World War Three?

[Thoughtful Monk]

The only reason Russia didn't conquer Ukraine early on is because they miscalculated; they underestimated Ukraine's ability and resistance. But they are not an equal matchup. Sorry. Ukraine will lose.

Yes, Putin is the main culprit in this theater, but Zelensky betrayed his people instead of negotiating with Russia. By saying that he won't give up an inch of territory, he invited the onslaught.

It's pretty clear to me that Putin wants all of Ukraine. The only negotiations that would have been conducted would have been the terms of Ukraine's surrender and if Zelensky would be allowed to go into exile.

[Zara]

The only reason Russia didn't conquer Ukraine early on is because they miscalculated; they underestimated Ukraine's ability and resistance. But they are not an equal matchup. Sorry. Ukraine will lose.

Yes, Putin is the main culprit in this theater, but Zelensky betrayed his people instead of negotiating with Russia. By saying that he won't give up an inch of territory, he invited the onslaught.

The only reason, you mean, is that the Russian army is massively corrupt, incompetent and lacks morale and discipline. Defending is easier than attacking, the false dilemma that you pose is wrong.

The Donbas region favours Russia's carpet bomb and move forward by metres strategy, it is steppe. The rest of Ukraine has terrain that favours defenders. Given how much it has so far cost Russia on favoured terrain, I don't see them "winning", ever.

Your belief that Putin was negotiating in good faith, seems false to me. He wants the whole country - anything less is just propaganda.

The "war" is not free for Russia, any "victory" is pyretic at this stage, their economy is cut off from technology and their best customers are looking for energy elsewhere, how much is Russia willing to pay for minor gains - at best?

[Ronson]

It's pretty clear to me that Putin wants all of Ukraine. The only negotiations that would have been conducted would have been the terms of Ukraine's surrender and if Zelensky would be allowed to go into exile.

According to Trump (and a couple of others who spoke with Putin) his foremost concern was Crimea. He wanted it free-and-clear, no doubts, annexed into Russia, and probably written down on paper. Before the invasion, Putin said ...

“Let’s imagine that Ukraine is a NATO member, it is fully packed of weapons, it gets advanced attack means like those in Poland and Romania and it starts an operation in Crimea. Let’s imagine that Ukraine is a NATO member state and it initiates a military operation. What should we do then, [should we] fight against the NATO bloc? Did anyone think at least something about that? Apparently not.”

It's pretty clear that the home of Russia's navy - that was only leased from Ukraine until 2042 - was the issue. He was afraid Ukraine would move to take back Crimea and would have NATO fully behind it. Now, Putin may be thinking about taking all of Ukraine at this point, but that was what Trump was alluding to.

More here:

https://www.csis.org/blogs/post-sovi...c-value-russia

[Ronson]

The only reason, you mean, is that the Russian army is massively corrupt, incompetent and lacks morale and discipline. Defending is easier than attacking, the false dilemma that you pose is wrong.

I don't believe I ruled out corruption and incompetence. But that seems to be much corrected now.

The Donbas region favours Russia's carpet bomb and move forward by metres strategy, it is steppe. The rest of Ukraine has terrain that favours defenders. Given how much it has so far cost Russia on favoured terrain, I don't see them "winning", ever.

Your belief that Putin was negotiating in good faith, seems false to me. He wants the whole country - anything less is just propaganda.

The "war" is not free for Russia, any "victory" is pyretic at this stage, their economy is cut off from technology and their best customers are looking for energy elsewhere, how much is Russia willing to pay for minor gains - at best?

I don't know where you're getting your information from but it sounds like mostly opinion to me, derived from Ukraine and legacy-media sources. I have offered my opinions (above) and cited my sources.

[Zara]

I don't believe I ruled out corruption and incompetence. But that seems to be much corrected now.

"the only reason" ...

I don't know where you're getting your information from but it sounds like mostly opinion to me, derived from Ukraine and legacy-media sources. I have offered my opinions (above) and cited my sources.

I literally showed you Putin's "essay" on the oneness of the Ukrainian and Russian territory. No "legacy-" false argument required.

Your source is what a sociopathic narcissistic liar told a sociopathic narcissistic liar, hearsay. Your "legacy-media's" favoured buzz-word, right?

I read a map. Listened to some generals on the state of play.

[Ronson]

"the only reason" ...

Fair enough. I believe those are valid reasons, too.

I literally showed you Putin's "essay" on the oneness of the Ukrainian and Russian territory. No "legacy-" false argument required.

Your source is what a sociopathic narcissistic liar told a sociopathic narcissistic liar, hearsay. Your "legacy-media's" favoured buzz-word, right?

I read a map. Listened to some generals on the state of play.

Just before the invasion, on Feb 1 2022, Putin basically stated Crimea was his reason for invasion. His essay says more about his general belief, but he never acted on his belief/essay in his decades of Russian control. It was only when Obama/Kerry/Biden/Hillary began courting Kyiv in earnest that he annexed Crimea. And then he invaded Ukraine when he couldn't get concessions.

[Zara]

Fair enough. I believe those are valid reasons, too.

Just before the invasion, on Feb 1 2022, Putin basically stated Crimea was his reason for invasion. His essay says more about his general belief, but he never acted on his belief/essay in his decades of Russian control. It was only when Obama/Kerry/Biden/Hillary began courting Kyiv in earnest that he annexed Crimea. And then he invaded Ukraine when he couldn't get concessions.

You mean, when Ukraine said it was no longer a de-facto puppet state of Russia?

Putin's word is worthless. Also, he literally tried to take Kiev, but failed. If he was only interested in Crimea - which he already controlled - why try to take Kiev and murder the government?

His worry that Ukraine could join NATO and then attack Russia to get back Crimea is laughably stupid - would not have happened. Just another false justification.

Secret biological weapons program, joining NATO, genocide of Russians, "self-defence", whatever that means, your supposition about Crimea, all have been used as justification by Russia - all are • Edited by a Moderator •• Edited by a Moderator •

Moderated By: Sparko

Please watch your language. Profanity is not allowed

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publicly complain or whine, please take it to the Padded Room unless told otherwise.

[Ronson]

You mean, when Ukraine said it was no longer a de-facto puppet state of Russia?

Putin's word is worthless. Also, he literally tried to take Kiev, but failed. If he was only interested in Crimea - which he already controlled - why try to take Kiev and murder the government?

His worry that Ukraine could join NATO and then attack Russia to get back Crimea is laughably stupid - would not have happened. Just another false justification.

Secret biological weapons program, joining NATO, genocide of Russians, "self-defence", whatever that means, your supposition about Crimea, all have been used as justification - all are • Edited by a Moderator •• Edited by a Moderator •

You're too emotional and combative to converse with. Have a nice day.

[Zara]

You're too emotional and combative to converse with. Have a nice day.

You have nothing but poorly judged opinion, gotcha.

[Zara]

Secret biological weapons program; joining NATO; genocide of Russians; "self-defence", whatever that means; your supposition about Crimea - all have been used as justification by Russia - all are bullfeces.

I forgot one, how could I have missed it, de-Nazification of a state run by a democratically elected Jew - you can't make this stuff up.

[rogue06]

Spokesman for the National Security Council says that the United States does not support Taiwan independence, which is exactly what China wanted to hear.

Those six words, “we do not support Taiwan independence,” was a very deliberate and public assurance to China. Essentially, the United States will not do anything to support the independence of Taiwan, do whatever you want. Joe Biden took a knee to Chairman Xi. As a result, Beijing dropped back their tone to traditional rhetoric saying in a statement Tuesday morning, the visit “seriously infringes upon China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...-independence/

And then almost as if on queue, the media was immediately distracted by reports of an old and decrepit Al Qaeda leader being killed in a US military strike.

That has been our official policy for decades.

[rogue06]

The only reason Russia didn't conquer Ukraine early on is because they miscalculated; they underestimated Ukraine's ability and resistance. But they are not an equal matchup. Sorry. Ukraine will lose.

Yes, Putin is the main culprit in this theater, but Zelensky betrayed his people instead of negotiating with Russia. By saying that he won't give up an inch of territory, he invited the onslaught.

If Russia is willing to fight a war of attrition, something they've shown a willingness to do before, they will inevitably win.

[Ronson]

If Russia is willing to fight a war of attrition, something they've shown a willingness to do before, they will inevitably win.

And with the world's 11th ranked army (size) and 100 million more in population than Ukraine, I don't see any other possibilities. Unless western powers start fighting on Ukraine's side or Zelensky can get Russia to negotiate terms, it won't end well for Ukraine.

[Mountain Man]

And with the world's 11th ranked army (size) and 100 million more in population than Ukraine, I don't see any other possibilities. Unless western powers start fighting on Ukraine's side or Zelensky can get Russia to negotiate terms, it won't end well for Ukraine.

I still encounter clueless liberals who insist that the invasion was "botched" and that Ukraine is trouncing the Russian army. They become very confused and angry when I tell them the truth.

[Ronson]

I still encounter clueless liberals who insist that the invasion was "botched" and that Ukraine is trouncing the Russian army. They become very confused and angry when I tell them the truth.

One of those situations where people don't know who to believe. My father-in-law believes the legacy media on everything (ugh) and he's confused because they aren't very consistent even with themselves.