TrueScotsman
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“There are 284 pages on this discussion board, can you show just how you have proven the numbers you have stated “time and time again to be correct”.
I’m not going to trawl through the thread to do that. Do your own homework. But I said the Russian death toll was less than 10,000 which was confirmed by a BBC investigation. This does not include the death toll of the Donbass militia which is probably of a slightly larger number as they were doing much of the initial frontline combat. I said the deaths of Ukrainians were upward of 150,000, now much more. Von der Layan let it slip a couple months back that the death toll of Ukrainians was 100,000.
“Very little you have predicted has come to fruition.”
Funny, I don’t recall making many predictions about the war. My only major prediction has been that Russia will win decisively. And that is exactly what is happening.
“Scott Ritter said in February 2022 that Russia would not invade the Ukraine.”
Dunno where you got that from since he predicted the invasion in late 2021 after NATO rebuffed Moscow’s call to respect its security demands.
“After the invasion he said that, Ukraine will fall in maximimum of a week.”
It almost did. But again, he was expecting Russia to go in according to doctrine. As one would. His underlying assumption that Ukraine is no match for Russia has proven correct.
“I wouldn’t rely on him for your racing tips, TW”
His overall prediction that Ukraine doesn’t stand a chance has been very accurate.
“Because it was two states with comparable scale armies”
Not true. Russia’s army dwarfs that of Ukraine.
“fighting trench warfare”
They’re not. The Ukrainians are in the trenches. The Russians are smoking them out of them.
“and able to resupply their armies: it is a suitable modern comparator.”
Erm, miss the conversation about NATO’s pantry being bear?
“Remember, the size of Ukraine means supply lines are a key feature of the war, and Russia cannot advance too fast, unless the Ukrainian army completely collapses, which it is unlikely to do while it is still being supplied.”
Russia doesn’t need to advance fast. Russia’s number one goal is the demilitarisation of Ukraine. Ukraine is obliging by funneling its forces into the Donbass where they are being destroyed at a horrific rate. 15:1 casualties. An approximate survival time of four hours for new Ukrainian conscripts at the front.
“Look at Artemovsk: if Ukraine manages to pull out it’s forces, Russia will face another three or four such city assaults to keep it’s assault moving.”
Abandoning Bhakmut is Ukraine’s death knell. All other defensive lines are hastily erected and fortified. Donbass will be fully liberated by August if Scott Ritter is to be believed and he hasn’t got much wrong so far.
“Yes, the possibility of sudden collapse is there.”
Bhakmut is mere days if not hours away from falling.
“I’ll try and explain this to TW. “Bakhmut doesn’t itself hold a lot of strategic value” – This means the city (its resources, its manufacturing, its population, etc.) do not hold a resource based value. “but it’s location does” it has a strategic geographic position in terms of defensibility for the Ukranian Forces.”
No shit Sherlock. But that’s true of the entire conflict. The city is strategically important because it’s strategically important.
“From the get go you have been saying that Russia would steamroller the Ukrainian state very quickly. One year on this has not happened, tragically to the cost of thousands of working class people on both sides.”
My initial assessment was based on that of Scott Ritter. He expected Russia to follow their standard military doctrine, a doctrine that would have been used in a confrontation with NATO. But Russia refrained from doing so because they wish to preserve civilian life and, for the first months of the conflict, civilian infrastructure.
“As to whether there will be a Russian breakthrough in 2023, the outcome is probably pretty uncertain. The usually expected numerical advantage that attackers need to breakthrough defensive forces has long been set at about 3:1.”
Indeed, which is why claims that Russia attempted to take Kiev at the beginning of the conflict are farcical.
“Has Russia got the level of advantage oveer Ukrainian forces, I don’t know and I’m very confident that TW doesn’t know either.”
Actually. I do know because I follow trusted and knowledgeable analysts rather than propagandists and wishful thinkers.
“It is likely in the fog of war neither side can give an accurate forecast of these numbers.”
Not true either. I am very confident in the numbers state because the sources I follow have proven themselves time and time again to be correct.
“We also need to take into consideration that these are the minimum estimated numbers required. It is also possible that these numbers can be impacted on quality of arms and troops (A British force of 36,000 overwhelmed an Italian force of 150,000 troops during Operation Compass in 1940-41 taking 133,000 prisoners of war).”
Imagine that scenario but the numbers reversed. That’s the equivalent of the situation. The kill ratio is approximately 15:1 now in favour of Russia.
“What is certain that without meaningful peace negotiations and some settlement between these two capitalist powers, thousands of more workers will be fed into the meat grinder to keep the powerful elite in their positions of power.”
This about capitalism for one side only. NATOstan. For Russia it is about confronting NATOstani aggression.
“It seems everything is dependent upon the success or failure of the imminent Russian Spring Offensive.”
The offensive has already begun. Google it.
“IMHO even such a victory will not be sufficient to bring subdue Ukraine and bring it to the negotiation table.”
Russia is done talking. If Ukraine has a guardian angel Moscow may just be magnanimous enough to offer them one last chance to negotiate. But Moscow doesn’t need to. The war is going its way. It’s winning decisively and nothing, short of nukes, will prevent a Russian victory.
“The war will go on and I have to agree with Wagners Prigozhin that the conflict will drag on, draining not only the combatants but the rest of the world of resources.”
No, it’s not going to go on much longer. Ukraine and NATOstan are almost spent. NATOStan is busily preparing one final iteration of its proxy army. Like the other 2 this third will also be reduced to chum and smoldering slag.
“Recall the Iraq-Iran war lasted 8 long bloody years.”
Recall the Hundred Years War. Erm, why?
“Roozenbeek said Bakhmut itself doesn’t hold a lot of strategic value, but the location does.”
(Whiplash) Say what?! The town isn’t of strategic value but it’s of strategic value. Lol. This guy’s a professor? Of clownery?
“Is it likely that Russia will invade NATO in the near future?”
May I remind you that the subject of NATO’s demilitarisation came up with respect to my claim that Russia will win in its conflict with Ukraine because Ukraine is running out of the means to stay in the fight. I was then ridiculed for not understanding NATOs military might. Well, looks like I was right afterall. Lol
“As you keep saying, Russia is not the aggressor, so present shortages are not an immediate critical issue.”
Not for Russia, no. For Ukraine, big yes.
“It simply supports all those who say that NATO is not a threat to Russia.”
Not in a toe to toe ground war, no. But that’s not what keeps the Kremlin up at night. Nukes and missile silos do. Moscow will never allow NATO to build such infrastructure on its borders.
“On the other hand, if a war did unexpectedly break out, it does raise the prospect of nuclear weapons being used to compensate for the lack of conventional supplies.”
Indeed. And then we’re all dead.
“Without sufficient 155mm shells, a tactical nuke may well be employed.”
Gold star for you. You may actually be right about something for once.
“Stockpiles of weaponry are being depleted but NATO members have all committed to increasing their military budgets and are ordering new armaments from manufacturers.”
Words are one thing, deeds another. Like the SPGB I suspect its mostly blather.
“It will take time for them to be produced to replenish. But it will happen.
Perhaps the time-line may not be sufficient to save Ukraine from the anticipated Russian offensive,”
The offensives have already started. You sleeping in class again? Do pay attention. And yes, it is too late for Ukraine. But then again, Ukraine never had a chance as I was saying from the get go.
“but it does not mean that NATO is being demilitarised.”
Actually, it does.
“On the contrary.
NATO is on course to enlarge its membership with Finland and Sweden planning to join.”
Maybe, maybe not. It won’t change the dynamics on the ground.
“The lesson being learned is that the expenditure of ammunition in today’s modern war is vast, much more than war-games had foreseen.”
You mean NATOstani wargames? The Russians and Chinese never forgot this lesson.
“Do you think NATO countries will not take such lessons into consideration when they re-stock and re-arm themselves?”
That could take up to a decade. NATOstan doesn’t have that long. It may well collapse after Ukraine’s inevitable defeat. The cracks are already showing.
“For the working class, it means that national budgets will be adjusted with less GDP spent on social welfare and much more spent on the military.”
Yeah, but when have things been otherwise?
“Tanks for nothing, Putin and Zelensky, for putting more money into the coffers of the armament industry and less into health, education and the elderly.”
Lol. You’ve airbrushed NATOstan out of the rogues gallery. Putin doesn’t belong there BTW. He was coming to the aid of those poor civilians being targeted by Nazis. You know, the one’s Bojo’s Brains is clutching his pearls over?
“Something to be proud of.”
Way to miss the forest for the trees All in with Washington’s neo-con imperialists.
“As always, it is the workers who pay the price of war.”
As always, your analysis is a day late and a dollar short.
“Essentially the question is, “do you agree that it is appropriate to target civilians when there is a “fortress” situation”.”
It is always wrong to target civilians fortress or no. That’s why Russia went to war with the Kiev Nazis; to stop them targeting civilians in the Donbass.
“Whether it turns out to a lie or if it turns out to be true, this should not impact on your judgement on the matter.”
And it doesn’t impact my judgment on the matter. But it should impact your judgment as to which sources you choose to inform you of the conflict. Garbage in, garbage out.
“That said the veracity of the story is not really important, regardless of the truth of the story or not, the question is about your view on it.”
Say what?! The veracity isn’t important?! Erm, yeah it is. The claim sounded bunk when I first heard it and now I know it’s BS. So my view is, you were listening to a liar. Find a more reliable source of information on the conflict.
Ukraine firing artillery shells faster than the entirety of NATO can replace them. But NATO isn’t being disarmed! Hahahahahahahahahahaha!
“I was only trying to find out whether TN felt that the statement I quoted re civilians was one he supported or not.”
Link to the source of the quote, please.
“FACT-CHECK
Sixty-three percent of Moldovans support EU membership, while 33% oppose it.”
Lol, hardly a “fact check”. Fully a third of the population opposes membership.
“Currently, 82% of Moldovans believe current relations with the EU are either very good or somewhat good and 67% believe it is one of the country’s most important economic partners.”
Your point being what? That the media is doing a fine job brainwashing the population into opposing their own interests?
“A reminder that this was exactly the argument TS and the Chinese government made concerning the pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong – that they were instigated by the US.”
Difference being my claims are evidence based. Where’s the evidence the Russian state is attempting to overthrow the government with a violent regime change operation as was the case in Hong Kong?
“The repression continues to this day with the ongoing trial of dissidents for “subversion”.
Yeah, that’s what happens to traitors and fifth columnists. Where’s the evidence that Russia is bankrolling the opposition?
“TS finds that anything that does not concur with his political perspective is “fascist” regardless of their actual real politics.”
Good try. I don’t throw around the term “fascist” willy-nilly, I follow the evidence.
“Another aspect I had not understood is from a Turkish analysis that one of Russia’s strategic aims was to create a satellite state of Novorossiya a region that Putin also declared to have been wrongly given to Ukraine like Crimea.”
“From a Turkish analysis”? The evidence?
Crimea was wrongly given over. Ask any Crimean.
“Maia Sandu accused Russia of planning to use foreign saboteurs to bring down her country’s leadership, stop it from joining the EU”
Sure, there’s no way ordinary people would be challenging their “leaders” who are attempting to incorporate them into the neo-liberal hell-hole that is the EU. It must be “outside agitators”. Said every fascist ever. Now All-in is shamelessly pedaling fascist memes. Good running dog, here’s a bone.
“Ethically, it depends on what the provocateur wanted to achieve, and what the provoked person is doing. A nagging spouse may well provoke a person to violence, but we would condemn the violent one anyway, and see it for the abuse it was.”
And what if the nagging spouse’s foreign lover, who covets the family home, gives said spouse a loaded shotgun and directs them to first shoot the family dog then point it at said nagged spouse and pull the trigger? Then what do you see?
“In this circumstance, the provocation from the US is to try and make Ukraine part of it’s sphere of influence (or, at least, that is how the kremlin sees it) while Moscow believes it to be within its sphere of influence”
No that was not the plan. Stage one was to overthrow Ukraine’s democratically elected government in a violent fascist led coup. Stage two provoke. Arm said fascists, sick ’em on rhe ethnic Russian population; promise said fascists NATO membership along with basing rights and eventually nukes and wait for the Russians to respond, as they must, with violence. Stage four: sanction Russia, activate fifth columnists such as “human rights activists” and other assorted NGO regime change operatives. Infiltrate the protests that the various traitors and fifth columnists stage with agents provocoteurs and bring down the government. Stage five: break up Russia into statelets, pauperise the population, privatise all state assets and steal anything not nailed to the floor. All this you will find written in exquisite detail in neo-con think tank white papers and RAND reports. It’s not even a secret.
“Ukraine is caught between the pass and fell of mighty powers (or, again, at least, that is Moscow’s aim, to claim equality with the US and to settle this Empire to Empire).”
Rubbish. Russia has no imperial ambitions. Quite the opposite. It is at the coal face of the struggle against NATOstani(read US) imperial hegemony. If you weren’t blinkered by ideology you would know this. But you can only lead a horse to water. You can’t make it drink.
