158 missiles and they only managed to kill 39 people.
I rest my case.
And that's just not enough to matter.How much damage do you think 158 missiles did in one day? They dont target them to kill people but to destroy assets. they can hit a bingo hall and kill more people than that. They are strategic missiles Not tactical
They launched 158 missiles. Most of which were shot down.
They can only sustain 100 a month. That's nothing.
Maybe.You can believe whatever you want. Ukraine is producing zero missiles per month.zero tanks per month, zero aircraft per month, while Russia is finishing new weapons facility's. The fact is , Ukraine is losing. The US isnt going to throw good money after bad forever. At some point they cut their losses. the writing on the wall is clear. short of a NATO attack on Russia , nothing is going to save her now.
But at this point *any* victory Russia can eke out in Ukraine will be a Phyrric one.
Yup, a lot of military analysts thought so, and so did I. They weren't ready for a conflict of this size, their military leadership was awful, it still isnt all that good.Everybody assumed Putin would be dining in Kiev before that first summer.
And they also assumed the occupation of Ukraine would destroy Russia.
The pain for Russia doesn't even *start* until they have won the war.
The Russians didn't fare any better against the insurgents in Afghanistan than we did.Pretty much. But thats how they roll
Yup, a lot of military analysts thought so, and so did I. They weren't ready for a conflict of this size, their military leadership was awful, it still isnt all that good.
Im not seeing that so long as they dont take Western Ukraine. The majority of civilians in the East are Russian or back Russia , Most of the able bodied men there have either left the country, enlisted or been drafted, . I dont think the population in the east can launch an effective guerrilla war. and even if they did, The Russians wont fight it like We do. They arnt one for appearances, They will arrest the whole town and they will dig out who the enemy's are . And honestly, I dont think they will have the stomach for more killing , I think most will be glad the war is over and either move to another country, Western Ukraine or just get on with thier lives.
I do suspect at some point the Poles may invade Western Ukraine and annex it or something similar to prevent it from falling into Russian hands
The Russians claim they wont recognize that and will kill any pole that invades, Who knows how that will play out .
""What are they getting out of this whole adventure again ?""
A buffer with the west which is what they wanted from the get go Some of the best farmland in the world , total control of the black sea if they take Odessa, which is on the menu. Ukraines natural gas, and gas transit lines to Europe. There is a lot of strategic and economic value in Ukraine.
Maybe.
But at this point *any* victory Russia can eke out in Ukraine will be a Phyrric one.
Everybody assumed Putin would be dining in Kiev before that first summer. And they also assumed the occupation of Ukraine would destroy Russia.
The pain for Russia doesn't even *start* until they have won the war.
What are they getting out of this whole adventure again ?
The Russians didn't fare any better against the insurgents in Afghanistan than we did.
They have 2 new NATO nations on their border now than they did when this started.
If they annex easten Ukraine only, then it's almost guaranteed that what's left in the west will join NATO ASAP.
Why does Russia think they *need* a buffer against NATO ?
If NATO attacks, another 100 miles, or 1000 isn't going to make much difference. Russia is so ridiculously overmatched. It's like Cuba demanding part of Southern Florida for "a buffer" LOL.
It's completely understandable that Russia doesn't *want* NATO in Ukraine.Honestly it's the same reason we don't want Russia in Cuba.
The Ukrainian border is mere kilometers by.air and ground to Moscow. If we had the eastern block or China setting up shop in southern Ontario we would not allow it either. We would say get the hell out of here this is an existential threat
Yeah, just kill off those that oppose your dictatorial rule and everything is copasetic. OH, I guess in your fantasy world that means sophisticated.Chechen conflict had more dire prognosis. Look at them now and they were culturally different, different ethnos, different religion. Russia today is much more sophisticated than the U.S. at multicultural coexistence.
It's completely understandable that Russia doesn't *want* NATO in Ukraine.
They don't want NATO in Poland either, but thems the breaks.
Just watched this video. It was very enlightening to hear first hand perspective on how war has evolved and changed and things to consider.
They talk as if they are winning. This was posted on YouTube two days ago. Who knows when this was filmed. They could be tits up now.
Based on comments about past events and winter ending turning to spring soon (as an example removing white disruptive tape off kit) and looking at what Idaho (where this was filmed) looks like currently I would say it's fairly recent. Probably not more than 2 weeks old.
I don't think they talked as if they were winning. It was a good non political discussion to let people know what modern trench warfare is like. Obviously they have their bias and personal slant on their narrative but I didn't think it was overly lecturing or political.
I took it for what it was worth as a first hand account of hard lessons learned and things to worry about on modern battlefields. It seems hellish and lethal.
I didn't watch the whole video. They are annoying, remember the types from my OCS days. They came to the Russian Safari. There is a special place in hell for them.
But, the cold war is over. Russia is not the USSR no matter how much Putin wants to pretend otherwise.I dont think you understand the peramaters that are in effect here.Your looking at the equation wrong.
A deal was made allowing Ukraine to become independent under conditions which they agreed to. which was neutrality. Any violation or breech of this condition was made crystal clear that Russia would consider such, a national security breech and military action would follow.
Its in black and white and repeated endlesslessly for the last 30 years. there is no good reason for NATO to expand and place armies on the Russian border itself except to fight Russia at some future date. None. those armies would be intended to defend or fight whom? who would the NATO missiles be aimed at?
The US almost went to war with Russia for putting missiles in Cuba , a communist country and Allie of the soviets, because of grave national security threats. the US was compelled to take action to protect itself . It was so important they were ready to start a nuclear war over it. The world held its breath while these 2 countrys squared off .
The US was correct to protect itself as is the Russian federation. When the US tried to pull this shit in Georgia which isnt really even in europe the Russians could either allow it or do something about it. they chose to kick the shit out of them . like they are doing to Ukraine right now.
But, the cold war is over. Russia is not the USSR no matter how much Putin wants to pretend otherwise.
The only reason NATO would fight Russia is if Russia tried to invade a NATO member. And if NATO *did* decide to fight Russia, it wouldn't matter how much "buffer" they had.
NATO could go through Belarus in hours if they wanted.
NATO has never invaded anyone. It's not even clear *how* NATO could do that, and it is *quite* clear that if a NATO member decides to invade someone else, they're on their own.
So, if Ukraine joined NATO, and they decided they wanted to create their own "buffer zone" out of the western 100 miles of Russia, they would be on their own. They would not get to invoke article 5 and get any support from NATO.
Also, Russia was in no condition to demand any terms. Could Ukraine have demanded terms from Russia after the breakup ?
If Ukraine hadn't voluntarily given up their nuclear weapons, we wouldn't even be having this discussion anymore at all.
Russia needs to get over their delusion that they are still a world power and a peer to NATO. They are not.
And of course, Russia now has more of NATO on their border than ever.
But, the cold war is over. Russia is not the USSR no matter how much Putin wants to pretend otherwise.
The only reason NATO would fight Russia is if Russia tried to invade a NATO member. And if NATO *did* decide to fight Russia, it wouldn't matter how much "buffer" they had.
NATO could go through Belarus in hours if they wanted.
NATO has never invaded anyone. It's not even clear *how* NATO could do that, and it is *quite* clear that if a NATO member decides to invade someone else, they're on their own.
And of course, Russia now has more of NATO on their border than ever.
Ukraine isn't Russia's back yard.Can you let go of your front and back yard and allow public use of these areas. - the West
OK, I will do it in the interest of friendship, on the condition it will not be used by criminals and thieves targeting my home - Russia
Okey, dokey. - the West
fast forward few decades
I thought we agreed on non-threatening use of our front and back yard. - Russia
You don't have a say in who is in your front and back yards, we will work to make sure none of them are your friends. - the West
Ukraine isn't Russia's back yard.
Ukraine is it's own property.
It never was Russia's yard.
Russia needs to get over thinking they're the USSR. They aren't.
To your yard analogy, you used to belong to an HOA, the HOA dissolved. And now you're upset that your neighbor is putting in a garage on his own property that they HOA wouldn't have allowed, and you want to pretend that you own the land, but you don't.
Well, the USSR is gone, and the sooner Putin figures that out the better for everyone.Both sides can make a feast out of red herring.
USSR was never legally dissolved. While each Soviet Republic could leave Soviet Union following a specified constitutional process, there was no provision for dissolvement of the Soviet Union in the Soviet Constitution. Leaders of 4 out of 15 Soviet republics could not meet secretly and jointly proclaim the break up of the country. That was done illegitimately