War in Ukraine

[NorthDallas40]

So has Russia. But I dont see you complaining about them.

That’s different

 

[LouderVol]

Why didn't the U.S. government side with the peaceful truckers convoy in Canada? I mean they should have sided with the people right? Why was the Biden administration villianizing people who chose not to get the covid vaccine? Were you also this upset when Biden gave his Hitler- like speech against what he said were the "Maga" Republicans?

The U.S. isn't some great defender of people like you think. They often are the aggressor and antagonize other countries into conflicts. And create chaos in counties like Iraq the second time around.

Deflection.

Fwiw I was in the threads discussing those matters, instead of bogging down this thread with discussions of truckers.

In this thread i largely dont discuss the sins of the US, there are plenty of relevant threads for that.

It's really bad when you cant even deflect to a conspiracy about the US in Ukraine.

 

[LouderVol]

We've gone over this before. Transnistria wanted to break away from Moldova in the late 80s. Russia had nothing to do with it. Plus why are you upset that the people of Transnistria wanted their independence? I thought you liked it when people choose to revolt on their own?

As has been discussed I like it when people choose to revolt on their own and dont rely on foreigners to create the revolution. What russia does is invade, and then create a separtist movement to justify their invasion. Its putting the cart before the horse.

See our Revolution. We had declared our independence about 5 years before the French got involved. Or the Kosovo/Serbia one, Kosovo had declared independence about 2 years before anyone else got involved, fighting was going on before then.

Russia invades, and then suddenly there are people wanting independence. See Transnistria, Azerbaijan, Ossetia.

 

[LouderVol]

Putin's Next Nightmare: Challenger 2 Tanks Will Now Fight Russia in Ukraine

12 of them....hardly a nightmare. What is that a squad or two of tanks? May make a difference in one battle, but in the war as a whole?

 

[LouderVol]

No, they were not fighting to grab land outside of liberating Donbas. Again, if Russia was hellbent on expanding territory, they had the perfect opportunity 6 weeks earlier in Kazakhstan.

You mean when they invaded to put down a revolution of the people?

It's funny how you shift your stance based on how it applies to Russia.

Government sides with Russia, Russia sides with the government and kills civilians.
Government doesnt side with Russia, Russia invades, kills civilians, and then creates a separtist movement.

They didnt need to take land in Kazakhstan, they still have the government on a leash. They only invaded Ukraine because they lost control of that leash when the people took it back.

 

[rekinhavoc]

12 of them....hardly a nightmare. What is that a squad or two of tanks? May make a difference in one battle, but in the war as a whole?

Don't trust either side . Sooner or later Putin either hangs it up or escalates to nations supplying Ukraine.

 

[NorthDallas40]

12 of them....hardly a nightmare. What is that a squad or two of tanks? May make a difference in one battle, but in the war as a whole?

Oh I think they can be highly effective in specific use cases but I agree 12 aren’t a huge force. Think back to US Shermans on German Tigers. It took four or more Shermans to take on one Tiger due to the huge mismatch. In specific pointed battles those Challenger 2’s will be a handful for anything the Russians have fielded.

More likely the big shipment of Bradley’s with TOW will be a much larger and broader impact. Our Bradley’s shredded Iraqi T-72s in Desert Storm.

 

[DonjoVol]

As has been discussed I like it when people choose to revolt on their own and dont rely on foreigners to create the revolution. What russia does is invade, and then create a separtist movement to justify their invasion. Its putting the cart before the horse.

See our Revolution. We had declared our independence about 5 years before the French got involved. Or the Kosovo/Serbia one, Kosovo had declared independence about 2 years before anyone else got involved, fighting was going on before then.

Russia invades, and then suddenly there are people wanting independence. See Transnistria, Azerbaijan, Ossetia.

They didn't invade Transnistria, Abkhazia, or South Ossetia. In each of those the people themselves decided to revolt on their own. According to your own logic then you should stop being a hypocrite and completely support those independent movements. Plus all 3 of these nations have been governing on their own for quite some time now.

And I'm sure you meant Abkhazia and not Azerbaijan.

 

[DonjoVol]

Deflection.

Fwiw I was in the threads discussing those matters, instead of bogging down this thread with discussions of truckers.

In this thread i largely dont discuss the sins of the US, there are plenty of relevant threads for that.

It's really bad when you cant even deflect to a conspiracy about the US in Ukraine.

Some of us have already pointed out the U.S. involvement in Ukraine since 2012 which helped lead to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. No need to continue to repeat myself. Plus you don't have the ability to think critically when it comes to this conflict. You're simply parroting mainstream media talking points.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Lol. That's not what happened at all Proctor. I simply disagreed with the point you and him were trying to make about shock and awe originating in Desert Storm. Something you both claimed and you both were proven wrong. The author himself even used events from the past as an example of shock and awe. The term also didn't become popular until around 2003. I never said the term didn't exist before that. And finally you claimed the book was a book about Desert Storm. Once again you were wrong.

Of course you managed to put your stupidity and immaturity on full display. Congrats.

Congrats again on winning an argument absolutely no one else was having. You’re undefeated in non sequiturs and strawmen I’m sure Curly.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

 

[DonjoVol]

Congrats again on winning an argument absolutely no one else was having. You’re undefeated in non sequiturs and strawmen I’m sure Curly.

Lol. Thought you were done talking to me today Proctor.

 

[Velo Vol]

 

[NorthDallas40]

Lol. Thought you were done talking to me today Proctor.

Oh intermittently rattling your cage and watching the monkey get irritated and hop around doesn’t take too much time Curly

What’s your non sequitur/strawman total “wins” as clearly there aren’t any losses?

 

[Velo Vol]

Oh no stooges!

 

[NorthDallas40]

.

 

[LouderVol]

Oh I think they can be highly effective in specific use cases but I agree 12 aren’t a huge force. Think back to US Shermans on German Tigers. It took four or more Shermans to take on one Tiger due to the huge mismatch. In specific pointed battles those Challenger 2’s will be a handful for anything the Russians have fielded.

More likely the big shipment of Bradley’s with TOW will be a much larger and broader impact. Our Bradley’s shredded Iraqi T-72s in Desert Storm.

Is it a step up, yes. Do the challengers change the war, no. The Bradley's will be more impactful.

If there were large scale tank battles going on that would be a bit different, but there have been very few pitched battles like that
Not much opprotunity from the Ukraine side, and the Russian ones seem to be stuck in reverse. In a large stalemate tanks arent as useful as they otherwise would be.

 

[LouderVol]

They didn't invade Transnistria, Abkhazia, or South Ossetia. In each of those the people themselves decided to revolt on their own. According to your own logic then you should stop being a hypocrite and completely support those independent movements. Plus all 3 of these nations have been governing on their own for quite some time now.

And I'm sure you meant Abkhazia and not Azerbaijan.

You are right about Abkhazia not Azerbaijan.

What the nations are doing now is irrelevant. The russians are still there, occupying the territory. It would help your argument a lot more if the Russians ever left and these nations stood on their own.

The Georgo-Russian war lasted sixteen days. The russians were there from Day 1. The previous rebellions had both been put down and both were backed by the Russians. You dont get the rebellions without the Russians.

 

[LouderVol]

Some of us have already pointed out the U.S. involvement in Ukraine since 2012 which helped lead to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. No need to continue to repeat myself. Plus you don't have the ability to think critically when it comes to this conflict. You're simply parroting mainstream media talking points.

I must have missed all your input in the first Ukraine thread. 95% of that thread was Ras, Pacer, Velo, Bur, and me.

And You have been parroting Russian mainstream media. You even do it with this argument. You have to make up a stance for me because you cant argue what I am actually saying.

And I must have missed out on our MSM calling out Ukraines war crimes for staging bodies, and claiming that Ukraine was losing and will likely lose in the long run. I have yet to say we should GIVE Ukraine anything. I have been against US direct involvement from day 1, even arguing with people about the no-fly-zone some people wanted from us. Never was for the sanctions.

This is just another really bad take from you because you dont have an argument.

I actually dont buy either sides bs. You buy the Russian bs. Some others buy the Ukrainian bs. I have been calling them as they lay. Sometimes its "pro Russian", sometimes its "pro Ukraine", you just cant tell the difference because you are an all or nothing shill.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Is it a step up, yes. Do the challengers change the war, no. The Bradley's will be more impactful.

If there were large scale tank battles going on that would be a bit different, but there have been very few pitched battles like that
Not much opprotunity from the Ukraine side, and the Russian ones seem to be stuck in reverse. In a large stalemate tanks arent as useful as they otherwise would be.

There will be no large armor battles of old. While Russia has the equipment even though it’s heavily augmented by ragged out old T-62’s they haven’t shown the tactical competence or the logistics to pull it off. Their main play is war crime terror strikes against civilians while sending unsupplied green troops en masse against Ukrainian heavily fortified defenses. Most accounts on Soledar put Russian casualties higher than the town population.

Ukraine simply doesn’t have the resources. And likely never will, not in this war anyway. Nobody is sending hundreds of Abrams, Challengers, or Leopards to Ukraine.

The Bradley’s really present a great mid point option as long as they’ve got TOW they will shred T-72s. They’ve done it before.

 

[LouderVol]

There will be no large armor battles of old. While Russia has the equipment even though it’s heavily augmented by ragged out old T-62’s they haven’t shown the tactical competence or the logistics to pull it off. Their main play is war crime terror strikes against civilians while sending unsupplied green troops en masse against Ukrainian heavily fortified defenses. Most accounts on Soledar put Russian casualties higher than the town population.

Ukraine simply doesn’t have the resources. And likely never will, not in this war anyway. Nobody is sending hundreds of Abrams, Challengers, or Leopards to Ukraine.

The Bradley’s really present a great mid point option as long as they’ve got TOW they will shred T-72s. They’ve done it before.

The lack of resources is why I am not moved by the Challengers. It's a good threat to have, but they are almost worth more as a threat than they are on the battlefield.

 

[NorthDallas40]

The lack of resources is why I am not moved by the Challengers. It's a good threat to have, but they are almost worth more as a threat than they are on the battlefield.

And tanks break down. Very often even. Nice to have but likely not a major factor strategically. Might have an impact here or there in specific tactical situations. We agree.

 

[DonjoVol]

Oh no stooges!

Well. Good to know you're pro censorship.

 

[DonjoVol]

I must have missed all your input in the first Ukraine thread. 95% of that thread was Ras, Pacer, Velo, Bur, and me.

And You have been parroting Russian mainstream media. You even do it with this argument. You have to make up a stance for me because you cant argue what I am actually saying.

And I must have missed out on our MSM calling out Ukraines war crimes for staging bodies, and claiming that Ukraine was losing and will likely lose in the long run. I have yet to say we should GIVE Ukraine anything. I have been against US direct involvement from day 1, even arguing with people about the no-fly-zone some people wanted from us. Never was for the sanctions.

This is just another really bad take from you because you dont have an argument.

I actually dont buy either sides bs. You buy the Russian bs. Some others buy the Ukrainian bs. I have been calling them as they lay. Sometimes its "pro Russian", sometimes its "pro Ukraine", you just cant tell the difference because you are an all or nothing shill.

I don't buy any Russian BS. But I sure as heck don't buy any U.S. deep state, mainstream media, uniparty, neocon BS like you and others have bought into.

 

[LouderVol]

I don't buy any Russian BS. But I sure as heck don't buy any U.S. deep state, mainstream media, uniparty, neocon BS like you and others have bought into.

Beyond the obvious disagreements on events prior to 2022, what neocon bs have I bought into?