if they are now dealing with Vulga Russia, Ural Russia, Karelia Russia, Tatar Russia. Make sure all their different "races" get their own country.

Even if you could take Russia in a month, there is no way to achieve any desired results in a short amount of time.
Click to expand...

That's as good a plan as any, but after the mixing of blood the Soviet way, you have to wonder if current "Russians" understand the old Russia and have a desire to separate. One of the big Ukrainian issues is getting the Soviet planted Russians out of Ukraine - and getting Russia to agree that it wasn't their land in the first place. Of course, in this case nobody is lopping off the head of the snake. And there are the revisionists who claim all these places were Russian to begin with - a few of them are right here positing with us.
 
#50,477
#50,477
DonjoVol said:
Let me get this straight. If the are U.S. forces are in another country they were invited. But if Russian forces were invited its an occupation? Lol. You really are a clown.

The people of Transnistria revolted and decided they did not want to be part of Moldova. They've been governing themselves for almost 30 years. Time to get over it and move on lol.
Click to expand...
Can you point in that particular post you quoted where he mentioned US troops and/or Russian troops that led to this current dumbass hot take Curly?
 
#50,478
#50,478
LouderVol said:
My strategy would be to take them apart piece by piece. Moscow is a trap. Yeah it would take decades, and the death toll from conventional fighting would be higher, but I think that's the only way to make sure Russia stays down.

Release as many nation states as you can, so you arent occupying all the territory. And it also breaks down Russias ability to retake "Russia" if they are now dealing with Vulga Russia, Ural Russia, Karelia Russia, Tatar Russia. Make sure all their different "races" get their own country.

Even if you could take Russia in a month, there is no way to achieve any desired results in a short amount of time.
Click to expand...
This post is going to result in so much stooge wailing and gnashing of teeth Louder 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol and AM64
#50,479
#50,479
NorthDallas40 said:
Can you point in that particular post you quoted where he mentioned US troops and/or Russian troops that led to this current dumbass hot take Curly?
Click to expand...
Lol. You know good and well what I'm referring to Proctor. You guys think this perfectly okay for us to have troops anywhere. But anytime Russia does you claim its an occupation regardless of the circumstances.

I think it's about time you get over Transnistria as well. I don't even think the people of Moldova want anything to do with it at this point.

LMAO.
 
#50,480
#50,480
Rasputin_Vol said:
I can't understand or believe the arrogance of some of you people. You act as though the US has a long string of victories since WWII. Outside of Granada and Panama, there really isn't much to hang our hats on.
Click to expand...
Please list all of the resounding Russian victories that make you think they are an opponent that should scare us.

As others have pointed out and you avoid, our military does well. Our leadership does not. And more specifically our leadership on choosing victory conditions. We stuck around in Afghanistan without a real goal to achieve which is why it was a mess, but our military was able to complete their tasks. Iraqi nation building a failure, our complete domination against Iraqs military, twice, complete success.

Defeating Russia, sans nukes, isnt the problem with a potential war against them. Turning them into something we like off the battlefield would be the issue. If we had the mindset of just running out Putin and his budies. We could do that. If we tried to pick Putins replacement and dictate what Russia does after, that would be a failure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol, NorthDallas40 and AM64
#50,481
#50,481
LouderVol said:
Please list all of the resounding Russian victories that make you think they are an opponent that should scare us.

As others have pointed out and you avoid, our military does well. Our leadership does not. And more specifically our leadership on choosing victory conditions. We stuck around in Afghanistan without a real goal to achieve which is why it was a mess, but our military was able to complete their tasks. Iraqi nation building a failure, our complete domination against Iraqs military, twice, complete success.

Defeating Russia, sans nukes, isnt the problem with a potential war against them. Turning them into something we like off the battlefield would be the issue. If we had the mindset of just running out Putin and his budies. We could do that. If we tried to pick Putins replacement and dictate what Russia does after, that would be a failure.
Click to expand...

USSR/Russia has lost or at best ended up in a stalemate in every war 20th century war it has fought against foreign forces. Lost 1905 to the Japanese, got spanked bad. Was losing to the Germans in WWI until the quit, Losing WWII until we bailed them out. They’ve been good at crushing internal rebellions but pretty piss poor outside of that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, norrislakevol, NorthDallas40 and 1 other person
#50,482
#50,482
VolStrom said:
Have you ever heard of the cold war? I think we won that one.
Click to expand...
That doesnt count.

Because Russia isnt the USSR. Even though they are controlling all of the old Soviet republics, and get upset when anyone else gets friendly with old Soviet Republics, and still claim all the Soviets assets, and are still ruled by a top down totalitarian government. Totally, totally different.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, norrislakevol, NorthDallas40 and 1 other person
#50,483
#50,483
hog88 said:
USSR/Russia has lost or at best ended up in a stalemate in every war 20th century war it has fought against foreign forces. Lost 1905 to the Japanese, got spanked bad. Was losing to the Germans in WWI until the quit, Losing WWII until we bailed them out. They’ve been good at crushing internal rebellions but pretty piss poor outside of that.
Click to expand...

Pretty much Russians fight best against people who can't fight back ... and Putin discovered that Ukraine wasn't that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hunerwadel, norrislakevol, tvolsfan and 1 other person
#50,484
#50,484
Velo Vol said:
Master strategist

Click to expand...

A bit assumptive of him. I would say all of those look bad, but who knows how they will play out in the future.

I still believe we will see at least one more big Russian offensive in late Feb early March like last year. They will retake some territory, maybe back to their max extents this year, and then they will push for peace in late May early June. What the Ukrainians do will be very telling at that point.

If you believe the Russians Ukraine will be so decimated, apparently Ukraine is already down more than 20% of their total forces, they wont be able to fight at all and would have to take peace to avoid a total loss. If you believe the west the Russians will be so bloodied they wont be able to hold the territory at all and quickly lose it again while Ukraine takes back all their territory including Crimea.

I am still betting its somewhere in the middle. I could see Russia losing Donetsk but keeping Crimea. I really dont think Ukraine has the ability to take what is essentially an island from their perspective.
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol
#50,485
#50,485
LouderVol said:
That doesnt count.

Because Russia isnt the USSR. Even though they are controlling all of the old Soviet republics, and get upset when anyone else gets friendly with old Soviet Republics, and still claim all the Soviets assets, and are still ruled by a top down totalitarian government. Totally, totally different.
Click to expand...

Where did Ras mention anything about the USSR or Russia? Here is what I replied to.
can't understand or believe the arrogance of some of you people. You act as though the US has a long string of victories since WWII. Outside of Granada and Panama, there really isn't much to hang our hats on.
Click to expand...
 
#50,487
#50,487
JuicyBrucey said:
Nobody's disputing that the ancient Greeks, the Golden Horde, the Ottomans and others hadn't lived on the land where Odessa was eventually built. Most people recognize that. But the city of Odessa was, in fact, built and founded by the Russians, the same way Knoxville was built by and founded by Americans regardless of the native peoples who lived there before us who we forcibly removed through genocide and other methods of ethnic cleansing.

This was Odessa in 1794:

View attachment 511621

This was Odessa in 1814:

View attachment 511623

There's no way Jews are the biggest minority in Odessa. Your information is very out of date as that hasn't been true for nearly a century. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Russians and Jews co-existed and the population of Jews even became larger than the population of Russians by 1939. WWII changed that, in no small part because of the Romanians and the Ukrainian nationalists who allied themselves with Nazi Germany. And the apples haven't fallen far from the tree.

View attachment 511619

Odessa was under Romanian control when WWII began and the Romanians took part in the Holocaust, ethnically cleansing Odessa of its Jewish population. 1941 Odessa massacre - Wikipedia

At the same time, in Lviv and throughout the region, Ukrainian nationalists were also carrying out the Holocaust against Jews. Lviv pogroms (1941) - Wikipedia

Even these days, Jews aren't truly accepted in Ukraine because of Ukrainian nationalists. Ukrainian marchers in Kiev chant ‘Jews out’ | The Times of Israel

The chart above clearly shows that the Russian percentage of Odessa's population peaked during the Russia Imperial era and actually fell during the Soviet era, and that's why I keep saying the claim that the USSR planted a lot of Russian squatters in the region is bogus. Russians were already there long before the USSR was even established.
Click to expand...
Yes but the Russians were still planted there. I am not sure why USSR vs Russia matters in this argument. it was still Russians being planted there.

I have never been able to get an answer, what makes any of these claims legitimate? Russia didnt exist under the USSR for 70+ years, according to you guys. Seems like that would mean they lose any territorial claims they had. At the very least they didnt push any of these terroritiorial claims for 70 years, seems like a long enough time to say they "moved on" or "abandoned" their claims. Even the ethnic claims dont make sense as they arent the majority in any of these regions. Even Crimea before 2013,they were the largest minority, but not the majority.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#50,489
#50,489
DonjoVol said:
Lol. You know good and well what I'm referring to Proctor. You guys think this perfectly okay for us to have troops anywhere. But anytime Russia does you claim its an occupation regardless of the circumstances.

I think it's about time you get over Transnistria as well. I don't even think the people of Moldova want anything to do with it at this point.

LMAO.
Click to expand...
Oh let’s pull everyone out of Syria right now. Today. I mean it’s no fun anymore since we waxed those 200 Wagner mercs back in what 2018? So might as well withdraw. And likewise Russia can pull all their troops back like they signed an agreement to do in 2018 (edit: it was 2016). And Russia always honors their signed agreements amirite? 🤡
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol and AM64
#50,490
#50,490
LouderVol said:
Yes but the Russians were still planted there. I am not sure why USSR vs Russia matters in this argument. it was still Russians being planted there.

I have never been able to get an answer, what makes any of these claims legitimate? Russia didnt exist under the USSR for 70+ years, according to you guys. Seems like that would mean they lose any territorial claims they had. At the very least they didnt push any of these terroritiorial claims for 70 years, seems like a long enough time to say they "moved on" or "abandoned" their claims. Even the ethnic claims dont make sense as they arent the majority in any of these regions. Even Crimea before 2013,they were the largest minority, but not the majority.
Click to expand...

I'm not even saying Odessa is or should be part of Russia, as it's not one of the regions who voted to leave Ukraine and join Russia. I'm just pointing out that the assertation that Russians wouldn't be in the region if it weren't for "the USSR planting Russians in Ukraine" is historical revisionism.
 
#50,491
#50,491
DonjoVol said:
Let me get this straight. If the are U.S. forces are in another country they were invited. But if Russian forces were invited its an occupation? Lol. You really are a clown.

The people of Transnistria revolted and decided they did not want to be part of Moldova. They've been governing themselves for almost 30 years. Time to get over it and move on lol.
Click to expand...
I feel like you quoted the wrong post of mine.

I have said before and will continue to say it, I want us out of Syria or any other contested region. I also want Russia out of contested regions. It doesnt matter who invites either of us. And it's worse if we arent invited at all. This just leads to escalation and the war spreading.

I dont care if we have bases or deployments of troops in peaceful nations after we were invited. Last week I provided a list of Russian deployments outside their sphere that dont bother me. This doesnt lead to hot conflicts.

I am pointing out how you have the exact argument you say I am making. Even though I have made it clear it's not my argument. You keep saying it's ok if Russia is invited, but it's not ok if the US is invited. That is an inconsistent argument. I keep saying it's only ok if we are invited during peace, otherwise I want the US and Russia OUT!
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and NorthDallas40
#50,492
#50,492
AM64 said:
That's as good a plan as any, but after the mixing of blood the Soviet way, you have to wonder if current "Russians" understand the old Russia and have a desire to separate. One of the big Ukrainian issues is getting the Soviet planted Russians out of Ukraine - and getting Russia to agree that it wasn't their land in the first place. Of course, in this case nobody is lopping off the head of the snake. And there are the revisionists who claim all these places were Russian to begin with - a few of them are right here positing with us.
Click to expand...
I wouldnt think they were trolling if they could give a consistent argument to why one thing is acceptable but another isnt. Or what they are willing to accept as legitimate.

They are impossible to pin down and change their arguments more than they change their underwear.
 
#50,493
#50,493
JuicyBrucey said:
I'm not even saying Odessa is or should be part of Russia, as it's not one of the regions who voted to leave Ukraine and join Russia. I'm just pointing out that the assertation that Russians wouldn't be in the region if it weren't for "the USSR planting Russians in Ukraine" is historical revisionism.
Click to expand...
Ok yes if you are playing the semantics of USSR vs Russia.
 
#50,496
#50,496
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol, AM64 and tvolsfan
#50,497
#50,497
JuicyBrucey said:
There is a big difference between the two, even if it's not widely understood in the USA.
Click to expand...
You mean like historical claims being terminated? You mean like vested foreign interest being lost? You mean like different allies?

What is a major change when it comes to the current conversation?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top