The situation in Ukraine...

[Deleted member 586536]

He joined the site and his first post was to respond to me and someone else, so he was asking for it at that point, I just responded back since he wanted to target me first as soon as they joined.

so... responding to people and explaining why their point may or may not be bs is "asking for it"
...
checks out to me

 

[SG854]

..soo excuses and Bowing to a mad man ? With people like you no wonder Putins stayed in power so long.

No we shouldn't bow to Putin. That's not what I'm saying.

If putin decides to want to conquer other nations or to make threats to do what he says or he'll attack us if we don't comply, I'm not saying we should bow down. We should never bow down on these occasions.

What I'm saying is not the same as that. What I'm talking about is a bit more nuanced. A specific case. You can say Russians military is a joke but that's not going to bring back those dead Ukranians. What I'm talking about is a way to prevent this from happening to begin with, prevent innocent Ukranians from dying. That is not the same as bowing down to Russia. If Russia were to attack Nato then yes we should engage and we should not listen to Russias demands.

Putin would not stay in power for long if there were people like me because I do not apply what I say to every situation, only on certain scenarios. Weighing the pros and cons of each scenario and choosing the best response for that scenario.

There is too much of a lose if Russia were to try to conquer the U.S. for example so of course I would not apply what I said in this situation and bow down to Russia that would be stupid. And why would you insist that i'm that stupid or that of a push over. People are not simple minded and are adaptable & complex. Stop treating people like they're idiots.

 

[SG854]

Throughout this invasion it’s been noted that Russian equipment is significantly more out-of-date than initially believed, which confirms the suspicions I’ve had for many years now. Russia is a giant on clay legs with a small GDP - they have a couple high-tech vehicles and weapons that only serve the purpose of being show pieces, the rest of their military operates on crappy hand-me-downs from a bygone era. A paint job does not an armor make. They’re also severely underfunded, and corners are cut wherever it’s possible in order to amass quantity instead of quality. Their latest convoy was stalled for a whole day or two because of their shitty Made in China (not a pun) tires blowing up on them. Their equipment is, simply put, sub-standard - if NATO wanted to roll on them, they would, and it’d be a relatively short conflict. Even Russia’s nuclear capability wouldn’t help them much - there’s plenty of pre-existing anti-missile capability that’d likely neutralise their outdated delivery systems without causing much harm, although admittedly, MAD is probably one of the few reasons why the west even has diplomatic relations with Russia (the second being their large stores of fossil fuels and energy supply). Russian generals should hold on to those nukes for their dear life because they can’t seem to win a war against fish in a barrel, and they have a supposed massive advantage just based on numbers.

Moreover, they’re using outdated tactics like leaving their MBT’s out in the open without cover, leading to massive losses - tank platforms are not intended to operate as lone wolves, they’re vulnerable without support. The “strategy” they seem to be applying in Ukraine is to throw as much meat at the enemy as possible, which is what they did during WWII - their advantage is having a whole lot of soldiers they can drop into the conflict zone and sacrifice, by the thousands.

I wouldn’t be particularly worried about Russia if a hypothetical conflict were to erupt, and I don’t understand why the public is. Even military experts are shocked at how poorly this invasion is going - if the Russian military was half as good as they advertise it to be, it would’ve taken Kiev by now. Long story short, they just don’t have the funding to compete, and that’s been the case for a while. The Russian military is like a rich guy in an expensive bathrobe - you’d expect it to be ripped, but it turns out that the fabric is there to cover wrinkles and a beer gut.

To summarise, they’re getting (rightfully) pummelled on the ground because they’re fighting this war in a boneheaded way using outdated strategy and equipment, they have a shitty casus belli that nobody’s buying, they’re completely unprepared in terms of basic supplies like food or fuel (all of which they’re forced to actively loot) and they’re fighting against armed citizenry - a force a military is simply not equipped to fight. It’s been over a week - you’d expect all military forces to be neutralised by now, defensive perimeter to be set up and special forces stepping in to clear out insurgents. That’s not what’s happening - the Russians are still shelling the place because whenever they try to advance, they’re getting whooped and take heavy losses, too heavy to be justifiable for a supposedly modern military. This invasion is *embarrassing*.

EDIT: I’m just going to add a little factoid to solidify the point I’m making - I listened to a recording today. It was radio communications between a tanker from Georgia and a Russian military vessel. They were asking the Georgian vessel for fuel, got laughed at and remained stranded at sea. Imagine that - a military fucking warship having to ask civilian vessels for a top-up because *they ran out of fuel*. This invasion must’ve been planned by Pee-Wee Herman - it’s unexplainable to me how billions of dollars’ worth of ordinance just “runs out of fuel” in the middle of a military operation.

Russia's army is a joke. My impression is that it was a military strategy. Putin sending the weak disposable soldiers to feel for the area, to soften it a bit before he sends the actual good military to conquer. That long convoy.

But you're likely right. It's day what now 9? The longer he's there the less likely the west will take putins army seriously.

 

[SG854]

The US didn't push Ukraine. Ukraine pushed Ukraine to join the democratic world and we and Putin should respect that.

NATO should not have been disbanded because of others' feelings. NATO is a military security union. And NATO became evermore needed with the constant Russian agressions. The rise of China and the nuclearization of other dictatorships makes it so as well.

They feel threatened? Good, that's what stops then from waging direct war with NATO. That's the point.
_______________________________________________
Kasparov weighted in on the matter:



I disagree on going directly into warfare with Russia, but he does have a point: the cost of toppling a dictator goes up with time

Not saying Nato should disband.

What you said is what putin fears. There was someone in this thread that said Nato is not anti Russian. But the west and people pushing the west in the name of democracy, to get rid of putin, get rid of that dictator and replace him with a pro west elect.

This is what the U.S. has been doing for years and years. Toppling governments and replace them with democratic elects. Whether or not the U.S. is right to do this has caused debate.

 

[BitMasterPlus]

so... responding to people and explaining why their point may or may not be bs is "asking for it"
...
checks out to me

Whatever you say loser, we're done here.

Also, I find it funny how some people here think there are Russian bots or paid people to stick up for Russia here. I mean sure, I can see that on twitter, but don't yourself in high regards now GBATemp lol

 

[Foxi4]

Russia's army is a joke. My impression is that it was a military strategy. Putin sending the weak disposable soldiers to feel for the area, to soften it a bit before he sends the actual good military to conquer. That long convoy.

But you're likely right. It's day what now 9? The longer he's there the less likely the west will take putins army seriously.

You say that, but they did send them along with their T-90MS’, which is Russia’s most modern tank platform. They only have a couple hundred of them and guess what? Those idiots are abandoning them in the field. Ukraine is going to make mint selling scrap once this blows over.

 

[BitMasterPlus]

I still think Russia is gonna take over Ukraine in the end, and who knows, maybe more places as well. I would be very surprised if they do fail in the end. Surprised, but not at all distraught, since him failing would be the best possible outcome at this point and would deliver a massive blow to our enemies.

 

[Xzi]

I still think Russia is gonna take over Ukraine in the end, and who knows, maybe more places as well.

I'm not so sure it's inevitable any more, 80K men ready to fight just arrived in Ukraine today, mostly Ukrainian nationals going back home, but 16K of them being volunteers from other countries around the globe.

Regardless, even if Russia was able to capture all major Ukrianian cities, maintaining control of them would be a different matter entirely. Asymmetrical guerilla warfare is a very hard to beat tactic, and Ukrainians have already ousted one Putin puppet government in the past.

I would be very surprised if they do fail in the end.

In terms of what Putin was trying to gain here, the invasion has already been a colossal failure.

 

[UltraDolphinRevolution]

Can someone tell me why Russia is so damn scared of Ukraine joining NATO, when Russia can end all life on Earth if they felt like it?

Same reason why USA is afraid of Russian in Cuba.
A shorter distance between rockets and your country means less reaction time. This increases trigger nervousness and is therefore dangerous for the whole world.

 

[UltraDolphinRevolution]

...because USA would do the same thing if China was in South American... but I have shown you that China has expanded and GUESS WHAT USA did not take over Mexico to stop China from its borders...

Can you show me Chinese soldiers or missiles in Mexico?
Your link mentions Mexico only once: "and significant ownership stakes in lithium mines in each of the hemisphere’s four countries endowed with it: Chile, Argentina, Bolivia and Mexico."

 

[pustal]

Not saying Nato should disband.

What you said is what putin fears. There was someone in this thread that said Nato is not anti Russian. But the west and people pushing the west in the name of democracy, to get rid of putin, get rid of that dictator and replace him with a pro west elect.

This is what the U.S. has been doing for years and years. Toppling governments and replace them with democratic elects. Whether or not the U.S. is right to do this has caused debate.

Ehhhh. Doing the opposite too: Iran (Pahlavi), Chile (Pinochet), Guatemala (Carlos Castillo), Argentina (Peron), Indonesia (Suharto), Congo (Selo)...

The CIA even killed one of our democratically ellect Prime Minister, Sá Carneiro, in 1980 with a bomb placed in his airplane.

Their thankfully support of new democracies has been fairly recent, post USSR. But that's the difference: modern Russia still supports (puppet) dictators, modern USA no.

Whatever you say loser, we're done here.

Also, I find it funny how some people here think there are Russian bots or paid people to stick up for Russia here. I mean sure, I can see that on twitter, but don't yourself in high regards now GBATemp lol

Uhh, don't brake it from us, again, take it from Costello.

 

[Foxi4]

Ehhhh. Doing the opposite too: Iran (Pahlavi), Chile (Pinochet), Guatemala (Carlos Castillo), Argentina (Peron), Indonesia (Suharto), Congo (Selo)...

The CIA even killed one of our democratically ellect Prime Minister, Sá Carneiro, in 1980 with a bomb placed in his airplane.

Their thankfully support of new democracies has been fairly recent, post USSR. But that's the difference: modern Russia still supports (puppet) dictators, modern USA no.

Uhh, don't brake it from us, again, take it from Costello.

Hey, don’t knock it until you try it. I can think of a couple of world leaders who could have a horrible accident, in Minecraft. I have a feeling the world would be better off, too.

Same reason why USA is afraid of Russian in Cuba.
A shorter distance between rockets and your country means less reaction time. This increases trigger nervousness and is therefore dangerous for the whole world.

The reason why the U.S. didn’t want the U.S.S.R anywhere near Cuba is because they planned on building nuclear silos there - the U.S. was never under any threat of a land invasion. It was called the “Cuban missile crisis” for a reason. Nobody’s building nuclear launch sites in Ukraine, that’s asinine. I don’t understand why nobody will say it out loud - Russia invaded Ukraine because their pipelines go straight through it, and a hostile government in Ukraine threatens the bottom line of Russia’s key industries. Ukraine is fully empowered to “close the tap” whenever they please, and Putin isn’t keen on being at the mercy of a country that, in his mind, shouldn’t even exist. This has nothing to do with his idiotic theory that Ukraine is some kind of Kruschev’s invention to “solidify the U.S.S.R” that has never existed before, or whatever alternative history he’s peddling today. It doesn’t even have a lot to do with NATO - NATO is thoroughly uninterested in going to war with Russia, even though they now have a justification. Russia’s army is actively attacking a nuclear power plant with heavy ordinance - for all intents and purposes it is reasonable and justifiable for other world powers to step in, if only to prevent another ecological disaster. He’s playing fast and loose, and it’s not paying off so far.

 

[UltraDolphinRevolution]

The reason why the U.S. didn’t want the U.S.S.R anywhere near Cuba is because they planned on building nuclear silos there - the U.S. was never under any threat of a land invasion. It was called the “Cuban missile crisis” for a reason. Nobody’s building nuclear launch sites in Ukraine, that’s asinine.

As far as I know US wasn´t even aware of the nukes but could not accept Russian missiles near its territory. Even the potential is enough and Russia feels the same way.

 

[Flame]

As far as I know US wasn´t even aware of the nukes but could not accept Russian missiles near its territory. Even the potential is enough and Russia feels the same way.

so according you USA should invade Cuba next just in case and war is always okay?

all the against and abstention countries are either evil or failed states.

 

[Deleted member 194275]

so according you USA should invade Cuba next just in case and war is always okay?

USA do tried that in 1961 and was defeated.

The way the thing unfolded in Cuba is more comparable with the way Russia influenced the Donbas situation until last year (Soldiers disguised as revolutionaries, logistical support, intelligence support, air and naval aid). But still none can deny that USA tried an invasion.

The question is if it is right, and no, it is not. It was wrong in 1961 and it still is wrong in 2022. Big powers like Russia and USA are using force against the smaller nations without any repercussion for too many years now.

 

[Flame]

USA do tried that in 1961 and was defeated.

The way the thing unfolded in Cuba is more comparable with the way Russia influenced the Donbas situation until last year (Soldiers disguised as revolutionaries, logistical support, intelligence support, air and naval aid). But still none can deny that USA tried an invasion.

The question is if it is right, and no, it is not. It was wrong in 1961 and it still is wrong in 2022. Big powers like Russia and USA are using force against the smaller nations without any repercussion for too many years now.

Exactly my point. War is never the answer. maybe if Russia put the same effort into they schools, technology and science they do good for its own people. but instead the Russian rich and powerful want its own people to stay weak and poor so they can control them like puppets.

 

[Valwinz]

I find it funny how people that don't know anything want NATO to put a no-fly zone over Ukraine.
I'm sure NATO pilots shooting Russian ones will not lead to full-scale war.

Ukraine should be supported with aid and stuff but they are not worth a thermonuclear war over especially since they are not even a NATO member

 

[SG854]

Hey, don’t knock it until you try it. I can think of a couple of world leaders who could have a horrible accident, in Minecraft. I have a feeling the world would be better off, too.
The reason why the U.S. didn’t want the U.S.S.R anywhere near Cuba is because they planned on building nuclear silos there - the U.S. was never under any threat of a land invasion. It was called the “Cuban missile crisis” for a reason. Nobody’s building nuclear launch sites in Ukraine, that’s asinine. I don’t understand why nobody will say it out loud - Russia invaded Ukraine because their pipelines go straight through it, and a hostile government in Ukraine threatens the bottom line of Russia’s key industries. Ukraine is fully empowered to “close the tap” whenever they please, and Putin isn’t keen on being at the mercy of a country that, in his mind, shouldn’t even exist. This has nothing to do with his idiotic theory that Ukraine is some kind of Kruschev’s invention to “solidify the U.S.S.R” that has never existed before, or whatever alternative history he’s peddling today. It doesn’t even have a lot to do with NATO - NATO is thoroughly uninterested in going to war with Russia, even though they now have a justification. Russia’s army is actively attacking a nuclear power plant with heavy ordinance - for all intents and purposes it is reasonable and justifiable for other world powers to step in, if only to prevent another ecological disaster. He’s playing fast and loose, and it’s not paying off so far.

I did mention that old and gas was another reason for Russia to invade Ukraine in a previous post. Russia's economy is mostly based on gas around 40%. And their military is heavily funded by gas money. They will take a big hit if something were to happen to that. They already scared off Mobil and other gas companies from Ukraine a while back.

I find it funny how people that don't know anything want NATO to put a no-fly zone over Ukraine.
I'm sure NATO pilots shooting Russian ones will not lead to full-scale war.

Ukraine should be supported with aid and stuff but they are not worth a thermonuclear war over especially since they are not even a NATO member

There is ways you can enforce no fly zone through mobile focused beam emp's. Knock out the planes electronics but the pilot still has the ability to land safely or eject safely. This can be seen as non confrontational or lethal force. The thing is how to get this into ukriane.

 

[djpannda]

I find it funny how people that don't know anything want NATO to put a no-fly zone over Ukraine.
I'm sure NATO pilots shooting Russian ones will not lead to full-scale war.

Ukraine should be supported with aid and stuff but they are not worth a thermonuclear war over especially since they are not even a NATO member

Funny how you justify Ukraine being invaded because it wants to become NATO.

but not stating that NATO shouldn’t help Ukraine Because it’s not NATO..

Man You got to work harder with the value of those Rubles ..113 today ouch… I remember it was 20s before Putin.

By your logical NATO is legally justified to gobble any little country near Russia as a preventative measure
Oh wait NATO does NOT HAVE TO COMMIT War crimes as Finland Sweden, Georgia, Moldavia are in Voluntarily talk with the EU and NATO.

 

[Deleted member 194275]

I find it funny how people that don't know anything want NATO to put a no-fly zone over Ukraine.
I'm sure NATO pilots shooting Russian ones will not lead to full-scale war.

Ukraine should be supported with aid and stuff but they are not worth a thermonuclear war over especially since they are not even a NATO member

If NATO shot down a Russian plane, than it is game over. RIP planet earth.