Which Chechen wars are you talking about? They lost nowhere near that amount of troops in the first and second Chechen war.
It wasnt only about soldiers lost in the conflict,but the fact that they lost so many armoured vehicles as well
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
Would Russia's allies such as China get involved or would they stay out of it for their own self interests.
I dont think China would benefit from any conflicts away from mainland China,it would would only weaken their defences and economy.
And they dont have the logistics for it anyway.
Only way is trough Russia,everywhere else they would be targeted by US or allies.
Always take the word of a group of shortarses with a grain of salt...
The British lost nearly 1.5 times as many soldiers during 20 years in Northern Ireland than they did during the whole Iraq war and Afghanistan war combined.
It's hard to compare the situations between different wars like Chechenya and Iraq, anyway Independent experts and rights advocates generally say the figure for Russian troops casualties in both wars is at around 40,000, can you provide some links where you got this information from?
You seem to be complaining that Russia is underestimating the amount of troops they lost while at the same time you earlier gave a big overestimate claiming they lost 100,000 troops, wherever you got that information from it doesn't seem to be a much better source than the Russian one.
The preconditions for Russia’s aggression against Georgia were laid in the 1990s, when the Moscow-backed separatist regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia declared “independence” from Georgia. After the local wars, Russia imposed a truce on Georgia and placed its “peacekeepers” in the conflict zone. But Moscow did not adhere to the principle of neutrality, ignoring systematic ceasefire violations by South Ossetian “militia”. In addition, Russian passports were issued en masse to residents of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.On the eve of the invasion of Georgia, Russia conducted large-scale military exercises Caucasus-2008. Increasing the intensity of provocations, Moscow was waiting for a good excuse for open aggression. Their excuse was the Georgian army’s attempt to put an end to the Ossetian shelling and the creeping occupation of the border territories.
And did you ask the Taters in Crimea?
And would you vote for Russia with a gun to your head?
https://youtu.be/mcCqrzctxH4
Yeah, owning the sky worked out quite well in Vietnam and Afghanistan
Yes in a conventional conflict it works great,like ww2 and Iraq,against insurgents and guerilla warfare,not so good.
So, the Russians aren't stockpiling medical supplies and blood.
But nonetheless, the compromised Germans have given / promised a field hospital to the Ukrainians ... (With friends like them, who's need enemies?)..
https://news.err.ee/1608493113/estonia-germany-hand-ukraine-keys-to-new-military-field-hospital
But why a field hospital? Very provocative altogether. Considering there's no chance of a blitzkrieg.style invasion of softened up Ukrainian territories.
Fierce strange altogether.
Fascinating, even.
The level of innocence rampant on Boards.
The main instrument the American authorities need to win in any sort of conflict is the backing from the general American public and the families from that that same group that send their boys off into conflict. That is not going to happen here. The vast majority of Americans do not simply care about the Ukraine, and have no reason to believe any sort of conflict over there will somehow affect them. Unless Russia somehow bombs the new World Trade Centre or Pearl Harbour within the next month, that situation isn't going to change. If America has no public backing for a major conflict, it will not win, all that will happen is further strife and conflict upon the European stage.
Nobody wants a war anywhere in the first place,not even Russia,but US like any other nation have their obligation in NATO and article 5.
The US MILITARY BRASS beg to differ with you.
I've said it before: If any kind of major war were to break out between Russia and the US together with Europe (and China could get involved), then it could turn nasty and very quickly develop into a nuclear confrontation. I don't think any side would be willing to lose face by accepting defeat in traditionally fought combat, not when the capability exists to take entire cities off the map within minutes - and the US has previous in the form of Japan.
Hopefully it will never come to that, but...
But the Ukraine is not a member, it is in the process of accession, but it is not a full member. Even if it was, the point still stands, if the United States of America wants to win any sort of war, it needs the ultimate Will of it's citizenry in order to achieve it. She doesn't have it here.
Ukraine isnt a member and thats why NATO forces are not directly involved in Ukraine,only in countries on Ukraines border.
And if Russia attacks a NATO member,US like any other nation is obligated to assist,just like US allies helped US when article 5 was used in war against terror after 9/11.
And even neutral countries like sweden and Finland would become members automatically if that happens.
What members of NATO do you think Russia has designs on attacking?
None, cause it will end in disaster for both sides,and thats why Russia is trying to prevent more countries joining,because it affects their sphere of influence.
Russias trade wars against their neigbours is a good example
We all disagree with your opinions😜
@goldenmick - and the US has previous in the form ..
Yes and rightfully so.
The Russians came close to nuking China because they were afraid china was going to be more powerful than them
But they don't.
American generals admit it. Why are you telling them what they know and don't know?
None? So what's the problem here then? Why all this noise and the perpetual drive for conflict?
How do you mean "Russia is trying to prevent more countries joining" The entire eastern swathe of the Ukraine has never wanted anything to do with the west, the EU or Nato. They have a deep suspicion of armies and entities approaching from the West since the Germanic slaughter of WW2. Do their needs, desires and rights not matter?
The problem like i said is Russias trade wars and blackmailing of their neigbours,forcing them to apply for membership in EU and NATO.
And then Russia responds with military force to maintain their sphere of influence.
EU commisioner Stefan Füle,said in his statement in 2013 that he strongly condemned different types of pressure exercised by Russia on the European Union’s Eastern neighbors, especially Armenia, Moldova and Ukraine. He said that it was unacceptable to use threats like misuse of energy pricing, artificial trade obstacles and cumbersome customs procedures, against ex-Soviet states which are seeking closer ties with the EU. He was convinced that such actions clearly breached the principles to which all European states had subscribed, recalling that in the Helsinki Principles of the OSCE, signatories had committed themselves to respect each country’s right to define freely and conduct as it wished its relations with other states in accordance with international law.
Why would US generals say so? I'm not a brigadier or whatnot. I'm just relating what they are saying. You're completely free to tell them that they have no idea what they're talking about and that you know better. Or is that a "Nostradamus" moment?
You are completely ignoring the fact that half of the entire landmass of the Ukraine want nothing to do with anything from the EU. That has nothing to do with Russia or whatever blackmailing you believe is going on, and that is a fact. Does it not strike you odd that half of the Ukraine would rather ally herself with the dastardly blackmailing dictatorship of Russia than go anywhere near the likes of the German led EU or the likes of NATO or whatever else wants to claim its territory from the West? Why do you think that is? And like I said, should that desire not be respected and diplomatically allocated? Why the hawk call for war and conflict that ultimately sets everyone back, especially Europe, and not America, funnily enough
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c635d680d76ce16e490d61f21d7a1353.svg)
