Russian Tensions
- This topic has 5,312 replies, 39 voices, and was last updated 3 weeks, 1 day ago by
.
-
Posts
-
It is he same mythology about Nelson Mandela. There was a black bourgeoise also in South Africa
Are you referring to my message on Gandhi?
Yet more evidence of NATOstani demilitarisation.
https://www.ft.com/content/a781fb71-49bb-4052-ab05-a87386bf3d5e
FT link behind a paywall.
However, do you think that Russia has no supply problems? That it possesses unlimited weapon capacity?
They too will equally be suffering logistic problems.
I said in a previous post that it depends on who replenishes their stocks the quickest.
I stand by my earlier point that the West has reserves they can still access consisting of older weapons, just as Russia equally does. Question is who kept them in the better condition?
Both also will repair their arms. Again, it is a matter of who has the skills and facilities to bring them back into operation sooner. You say it is easier for Russia as their factories are close by. The ex-Warsaw Pact countries such as the Czechs possess the know-all and aren’t too far away, either.
However, with the sanctions in place, the West with a much larger budget to spend can go on a shopping spree around the world’s armament bazaars. Russia has only Iran and North Korea to look to.
But for you, these problems are not important as you expect a short war, just months away from a total victory. But the idea that the entire Ukraine can be occupied and subdued is very doubtful. Russia can only acquire more territory to better negotiate. Will it include Kiev? Odessa? Kharkiv? Kherson?
Can Russia impose such a long-term occupation?
Or do you believe they will be welcomed with flowers as Putin has initially been misled by his faulty intelligence departments
I anticipate a long war, perhaps interrupted by sporadic ceasefires.
Who can sustain the war effort for the longest?
Can the West subsidize Ukraine indefinitely?
I simply speculate that NATO still can become involved more. Without it being formally under the aegis of NATO, volunteer troops can be seconded from various countries regular armies to give it legality.
I don’t think it is likely but nevertheless, it is a possibility, if push comes to shove and Ukraine is backed up into a corner.
Unlike the start of the war Western powers can no longer concede a Russian total victory, only a compromise concession.
It is now all or nothing for BOTH sides.
Yet more evidence of NATOstani demilitarisation.
https://www.ft.com/content/a781fb71-49bb-4052-ab05-a87386bf3d5e
______________________________________________That is not what “demilitarisation” means
NATO countries many be experiencing supply problems for the moment in meeting Ukraine’s military needs, but you can bet your bottom dollar that military expenditures will be rising everywhere thanks to the capitalist Putin regime’s imperialistic gamble on invading Ukraine. Even so NATO has not demilitarised. Only a fantasist can believe that. NATO’S current military strength vastly exceeds that of Russia’s. It has approximately 3.37 million active military personnel compared with 1.35 million active military personnel in the Russian military and the former are better equipped and trained
“That is not what “demilitarisation” means”
Er yeah, it does. Third of US Stingers gone. Third of US Javelins gone. Third of HIMARS missiles gone. Third of Ukraine proxy warriors gone. M777s gone. See a pattern?
“FT link behind a paywall.”
It confirms what I was saying.
“However, do you think that Russia has no supply problems?”
Compared to Ukraine? No.
“That it possesses unlimited weapon capacity?”
For the purposes of waging this SMO, it absolutely does.
“They too will equally be suffering logistic problems.”
Lol. Not even close.
“I said in a previous post that it depends on who replenishes their stocks the quickest.”
Russia.
“I stand by my earlier point that the West has reserves they can still access consisting of older weapons, just as Russia equally does.”
This word “equally”. It doesn’t mean what you think it means.
“Question is who kept them in the better condition?”
Russia.
“Both also will repair their arms. Again, it is a matter of who has the skills and facilities to bring them back into operation sooner.”
Russia.
“You say it is easier for Russia as their factories are close by.”
That’s a fact.
“The ex-Warsaw Pact countries such as the Czechs possess the know-all and aren’t too far away, either.”
The closest facility for repairing Ukrainian artillery is a 2,000km round trip. And the trains barely run. Lol
“However, with the sanctions in place”
They’re having no appreciable effect on Russian military production.
“the West with a much larger budget to spend can go on a shopping spree around the world’s armament bazaars.”
Lol. So why is Ukraine running out of weapons?
“Russia has only Iran and North Korea to look to.”
There is ZERO evidence of any weapons coming from DPRK. Some Iranian drones are being used by Russia. From what I’ve heard they’re Iranian designed but manufactured in Russia.
“But for you, these problems are not important as you expect a short war, just months away from a total victory.”
I do. No longer than a year I think. Probably shorter.
“But the idea that the entire Ukraine can be occupied and subdued is very doubtful.”
We’ll just have to see won’t we?
“Russia can only acquire more territory to better negotiate.”
Yeah, and you’ll still claim it’s losing. Lol
“Will it include Kiev?”
Possibly but temporarily.
“Odessa? Kharkiv? Kherson?”
Definitely and permanently.
“Can Russia impose such a long-term occupation?”
Who said anything about a long-term occupation?
“Or do you believe they will be welcomed with flowers as Putin has initially been misled by his faulty intelligence departments”
Share these internal Kremlin reports with me. Link please.
“I anticipate a long war, perhaps interrupted by sporadic ceasefires.”
You’re wrong about everything else. I’m sure this won’t be the exception.
“Who can sustain the war effort for the longest?”
Russia.
“Can the West subsidize Ukraine indefinitely?”
Sure, just like South Vietnam, Nicaragua, Iraq, Afghanistan…Oh wait!
“I simply speculate that NATO still can become involved more. Without it being formally under the aegis of NATO, volunteer troops can be seconded from various countries regular armies to give it legality.”
Then they’ll be turned to fertilizer too.
“I don’t think it is likely but nevertheless, it is a possibility, if push comes to shove and Ukraine is backed up into a corner.”
Ukraine IS backed into a corner.
“Unlike the start of the war Western powers can no longer concede a Russian total victory, only a compromise concession.”
They don’t get a say. Victor’s set terms.
“It is now all or nothing for BOTH sides.”
But only one side is equipped to win. Russia. Its victory is a certainty.
“That is not what “demilitarisation” means”
Er yeah, it does. Third of US Stingers gone. Third of US Javelins gone. Third of HIMARS missiles gone. Third of Ukraine proxy warriors gone. M777s gone. See a pattern?
___________________________Don’t be daft. The loss of some military equipment does NOT equate with “demilitarisation” or is the English language not your mother tongue? Of course, weapons supplied by NATO countries have been lost. That is the nature of war. Weapons get destroyed. Duh. I notice you say nothing about the massive amounts of Russian weaponry that have also been destroyed or captured. According to your daft logic Russia too is undergoing “demilitarisation”
The fact remains that NATO militarily speaking is vastly superior to the Russian in terms of manpower and most other criteria you care to mention. Only a deluded fool would deny this. And thanks to the Putin regime’s imperialistic invasion of Ukraine military spending is going to rise in the future, not decline
“It is now all or nothing for BOTH sides.”
But only one side is equipped to win. Russia. Its victory is a certainty.
__________________________________“Victory” for Russia in that case (if their military is lucky) means simply hanging on to most of Donbas and Crimea. That is the most probable outcome leading to ceasefire talks and possibly the formal recognition of the break-up of Ukraine along these lines. It looks like stalemate in military terms is the increasingly likely scenario and Ukraine’s momentum in recapturing lost territory is going to slow down…
Tens of thousands of working-class lives will have been lost fighting for one repugnant capitalist regime (and its backers) against the other – not that a rabidly anti working-class nationalist like TS cares a fig about the interests of workers in this sickening capitalist conflict
“Odessa? Kharkiv? Kherson?”
Definitely and **permanently**“Can Russia impose such a long-term occupation?”
Who said anything about a long-term occupation?”You did as I have asterisked.
If you mean Russia isn’t capable of occupying (or annexing) all of Ukraine, then I agree that it isn’t possible.
I note you insist that details of intelligence failures should only be from internal Kremlin sources. Hardly going to happen, is it?
“Putin fired Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) and put the military’s Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) in charge of providing intelligence on the Ukraine invasion, according to two leading Russian journalists.”
https://www.businessinsider.com/putin-gru-in-charge-ukraine-intel-after-fsb-failures-report-2022-5But there are ample other non-Russian sources that he purged his intelligence departments, as well as a number of generals, one being in charge of logistics for failures.
“Putin has sacked. Dmitry Bulgakov, Russia’s highest-ranked general in charge with managing its military’s logistics operations in Ukraine.”
https://inews.co.uk/news/vladimir-putin-sacks-another-general-as-he-takes-a-more-active-role-in-ukraine-war-1877002It indicates Russia also has supply problems that you deny.
“No longer than a year I think.”
A year from February 2022 or from now?
The examples you offer show that commitment was much longer than a year or two…Almost 20 years in Afghanistan.
The deadlock in the Donbass shows that Russia cannot manage a breakthrough. It shows also that Ukraine has to concede territory for a peace settlement.
I know you won’t accept an American analysis but isn’t it useful to know what the enemy is thinking especially since unlike the Europeans the USA did correctly predict a Russian invasion
““Odessa? Kharkiv? Kherson?”
Definitely and **permanently**“Can Russia impose such a long-term occupation?”
Who said anything about a long-term occupation?”You did as I have asterisked.”
Kharkiv and Kherson are now Russia. Odessa will be. Who said anything about a long-term occupation of Ukraine?
“If you mean Russia isn’t capable of occupying (or annexing) all of Ukraine, then I agree that it isn’t possible.”
That would probably, though not necessarily, require additional Russian mobilisation. In which case it would be very possible.
“I note you insist that details of intelligence failures should only be from internal Kremlin sources. Hardly going to happen, is it?”
Exactly, so don’t confuse your conjecture with facts.
““Putin fired Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) and put the military’s Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) in charge of providing intelligence on the Ukraine invasion, according to two leading Russian journalists.””
Where’s the bit about flowers?
“But there are ample other non-Russian sources that he purged his intelligence departments, as well as a number of generals, one being in charge of logistics for failures.”
Erm, we’re talking about flowers here.
“Putin has sacked. Dmitry Bulgakov, Russia’s highest-ranked general in charge with managing its military’s logistics operations in Ukraine.”
The flowers, man. Where’s all this talk about flowers?
“It indicates Russia also has supply problems that you deny.”
I do, because the Russians are not running out of anything.
“A year from February 2022 or from now?”
From now.
“The examples you offer show that commitment was much longer than a year or two…Almost 20 years in Afghanistan”
You seem to be confusing US commitment to its proxies with my projected length of the Russian/Ukraine conflict. You aren’t making any sense.
“The deadlock in the Donbass shows that Russia cannot manage a breakthrough.”
Are you on crack? Bhakmut is about to fall. Then Ukraine loses everything in Donbass. Lol.
“It shows also that Ukraine has to concede territory for a peace settlement.”
Ukraine needs to surrender.
It is the opposite way and it is logical, this war has increased the production and sales of armaments, this is a gold mine opportunity for the arms dealers, the USA is the number one arms dealers in the whole world. Weapons are not for exhibition they must be used and they have to be replaced. Some countries like Poland have purchased used tanks from the USA because the USA armed forces are getting more modern ones
I think if you read back you will find that I already stated it was Boris Johnson who convinced Ukraine to resist when all other NATO countries were ready to accept defeat with USA preparing to fly Zelensky out to safety. I was making the point that the USA was not responsible for planning the proxy war which you claimed but the UK. But the strategic situation did change.
Do you deny that Russia’s intelligence failed by miscalculating the strength of nationalist feelings of the Ukrainians and that the Russian army was not welcomed as liberators as their soldiers were told?
Are you so deluded that you expect that Ukraine will accept surrender when they already refused to when elite Russian troops were in the suburbs of Kiev and before NATO aid had arrived?
Are you so deluded that you see Russia desperate to retain some of the gains they made at the outset of the war and lost to a Ukrainian offensive. You talk of Bakhmut a battle going on since August with Ukraine still holding out but conveniently forget the defeats Russia had at Kharkiv and Izium. A symbolic victory – not for the Russian army, but a mercenary army of convicts
I tried to earlier explain that NATO was prepared to accept the defeat of Ukraine at the outset of the war but now the stakes are far too high to allow a Russian victory. Global geo-politics takes precedence now.
I anticipate the loss of DPR, LHR and Crimea and a return of Russia to Feb 22 lines as the basis of peace. How long such a peace lasts is conjecture.
Your video link is to a website that has the description
“I analyze war movies, video games and react to other Youtube videos.”
Scarcely a credible source when you dismiss similar such sources that are pro-Ukrainian?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.