Russia - threadbanned users in OP

TedBundysDriver

Weird. Anyway i digress as i guess we all see different things in different posts.

pixelburp

I'll be honest and hopefully not the only one, I can't keep track of who's supposed to be a Putinbot, spam bot, normal bot, or... I dunno, Botticelli. There's a small whiff of ... I don't wanna call it paranoia cos I DO think the thread has had malcontents, but something too eager to suppose shenanigans.

Dubh Geannain

Video of cardboard drone in action

https://twitter.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/1697234437480632650?s=20

Strazdas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121051515#Comment_121051515

"Bot" would probably be the wrong word : they are undoubtedly real people.

From my own observations, "bots" tend not to be seen on discussion forums on engage in genuine debate. They are far more dedicated to spreading propaganda and misinformation on social media sites like Twitter....the aim is to misinform (on behalf of whoever or whatever they are working for).

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121051586#Comment_121051586

Indeed that tracks, but where and how does one tell the difference between a concerted attempt at misinformation - and a contrarian bollix just taking the opposite view out of intellectual devilment?

Cos while not many, I've definitely heard people in real life take the misinformation angle, albeit with that "taxi driver rant" unearned confidence of someone thinking they're being very clever not believing ... *ominous thunder* the mainstream media.

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121051515#Comment_121051515

Trying to keep track of who you think is what isn't really the right way to go about it, imo. Far easier to just refute a bad argument if you see one, no matter the identity and motivation of the person behind it.

What's great about discussion forums as opposed to more modern forms of social media is that the pace of them is slow enough that you can pick through arguments in a deliberate manner. You couldn't do that on Twitter as you would be quickly inundated.

anonymouscactus

Been lurking for months on this thread. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, escapes the Spanish Inquisition here. It's quaint.. the hubris of being a keyboard warrior spilling over into the deluded belief that it would matter a jot if every single post on this thread was pro-Russia or not. I understand that it is war and that brings the best and worst out in people, but this thread is fascinating to observe... 'popular' (i.e. entertaining lunatic) posters losing the run of themselves with hubris and one by one over the months they end up banned, a victim of their theatrical playing to the gallery. Boards.ie's own fallen heroes.

All that said, a lot of the mistrust and doubt comes because there are broadly two types of people in this world - those that believe in an eye for an eye and those that don't. Each group appears dangerous, stupid, and insane to the other... but we're all on the same 'team', for what's worth (and it's worth fupp all).

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121051615#Comment_121051615

Putinbot I think is being used as an insult not anyone genuinely believing it is a generated account or someone in the pay of Putin.

It is just people who hang out on loopdy-doo parts of the internet who then regurgitate it ad nauseum in the mistaken belief that we are all as gullible as them.

Covid forum was full of them too. Posting links from shady "doctors" that popped up on their warped YouTube accounts thanks to algorithms.

pcardin

A "Bot" is just a lot shorter word than "pro-russian mocovyte shyte posting user" hence every pro-russian is labeled as "bot". A number of posters here gave a good enough explanation on who gets usually marked as "bot". Now, lets move on.

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121051655#Comment_121051655

If we accept your argument, trolls/bots or whatever you want to call them wouldn't bother using the Internet at all. After all, like you say, what does it matter about online discussion? It's not real world action.

Except that people do read particular arguments and points of information or misinformation, and it does inform how they view the world which then translates into real world political views/pressure and nonsense talking points promoted often enough get taken as fact when they are anything but.

You're not the first one to come along and sneer about a load of keyboard warriors thinking they're affecting something. It's sort of on the totem pole of shíte to say, at this stage. This thread does, however, remain a good talking shop to share information about the situation as well as unpick bad faith or simply misinformed arguments that have the effect of eroding support for Ukraine bit by bit if just taken as read.

Strazdas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121051615#Comment_121051615

It's actually very difficult to tell the difference between the two - are you having a conversation with a cranky oul git or with a bot which has been placed there to spread misinformation. One big giveaway on social media though is post count - you'll see some yoke you're having a conversation with and he has 35,000 posts since November 2022 or whatever, sometimes even 50,000 (no way would even a crank have that much time on his hands).

dzer2

Some shite on the thread today

Dubh Geannain

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121051621#Comment_121051621

Most of the points have been well refuted at this stage. I've not heard an original contrarian POV in quite a while.

Easier to ignore at this stage. Unless it's someone new with what appears to be a genuine interpretation in their opinion. There's a pessimistic slant that can be applied to all the points alright which may fit in with your personality or perhaps someone is simply just being contrarian. I don't mind either way. It's good to have contrarian voices but I prefer when the points are original at this stage. The thread is so long that a lot of stuff keeps getting regurgitated.

• Russian superiority in numbers of equipment and weapons - Comparing pre war levels to current levels and project future levels there's an obvious trend here.
• Russia has endless meat for the grinder - Can prove useful but in and of itself it does not present an significantly superior force without proper training, equipment, morale. I'd take 1 Ukrainian fighting for his his countries existence over at least 2 Russian mobiks any day.
• Ukraine running out of support from the West - Public interest was always going to wane but I've not heard any governments turn heel or suggest they will on previous commitments of support to Ukraine. Some promises/pledges have proven to be impulsive and not materialised to the same degree (Politicians will politic) but that does not equate to a withdrawing of support for Ukraine.
• The BOMB - Why would they use it? What would be the tactical gain? The continuing failed invasion is driven by Putin's spite and while he's been found dumb enough to believe his own propaganda and the lies peddled back by his yes-men he's still no idiot.
• Russian defence is too strong - They've proven better in defence than attack alright but do the soldiers truely believe they're defending for their countries future? Ukraine have had to change tactics and it's been a slog but they are the ones making the slow gains.
• Soldier deaths hurt Ukraine more - This is true and accounts for the the previous point. I trust that Ukraine know the knock on morale effects of simply trying to overwhelm defences with men. I'm happy to let them conduct the offensive as they see fit and call a halt if needs be. But I'll be cheering them every step of the way. This is the first major war of the 21st century and a lot of the old doctrines are being tested so I don't take what any far removed expert says or speculates as gospel. It was obvious the counter offensive didn't go as planned from the start (when a rapid recapture of territory was seen to be too costly for both men and equipment) so the plan has changed.
• No one is winning this war - Ukraine continues to exist as an independent nation is what winning looks like to me at the moment. Getting land and people back is an obviously an additional goal that may end up at the negotiating table eventually. Nobody knows, but the momentum is still with them and it is their decision when to stop pushing back. But there will be no 100% winner at the end. Ukraine has already lost so much. But they need to continue doing what they are doing and kick Russia in the crotch so hard that their great grandchildren will still feel it.

And

• The litany of BS reasons for the invasion in the first place. People that want to believe these have already made their decision which side they're rooting for.

Dubh Geannain

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121051798#Comment_121051798

People who log in to see 100 new posts thinking something major has happened will be disappointed. 😂

Although, we could be on the cusp of something major, if Ukriane manage to get to the highest points East of Noroprokopivka. Another not mentioned advantage of topping Hill 166 relates to the KA-52 helicopters which have proven very effective against advancing Ukrainian columns. Them not being able to pop up on the brow of a hill should hopefully reduce their efficacy between there and Tokmak.

pawdee

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121050989#Comment_121050989

It has me stumped as well.

pcardin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121051858#Comment_121051858

Supporting Ukraine for sure. How about you?

zv2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121050805#Comment_121050805

They're hitting twice as much as they were a couple of months ago. Their strikes on artillery suddenly increased recently.

RoyalCelt

https://twitter.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/1697241583198883887?t=aio0LxeaRRbI_TIeRtFnXw&s=19

Sounds about right. Ukraine getting 50 to 60 aircraft would be huge if it happened before next summer but if this war goes on into 2025 you'd like to think by then Ukraine would have a fleet of 150+ western aircraft.

And factor in they'll probably lose 10+ from accidents or Russian attacks etc.

pcardin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121052138#Comment_121052138

There was a user, an aussie, unfortunately threadbanned, who shared an article on F18 jets Australia were thinking to donate to Ukraine. Does anyone knows what came out of it at the end?

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-28/australia-not-giving-ukraine-military-support-needs-retired-jets/102529920

Sleepy

I'm no expert but I'd assume that's because more and more of the NATO standard 155mm guns are being brought to action (Howitzers and other self-propelled 155m guns seem to form part of almost every aid package Ukraine are sent), more crews have been trained in their operation (the US were/are delivering this training in Germany IIRC), the crews are becoming more accurate as they become more experienced with them and counter-battery fire seems to be a key factor in the strategy of the counter-offensive...

thomil

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121052138#Comment_121052138

Also, worth keeping in mind that the first ten or so aircraft will likely never touch down on Ukrainian soil, or at least not until after the end of the conflict. If UkrAF command is smart, they'll use those to set up an operational conversion unit in one of the western nations in order to have their own training pipeline.

and yes, it's worth repeating that there will be significant training required. Whilst a lot of Ukrainians sent to train on F-16s will be "current" on the main fighter and trainer aircraft currently in Ukraine's inventory, and know all about how aircraft actually work, stall speeds, etc., they will not be used to the F-16s cockpit layout, or the the underlying operating concepts. The cockpit layout and the peculiarities of the F-16s flight characteristics are easily taught, especially to seasoned pilots. A few weeks of ground school and simulator sessions, and most experienced pilots should be able to transition to the real aircraft.

The operating concept is a different matter. I may have touched on this before, but given how rapidly this thread is still growing, it's worth repeating. Western pilots in general have a lot more autonomy in planning and carrying out their mission compared to what pilots brought up along Soviet or Russian principles would have. As such, they're expected to be much more aware of the tactical situation around them, and able to adjust quickly. The F-16's entire cockpit layout is designed around it, from the HUD to the large displays, the information that is available to the pilot, and the ability to integrate the aircraft with other F-16s, to the massively increased visibility and reliance on HOTAS controls. You don't fly and fight this aircraft so much as you "manage" it, whereas on the MiG-29 or Su-25, you'd have enough information to get to your target and deliver your ordnance, and that's it.

This much wider perspective, the wealth of information and the tactical freedom going along with it will be the biggest advantage for Ukrainian pilots, but it'll also require a massive shift in the operating philosophy, from mission planning to actual combat. If Ukrainian pilots can handle this change in operating philosophy, and to be honest, I'm pretty sure they will, then even these relatively simple F-16s can be a massive boost for the Ukrainian Air Force.

Sleepy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121052192#Comment_121052192

I did some reading on that at the time and a lot of the info I could find on-line was that most of those F18s were already end-of-life or extremely close to it i.e. they'd have been death-traps due to the airframes being well past their scrap-by-date.

EDIT: Healthy dose of salt required, mind you, half the sources I found were on Twitter!

zv2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121052007#Comment_121052007

BOTH the west and Russia have been made paranoid by Cold War terror. The Russians had their own version of Duck and Cover. They built nuclear bunkers all over Russia. The west was terrorized by the imminence of MAD. Nuclear weapons are unhealthy in more than one way.

RGARDINR

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121051158#Comment_121051158

There is but I don't like if someone is posting say Russia make progress somewhere and post a link showing this there called a Russian bot etc. There is 1 sides here and I like to get as much information as I can. If crap is been posted call it out but if someone posts something about Russia making some sort of progress and that's all they post let them as we have about 50 others here who will post Ukrainian successes here and we can réad that but I do like a bit of balance here and not just all one sided.

rogber

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121051858#Comment_121051858

Sometimes I actually think some of the more hysterical, paranoid posters who accuse others of being pro Russian bots when they post a "Russian propaganda" link from, say, the BBC, are themselves Russian bots set up to discredit the pro Ukrainian side as being all fanatical and intolerant. In the same way in the run up to 2016 election the Russians quite cleverly set up fake pro BLM accounts merely to provoke strife and paint both sides as fanatical.

Though in reality there are probably very few bots here, just a mixed pool of perspectives and approaches and some who lash out at any perceived difference of opinion. At the end of the day 99 percent agree on the causes and ideal outcome of the war, the bickering is mostly over secondary issues like will Crimea be retaken or all Russians guilty for Putin's actions.

rogber

Confirmation of the Pskov attack, Russians vowing revenge shows they are rattled.

Would be really great if they could hit a decent target in Moscow or Petersburg, but probably too much to ask

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66675108

mike_cork

https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/ukrainian-counteroffensive-pierces-main-russian-defensive-line-in-southeast-9441e204

More of a positive tone from the WSJ on the counter offensive

wassie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121052192#Comment_121052192

Sounds simple - but much has talk has already been made of the use of F16s over FA18s, including differences in payloads and combat radius as well as pilot training.

One of the issues is that these retired Aussie aircraft are the older (upgraded) F/A-18A/B variants. Despite what the article suggests, the design of these upgraded 'classic' variants is still significantly different from the F/A-18E/F 'Super Hornets' that are currently in operation and would have technical challenges in terms of maintenance just to get these planes operational again.

But at the end of the day, it would be the US to be the ones to give the permission (again the article suggest otherwise but there is no evidence to support this claim).

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121052284#Comment_121052284

Actually the opposite. It has been well documented that because the Aussie FA18s have been used primarily on land, the frames are in very good condition, as opposed to the US Navy counterparts that suffer heavy stress associated with repeated fast, sharp naval aircraft carrier landings.

Fighter aircraft frames can be extremely durable and can easily have operational life spans of 30-40 years. Whilst the frame are solid, generally there would be a number of complete system upgrades required to refresh the aircraft over its life to keep it operational.

Beasty

Back on topic everyone

TedBundysDriver

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121052481#Comment_121052481

I don't think it is too much tbh. They've shown they can now hit deep inside Russia again and again with western help i think it's only a matter of time before we see something very very big indeed from Ukraine in regards military or intelligence damage to Russia. Let's see what happen but it looks like the tide is slowly turning in Ukraine's favour after a tough summer.