Would Russia's allies such as China get involved or would they stay out of it for their own self interests.
Russia retaliated against Georgia after Georgian troops attacked and killed over 30 Russians in South Ossetia. You mention that Tatars were shot. How many? You are concerned about a tiny minority of Tatars but don't give a damn about a rather larger ethnic Russian minority in Crimea and Donetsk who don't want to be ruled by Kiev. Tatar Lives Matter? Your false referendum was observed by Gallup and no impropriety reported. 8 years now of the Crimeans living under foreign occupation against their will and not a single petroleum thrown at a Russian stormtrooper or a single demonstration complaining about being under the Moscow jackboot. I've seen more violent resistance from Ghandhi.
They lost a minimum of 14,000 soldiers in the first conflict alone ,in the second conflict it was around 50,000 soldiers killed , remember Russia downplays loses Including in occupied ukraine where it's it's believed to be around 9000 killed ,many of who were buried in secret to hide the actual loses ,
They suffered even heavy casualties in Afghanistan Including having over 300 aircraft down ,
America lost 2,455 after 20 years in Afghanistan that's with contacts every single day for those 20 years .
In Iraq America lost 4,431
I'm sure there is some who seem to believe everything they read straight from the Kremlin as fact , but like others Russian soldiers are not this invincible fighting force that was going to roll through the fulda gap and take over the whole of Europe.
Take those losses and put Russia up against America or America and NATO and the Neutral States today in a conventional war tell me who's going to suffer heavier losses
lol how dumb is macron?
"Macron said Putin had made clear during discussions on Monday that he would not be the one to escalate tensions."
i.e.
Nobody knows the exact number of civilians killed either,since Russia leveled Grozny with missiles.
But Russia lost alot of armoured vehicles when entering Grozny in the 1 Chechen war in ambushes inside Grozny.
What are you talking about? I don't know how many armoured vehicles they lost.
What has that got to do with the poster I quoted making up imaginary figures on how many troops were lost in the Chechen wars, it was literally nowhere near the figure he claimed.
They didn't even lose 10,000 troops, that poster claimed they lost 80-100,000 in those wars as a way of showing some sort of superiority to the Americans by comparing it to Iraq and Afghanistan.
It wasnt only about soldiers lost in the conflict,but the fact that they lost so many armoured vehicles as well
Which Chechen wars are you talking about? They lost nowhere near that amount of troops in the first and second Chechen war.
The russian experience of occupation have been since 2008 in Georgia
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_warfare
They Been occupating parts of Ukraine for the past 8 years
If you have enough missiles and and and airforce 5 times bigger than Ukraines,you dont need a large force.
Whoever owns the sky owns the battlefield.
Exactly - the Russian experience of occupation and insurgency is very grim and very recent. So why would they invade Ukraine again?
Take the Russian losses on Chechen wars only localised internal wars they lost between 80 -100,000 men ,
America fought in Afghanistan and Iraq everyday for 20 years and lost a fraction of a that number ,
Yurt! threadbanned
In Georgia, a country far, far, far smaller than Ukraine? About 80,000. They would need far, far, far more to subdue a country like Ukraine which is far bigger than Georgia.
Hybrid warfare might help them crush the Ukrainian military but it is not going to help them hold Ukrainian territory against an insurgency. Ask the US about its experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan. At some point holding territory, especially cities, requires men with guns - and the supposed Russian invasion force doesn't have enough of them.
It is hard to keep up with the flip-flopping. On the one hand Russia is a pathetic force that will lose tens of thousands to the Ukrainians if they dare invade. And then on the other Russia has invented some higher level of warfare that means every Russian soldier is worth 10 Americans. Which is it?
No one is interested in your edgy Putin hipster-boy take on world history. It's universally dumb.
You've just been pwned (as they say in your world) on the EU trade deal with Ukraine. Focus your attention on that, it's on-topic and shows your *drum roll* hYPocRisY and blows a hole in your NaRrAtIVE (do I get points for using shoeshine boy buzzwords?)
If you think Russia can take on 30 nations and probably a few more that will join in thats neutral now,sweden and Finland,think again.
It will end up in a disaster for Russia
The US and Nato would anilate Russia in a conventional war ,
What we know now.
America has better aircraft ,tanks , drones , bombers , equipment
Russia would be anilated
Low knowledge shoeshine boy b*llsh*t
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/22/ukraine-european-union-trade-russia
"The Kremlin aide added that the political and social cost of EU integration could also be high, and allowed for the possibility of separatist movements springing up in the Russian-speaking east and south of Ukraine. He suggested that if Ukraine signed the agreement, Russia would consider the bilateral treaty that delineates the countries' borders to be void."
From the mouth of Glazyev (Russian Trade Minister at the time). Defend that, a neighbour threatening to tear up a treaty recognising borders and and promising dismemberment, all for signing a trade deal with Brussels.
Go on. Defend that comment from the Kremlin made when prior to the summit when the EU deal was to be signed.
Better deal my rear end. You're a myopic Putin lackey - embarrassing.
How many troops did Russia use to invade Georgia?And eastern Ukraine?And Crimea?
Element of surprise,hybrid warfare and supporting seperatists is the clue.
Don't take my word for it, Eisenhower
In 2016, then-Lieutenant General H.R. McMaster, when speaking about the results of a study – the Russia New Generation Warfare – he had initiated in 2015 to examine lessons learned from the fighting in eastern Ukraine, told an audience at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington that the Russians have superior artillery firepower, better combat vehicles, and have learned sophisticated use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for tactical effect. “Should US forces find themselves in a land war with Russia,” McMaster said, “they would be in for a rude, cold awakening.”
To put it into jargon that you will understand..."they would get their asses kicked".
I'll put more faith in the knowledge and expertise of a decorated US General and strategist than in the wafflings of a fantasist who thinks that playing C.O.D. makes him some sort of crack military tactician. Call up McMaster and tell him he's full of sh!t
Maybe you should read this:
Macron: I believe it is peace for our time. We thank you from the bottom of our hearts. Go home and get a nice quiet sleep.
I mentioned earlier that a force of 100,000 seemed far too small to invade Ukraine, let alone hold it. The Ukrainian Deputy Defense Minister Hanna Malyar, agrees and has been quoted as saying the Russian forces cited "are not enough for a full-scale invasion."
The Ukrainians also contradicted a Reuters report that the Russians were stockpiling medical supplies and blood. They say that is not their information, and no one has shared any information with them. Reuters apparently based their story on 3 unidentified people who refused to say where the stockpiles were being made. This reminds me of the White House press secretary that claimed his statement that Russia was planning to use crisis actors was in itself the evidence that Russia was planning to use crisis actors.
The claim that Russia is going to launch an imminent invasion of Ukraine is looking more and more desperate.
What a load of drivel.
But it IS on topic and it IS relevant. Generally when hypocrisy is laid bare and the cognitive dissonance kicks in people like you don't like it and stamp your feet, start making accusations of dragging a discussion "off topic" and whining about "whataboutery". The US are the masters of coercion and bullying and here you are singing their praises. Is that not a complete double standard or is it "off topic" because you don't want to face up to the hypocrisy?
Well no matter how thin you make the pancakes there's always two sides. Your view of the Warsaw Pact is a matter of opinion. One could just as easily argue that NATO was established as a military staging post for future offensive military action against the USSR / Russia.. Looking at it from an oversimplified angle is naive at best.
Lol 😂😂😂😂
Have you seen the losses Russia suffered from Ukraine, Chechnya,and Afghanistan alone
Maybe you should read the terms of that trade "deal" with the EU. It was a complete racket of mafia extortion proportions. He shopped around and got a much fairer deal from Moscow. When he went for that deal a coup was instigated and he was ousted.
And thats not going to happen unless a NATO country is attacked and article 5 is broken,and Ukraine isnt a NATO country.
Sorry to dissapoint you,but i am sure you will find another way to show your hatred towards US.
Good luck
Calmer heads are going to have to prevail because if the US gets into a conventional ground war with Russia they are going to suffer a defeat like they could never imagine.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c635d680d76ce16e490d61f21d7a1353.svg)
