Replacing previous thread which has continuing page count issues.
Previous Thread
Previous Original Thread:
Threabanned posters:
brickstser69
slay55
mulbot
Took the afghans 10 years to outlast the much bigger soviet Union who had less historical interest in Afghanistan then they would in Ukraine. We're going to be 3 years into all out war in 4 months. While Russia will want to conquer Ukraine far more then they ever would Afghanistan, they aren't the Soviet juggernaut anymore so they'll fight on a few years yet and will completely use up their gigantic weapon stockpiles in doing some but they won't last another 7 either militarily or economically.
Their only hope is the west stops supporting Ukraine then they'll have a chance. Unfortunately for them that won't be happening.
Your common sense varies from cheerleading the American invasion of Afghanistan to peddling Kremlin propaganda on their genocidal war. You have a deeply disturbing outlook on the world.
This is like arguing how does Afghanistan stop the Russian advance.
You don't. You stall, engage in a war of attrition, you outlast Russias ability to wage an aggressive invasion.
So Ukraine should march their armies into open plains and line up colonial style? Please stop being so utterly absurd.
When you're arguing "good guy Russia" is trying to avoid civilian casulties….I honestly don't know what to say.
Common sense?
What's your native language?
You got me. I setup this account on an Irish website 23 years ago on the orders of Comrade Putin (or the boss, as I know him). For 23 years, I built up my cover posting about Man United, PC gaming and vaguely pro-neoliberal/USA politics. Until I received the code word from the motherland to activate the sleeper cell. Soon, we will take over boards.ie and then the world…
Jesus christ. I'm not a native English speaker. I'm Irish with a massive propensity to typo my way though posts.
Thanks for the check in though, "Josip".
It's very simple. Give Ukraine more weapons. They are nowhere near receiving what they could. They've many more F16 and French fighter jets on the way. Possible Swedish too. You think 8 F16 would be a wonder weapon?
Ukraine have a manpower shortage because they haven't mobilised men under 26. It's by choice and can be rectified. You are quick to mention Ukraine losses but what about the humongous russian losses? The rate they lose APV's and tanks is completely unsustainable and are probably suffering from man power issues themselves hence the north Korean troops.
I wouldn't be too confident if I was Russia that I could keep this going. What will they use when they run out of huge numbers of tanks and APV's? People like you seem to desperately push the narrative that Ukraine can't win and must seek peace now.
Incidentally that's the Russian western propaganda tactic to try make people believe more military support is futile. It's almost as if Russia is desperate and fears Ukraine receiving increased support. Your camouflage is very thin.
It is about who can hold out the longest not just at the front but the economy resources etc. Russian oil is failing Russian buying power and credit is collapsing and today
1 dollar to 99.85 - tonight 15th November!
They don't have to make a settlement. Zoom out!: I always say this to those dooming over Russian gains on maps. The map has barely changed since the winter of 2022. The Russians have thrown everything at this and the Ukrainians still hold a large amount of Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson which are supposedly constitutionally Russian.
Ukraine just has to hold on a defend the best it can. Sooner or later Russia will want a ceasefire with minimal conditions. This will effectively partition Ukraine along the Line of contact.
So how does Ukraine halt the Russian advances?
All reports - even the most fanatically pro-NATO/Ukrainian media - now acknowledges that Ukraine is suffering significant manpower shortages, and that Russian forces enjoy huge advantages in manpower and firepower. At the same time, after 2-3 years, its clear NATO wont fight for Ukraine (so manpower is not solvable) and cant supply the material promised (so firepower is not solvable).
All the western wunderwaffen have been tried - up to and including F-16s.
There is no magic trick. If you are arguing Ukraine cannot negotiate, then how does Ukraine halt the Russian advances? More than that, how does Ukraine win?
This is the thing all the NAFO/"Friends of Ukraine" dodge. Explain it to me.
"A 100..."
I've never seen a native English speaker write it like that. Where are you from Sand? Your English is eloquent.
It was said from Day 1, If Russia stops fighting the war is over but if Ukraine stops fighting it won't exist.
Hard to make a deal with Putin. He goes back on what he says as a matter of course.
Hey here is a thought for ya
Russians can choose to stop the war they started
Ukraine at the bare minimum need to be able to halt Russia's advances otherwise why would Russia stop. Putin has no interest currently unless Ukraine were to give up and give Russia more territory. Do you like the sound of that?
I dont know. Russia is going stop eventually, they can't occupy all of Ukraine and they obviously know that and I'm pretty certain that was never their plan.
Their goals are still the same as they always were. Topple Ukrainian government, disarm Ukraine, guarantees for future Ukrainian neutrality. And of course now that their position is so much stronger they will want the 4 oblasts they mostly have already. Never mind Crimea. For a settlement they may have to make some concessions e.g. internationally observed referendums in the oblasts. But it's hard to see why they should settle for less when their position is so much stronger now and is getting stronger every day.
It's obviously a fucked up situation most of all for the Ukrainian people. Ukraine should have made a deal when their country was still intact and was likely to remain intact. When hundreds of thousands were still alive and unharmed. As many said so back then. 🤷♂️
That isn't a strategy for victory within your own terms. Forcing "Russia to actually want to negotiate" is a lose condition. You said yourself that negotiations would just:
set a precedent for many more wars in future where the aggressor can later after to "peace". Even in the case of Ukraine, Putin in 3 years could go again, sieze another 10% of Ukraine and the likes of you would be calling for a "peace" deal to save lives.
So by your own definition, Ukraine has to win a total, unconditional victory now, without any negotiations. What is the viable strategy to do that in your opinion? When you attack people who argue for negotiations, what is your "no negotiations" alternative?
Pyrrhic victory,,even if a deal gives Russia parts of Ukraine he has bankrupt his country,a third world country in Europe,will they be able to keep hold of the people, when life is better across the border,many will leave, Russia and Russia occupied Ukraine,time will tell.
The strategy is clearly to ramp up military support to force Russia to actually want to negotiate. Because right now they want their main aims which is fully conquer the Donbass, Kherson and Zaporozhye.
I think it is significant if putin can no longer trade the currency of his empire for weapons. They clearly have only limited home production since they are so reliant on what they have got from north korea and Iran where they were likely to have got supplies in exchange to some extent for sharing nuclear weapons and missile technology rather than a purely financial transaction. From what I have read it sounds like rural areas of the russian federation don't have much use for the goods that will be more expensive than before due to their currency collapsing but in the urban areas where the more wealthy people live they will find it very irritating that putin has made them poorer. While I don't expect a mass back lash due to the authoritarian nature of putin's empire there is increasingly a chance that some one with wealth in putin's empire will find a way to make his reign that is so destructive to their wealth come to an abrupt end.
The Ukrainians could choose to not make civilian towns into battlefields by creating fortifications outside of civillian areas. They are within their rights to make them into battlefields, but its a choice they make. If civilian lives and towns are your top priority, you don't turn their homes into bunkers.
The Russian strategy of bypassing strongly held towns and forcing their defenders to retreat by flanking them does promise to reduce the damage to civilians and their homes from here until the end of the conflict. I think everyone will welcome that.
I do note though that your performative anger dodges the question - if negotiations are off the table, then how does Ukraine win militarily in your opinion?
Ah yes because towns occupied by Russia dont experience death and destruction and look like a nuke was dropped on them
/s
Your posts are getting more and more ridiculous
So, if any negotiated peace is off the table and Ukraine - with vague/limited NATO support - has to inflict an unconditional surrender upon Russia, what is your theory of victory?
What is the plan? What is the strategy? Taking into account the realistic constraints of course.
What do you tell the inhabitants of Pokrovsk to convince them they have to suffer death, despair and the destruction of their town to achieve your defined victory?
Of course it matters,imports cost a fortune.
Does this mean anything? The Turkish lira is worth 1/10th of it's value from 7 years ago, the ruble has halved in the same timeframe. Turkey obviously isn't in a strong position but still a functioning country despite much worse inflation and high interest rates than Russia. Things can get a lot worse in Russia and there might be no back lash.
While it would save lives it would set a precedent for many more wars in future where the aggressor can later after to "peace". Even in the case of Ukraine, Putin in 3 years could go again, sieze another 10% of Ukraine and the likes of you would be calling for a "peace" deal to save lives.
Unfortunately not by PPP, it is the 4th largest in the world with the 6th largest oil reserves along with an enormous standing army, stock of conventional muntions and military equipment (albeit dwindling). That's not to mention the biggest inventory of nuclear weapons globally and tremendous soft power globally. Their position as a regional power isn't surprising at all. We can't fool ourselves into complacany. It will take a dedicated and sustained effort from all NATO countries to turn this around, no more slow walking aid and no more enforcing arbitrary rules on where and when the Ukrainians can strike back. Gloves off approach.
The German economy is screwed, that's why Scholtz is talking to the Moscow gremlin.
The ruble dropped below 0.01 dollar today too.
