It was the Bitcointalk forum that inspired us to create Bitcointalksearch.org - Bitcointalk is an excellent site that should be the default page for anybody dealing in cryptocurrency,
since it is a virtual gold-mine of data. However, our experience and user feedback led us create our site;
Bitcointalk's search is slow, and difficult to get the results you need, because you need to log in first to find anything useful - furthermore, there are rate limiters for their search functionality.
The aim of our project is to create a faster website that yields more results and faster without having to create an account and eliminate the need to log in -
your personal data, therefore, will never be in jeopardy since we are not asking for any of your data and you don't need to provide them to use our site with all of its capabilities.
We created this website with the sole purpose of users being able to search quickly and efficiently in the field of cryptocurrency
so they will have access to the latest and most accurate information and thereby assisting the crypto-community at large.
At least you tried to draw attention away and change the topic right?
The topic is Russian invasion in Ukraine, not really your personal diary and wall-quoting yourself.
Do you have anything to say on-topic, or is it just Cuba, Taliban, Israel, Taiwan etc? Seems like every problem anywhere in the world exists only to justify your fuehrer's actions. Might be great in your current condition but sounds utterly absurd in the real world.
[...] not sure how you could put a positive spin on that, go ahead now you can sign the new agreement at even worse terms but your losses weren't in vain because you protected NATO (even though NATO was fine in 2013)
Not sure how to tell you this, but you're arguing with yourself here. Sorry about your mental illness, perhaps taking a break from the internet would be beneficial for you.
Not sure how to tell you this, but
But let me help you out, and educate you on this too:
Michael von der Schulenburg is a former UN Assistant Secretary-General, who worked for over 34 years for the United Nations
Hajo Funke is Professor Emeritus for political sciences of the Otto-Suhr-Institute/ Freie University Berlin
General (ret.) Harald Kujat was the highest ranging German officer of the Bundeswehr and at NATO ... Just one month after the start of the Russian military intervention in Ukraine, Ukrainian and Russian negotiators had come very close to an agreement for a ceasefire and to an outline for a comprehensive peace solution to the conflict. ... Contrary to Western interpretations, Ukraine and Russia agreed at the time that the planned NATO expansion was the reason for the war. They therefore focused their peace negotiations on Ukraine’s neutrality and its renunciation of NATO membership. In return, Ukraine would have retained its territorial integrity except for Crimea. [...] ... The Washington Post reported April 5 that in NATO, continuing the war is preferred to a cease-fire and negotiated settlement: “[yellow=red,2,300]For some in NATO, it’s better for Ukrainians to keep fighting and dying[/glow] than to achieve a peace that comes too soon or at too high a price for Kiev and the rest of Europe.” Zelensky, he said, should “keep fighting until Russia is completely defeated.”
BORIS JOHNSON’S MESSAGE TO UKRAINIANS ON APRIL 9, 2022: WE MUST CONTINUE THE WAR
On April 9, 2022, Boris Johnson arrived unannounced in Kiev and told the Ukrainian president that the West was not ready to end the war. According to Britain’s Guardian on April 28, PM Johnson had “instructed” Ukrainian President Zelensky “not to make any concessions to Putin”: ... Johnson brought two simple messages with him to Kiev. The first is that Putin is a war criminal; he should be pressured, not negotiated with. The second is that even if Ukraine is willing to sign some agreements with Putin on guarantees, but that the collective West is not. ...[...]
[...]
You need to learn to summarize. Putin demand was that Ukraine would not join NATO and Ruzzia would keep the illegally acquired territory - something difficult to see as a "win-win". And on top of that he also wants to impose conditions on NATO and the European countries. That's not a plan is a threat.
What is another obvious problem with this "plan"? There is nothing preventing Putin for annexing more land at will. The "West" cannot provide guarantees to a country that is effectively prevented from having the means to defend itself and from getting the protection of an alliance.
What type of deal is that then? What would prevent Putin from toppling the government of Ukraine at will or take new territories? Again, not a plan but a threat -"do as I say or else it will be worse"
The answer is "since Ukraine has to either fight or be under Moscow control, we fight and we s do it ASAP". Sorry if this was not the answer Putin was expecting, sorry if he thought the European Union would not help, US not get involved and the Ukrainians not willing to fight. A head of state that makes such as errors in judgement should not be in charge of a country. Well... except Ruzzia.
It does not resist even the most elementary analysis.
But I am summarizing, those articles have a lot more useful info that I had to cut out, plus it's really hard to summarize global events with the potential to change the world order down to a paragraph.
You keep appealing to some concept of global fairness and a win-win, but Cuba has been under embargo for over 50yrs with the whole world but two countries saying it's illegal and should stop. Afghanistan has been in a state of war, only after 20 years and huge losses to finally replace Taliban with...Taliban. US has bases in Syria that Syria never agreed to, support of dictators in Africa, South America and Asia etc etc etc. Ukraine was under Russian sphere of influence up to 2014 and everything was fine, then west decided to attempt another financial expansionism, and brought cookies to wrestle Ukraine into it's own sphere of influence. You are correct that under some disguise of a win-win for everyone, the root of any peace agreement must decide which sphere would Ukraine fall under. Now for every decision there's a cost/benefit analysis, all sides seem to confirm that there was some agreement reached in principle in the beginning of all of this in 2022, and then Boris came and said no, let's start a war. Considering all of the losses, if a new peace agreement would be reached now which side's position do you think improved since then? The consensus seems to be that the trend is not positive for Ukraine at the negotiation table. Now if you could mobilize younger generation and risk 100s of thousands of soldiers lives, would you do it simply because what you felt was right/wrong/fair thing to do, disregarding the chances of actually achieving anything, or would you only do it if you felt that there's a strong chance of improving your position 6month from now? And now consider what would happen if those lives are wasted without achieving any progress or even worse, if 6month from now after loosing more people your position deteriorates even further like from the previous peace agreement? World is not a cartoon with good guys wearing white and bad guys wearing black, it's just as important for a good leader to know when to fight as when to fold and save lives.
Because the Germans speak with one voice, and you just happen to have found the guy who speaks for them? And it happens that the origin of the comment is a Norwegian guy, involved in propaganda activities from Ruzzia.
I any case, again, irrelevant, the deal was a bogus, it imposed conditions on western democracies and it would only last until Putin felt like taking more land.
Economically, Putin should fail. If the US citizens are convinced that they should "do nothing" then is likely Ruzzia will have some type of success. Europe is one of the few allies of the US in the world, if US fails to support the price to pay would be felt for generations.
Because the Germans speak with one voice, and you just happen to have found the guy who speaks for them? And it happens that the origin of the comment is a Norwegian guy, involved in propaganda activities from Ruzzia.
I any case, again, irrelevant, the deal was a bogus, it imposed conditions on western democracies and it would only last until Putin felt like taking more land.
Economically, Putin should fail. If the US citizens are convinced that they should "do nothing" then is likely Ruzzia will have some type of success. Europe is one of the few allies of the US in the world, if US fails to support the price to pay would be felt for generations.
Because the Germans speak with one voice, and you just happen to have found the guy who speaks for them? And it happens that the origin of the comment is a Norwegian guy, involved in propaganda activities from Ruzzia.
I any case, again, irrelevant, the deal was a bogus, it imposed conditions on western democracies and it would only last until Putin felt like taking more land.
Economically, Putin should fail. If the US citizens are convinced that they should "do nothing" then is likely Ruzzia will have some type of success. Europe is one of the few allies of the US in the world, if US fails to support the price to pay would be felt for generations.
You need to learn to summarize. Putin demand was that Ukraine would not join NATO and Ruzzia would keep the illegally acquired territory - something difficult to see as a "win-win". And on top of that he also wants to impose conditions on NATO and the European countries. That's not a plan is a threat.
What is another obvious problem with this "plan"? There is nothing preventing Putin for annexing more land at will. The "West" cannot provide guarantees to a country that is effectively prevented from having the means to defend itself and from getting the protection of an alliance.
What type of deal is that then? What would prevent Putin from toppling the government of Ukraine at will or take new territories? Again, not a plan but a threat -"do as I say or else it will be worse"
The answer is "since Ukraine has to either fight or be under Moscow control, we fight and we s do it ASAP". Sorry if this was not the answer Putin was expecting, sorry if he thought the European Union would not help, US not get involved and the Ukrainians not willing to fight. A head of state that makes such as errors in judgement should not be in charge of a country. Well... except Ruzzia.
It does not resist even the most elementary analysis.
Even Ukrainians see it more clear now than you do
"Ukrainian telegram channel Ze Rada: "Hero of Russia Boris Johnson. It was Boris Johnson who convinced Kiev to withdraw from all negotiations on June 20, 2022. At the moment when the Russian Federation made a critical mistake, deciding that a police operation (now the beginning of the SMO is assessed in this way) could persuade Kiev to compromise,[...]
And Russia resisted, as it has resisted many times in history.[...]
And you called Trump an agent of Russia..."
I think has strong links to Ruzzia yes. Either that or he cannot tell allies from enemies. He has stated many times that "he would end the war in a day" - which regardless of being another hyperbole, there is only one way to achieve that result - giving Ruzzia whatever they want. But let's no always make all about Trump, it is boring.
I do not see how the propaganda you have put in here changes in any way the fact that the deal offered to Ukraine (with impositions on "the West" as a side dish) was less of a bogus, one sided, meant to be broken, unfeasible in regards to guarantees and a threat by the Ruzzia mafia state rather than a deal.
If anything you argument confirms that Ruzzia is about threats. Bullies do not give up until they get a punch in the nose.
As for sanctions, they are as effective as "freezing Europe". As for Ruzzia resisting...
You need to learn to summarize. Putin demand was that Ukraine would not join NATO and Ruzzia would keep the illegally acquired territory - something difficult to see as a "win-win". And on top of that he also wants to impose conditions on NATO and the European countries. That's not a plan is a threat.
What is another obvious problem with this "plan"? There is nothing preventing Putin for annexing more land at will. The "West" cannot provide guarantees to a country that is effectively prevented from having the means to defend itself and from getting the protection of an alliance.
What type of deal is that then? What would prevent Putin from toppling the government of Ukraine at will or take new territories? Again, not a plan but a threat -"do as I say or else it will be worse"
The answer is "since Ukraine has to either fight or be under Moscow control, we fight and we s do it ASAP". Sorry if this was not the answer Putin was expecting, sorry if he thought the European Union would not help, US not get involved and the Ukrainians not willing to fight. A head of state that makes such as errors in judgement should not be in charge of a country. Well... except Ruzzia.
It does not resist even the most elementary analysis.
Even Ukrainians see it more clear now than you do
"Ukrainian telegram channel Ze Rada: "Hero of Russia Boris Johnson. It was Boris Johnson who convinced Kiev to withdraw from all negotiations on June 20, 2022. At the moment when the Russian Federation made a critical mistake, deciding that a police operation (now the beginning of the SMO is assessed in this way) could persuade Kiev to compromise, at the moment of weakness of the elites, ready to record a historical defeat by signing the “Shameful World 2.0”, the “shaggy one” came to the rescue. A man who held a position in which the fight against Russia never stops. When it seemed: “that’s it record the actual defeat of Russia, write textbooks about it, create a movie, blow up the country from the inside with “patriots,” but Boris decided that the main thing was not to lose his place in London intrigues, and to please his personal desire to remain in chair, convinced the second such tyrant to “put the squeeze” on Russia.
And Russia resisted, as it has resisted many times in history. People suddenly returned from African missions who knew how to fight in a new way, specific instructions came down from above, and a new paradigm was explained to the elites. The opposition left on its own, purges of generals and officials began, billions were invested in the military-industrial complex. Russia showed exactly that “long will” that Arestovich spoke about: slowly and ponderously, with mistakes and obstacles, but they began to change the country. And then Xi arrived and said: “We’ll stand a little behind and won’t let you fall.” 90% of the sanctioned goods went through the PRC, increasing the production of drones, Shaheds arrived from Iran, a million shells arrived from the DPRK, but that was all later, and at the most difficult moment, Boris was the first to help Russia.
Michael von der Schulenburg is a former UN Assistant Secretary-General, who worked for over 34 years for the United Nations
Hajo Funke is Professor Emeritus for political sciences of the Otto-Suhr-Institute/ Freie University Berlin
General (ret.) Harald Kujat was the highest ranging German officer of the Bundeswehr and at NATO ... Just one month after the start of the Russian military intervention in Ukraine, Ukrainian and Russian negotiators had come very close to an agreement for a ceasefire and to an outline for a comprehensive peace solution to the conflict. ... Contrary to Western interpretations, Ukraine and Russia agreed at the time that the planned NATO expansion was the reason for the war. They therefore focused their peace negotiations on Ukraine’s neutrality and its renunciation of NATO membership. In return, Ukraine would have retained its territorial integrity except for Crimea. [...] ... The Washington Post reported April 5 that in NATO, continuing the war is preferred to a cease-fire and negotiated settlement: “[yellow=red,2,300]For some in NATO, it’s better for Ukrainians to keep fighting and dying[/glow] than to achieve a peace that comes too soon or at too high a price for Kiev and the rest of Europe.” Zelensky, he said, should “keep fighting until Russia is completely defeated.”
BORIS JOHNSON’S MESSAGE TO UKRAINIANS ON APRIL 9, 2022: WE MUST CONTINUE THE WAR
On April 9, 2022, Boris Johnson arrived unannounced in Kiev and told the Ukrainian president that the West was not ready to end the war. According to Britain’s Guardian on April 28, PM Johnson had “instructed” Ukrainian President Zelensky “not to make any concessions to Putin”: ... Johnson brought two simple messages with him to Kiev. The first is that Putin is a war criminal; he should be pressured, not negotiated with. The second is that even if Ukraine is willing to sign some agreements with Putin on guarantees, but that the collective West is not. ...[...]
[...]
You need to learn to summarize. Putin demand was that Ukraine would not join NATO and Ruzzia would keep the illegally acquired territory - something difficult to see as a "win-win". And on top of that he also wants to impose conditions on NATO and the European countries. That's not a plan is a threat.
What is another obvious problem with this "plan"? There is nothing preventing Putin for annexing more land at will. The "West" cannot provide guarantees to a country that is effectively prevented from having the means to defend itself and from getting the protection of an alliance.
What type of deal is that then? What would prevent Putin from toppling the government of Ukraine at will or take new territories? Again, not a plan but a threat -"do as I say or else it will be worse"
The answer is "since Ukraine has to either fight or be under Moscow control, we fight and we s do it ASAP". Sorry if this was not the answer Putin was expecting, sorry if he thought the European Union would not help, US not get involved and the Ukrainians not willing to fight. A head of state that makes such as errors in judgement should not be in charge of a country. Well... except Ruzzia.
It does not resist even the most elementary analysis.
[...] not sure how you could put a positive spin on that, go ahead now you can sign the new agreement at even worse terms but your losses weren't in vain because you protected NATO (even though NATO was fine in 2013)
Not sure how to tell you this, but you're arguing with yourself here. Sorry about your mental illness, perhaps taking a break from the internet would be beneficial for you.
If you can't find a link to El Pias, you probably can't see it.
Ukraine artillery over use is what is happening, because the Ukraine military is losing the war, and they are frantic. You need to read between the lines.
However, Ukraine might be getting some help if they can hold out as long as it might take for the article, below, to happen. If it happens, the US military will need to recoup its $billions in losses. So, they will probably give Ukraine to their military people.
In what way will they give Ukraine to them? They will order their military people in there to fight against Russia, formally. Then, if the US military wins, the US will formerly take over Ukraine. If they don't, their military people will. And Ukraine won't be able to do anything about it because Ukraine's military is totally depleted as it is. No Ukraine military left to fight either the US or Russia.
Just a thought.
You post and source mention a publication by a serious diary ("El Pais", not "El Pias"). May I see the link or is it fake information, as usual?
All your assumptions about the US taking over, Ukraine following orders and the degree of depletion are simply fantasies of an ignorant. The war in Ukraine is the only thing that helps the US have some allies in the world. The rest of the world would rather have the US erased.
Since you don't seem to be able to search for and find the link, odds are you wouldn't understand it if you found it.
Since I don't have any assumptions about the US taking over Ukraine, your talk doesn't hold any value. How can you tell? I show links to other people saying what THEY say, and simply repeat a little of it along with logical conclusions.
However, if you search for it, you can find that 3 major US companies have taken over 60% of Ukraine farm land. So, the US taking over Ukraine is a done-deal already, except for the formal announcing of it. This means that the small invasion that Russia has done, is way less than the big US invasion.
What happens when you blow up a train carrying tons of jet fuel inside a 19 km long tunnel in Siberia:
a) The tunnel gets badly damaged for a long time. b) The security services of the Ruzzian Federation look stupid. c) The main route between China and Ruzzia is halted. d) Millions in fuel burn. e) All of the above.
Once in a while Ukrainian commanders and government officials stop propagandizing. Once in a while they tell the truth about what is really going on.
...
Speaking to journalists from the Spanish newspaper El Pais, a Ukrainian commander codenamed "Ivan" disclosed that his unit is caught between a rock and a hard place....
May I see the link to El Pais or is it fake.
BTW the error on artillery is usually due to either overuse of the barrel or shooting at maximum range.
If you can't find a link to El Pias, you probably can't see it.
Ukraine artillery over use is what is happening, because the Ukraine military is losing the war, and they are frantic. You need to read between the lines.
However, Ukraine might be getting some help if they can hold out as long as it might take for the article, below, to happen. If it happens, the US military will need to recoup its $billions in losses. So, they will probably give Ukraine to their military people.
In what way will they give Ukraine to them? They will order their military people in there to fight against Russia, formally. Then, if the US military wins, the US will formerly take over Ukraine. If they don't, their military people will. And Ukraine won't be able to do anything about it because Ukraine's military is totally depleted as it is. No Ukraine military left to fight either the US or Russia.
Just a thought.
You post and source mention a publication by a serious diary ("El Pais", not "El Pias"). May I see the link or is it fake information, as usual?
All your assumptions about the US taking over, Ukraine following orders and the degree of depletion are simply fantasies of an ignorant. The war in Ukraine is the only thing that helps the US have some allies in the world. The rest of the world would rather have the US erased.
What happens when you blow up a train carrying tons of jet fuel inside a 19 km long tunnel in Siberia:
a) The tunnel gets badly damaged for a long time. b) The security services of the Ruzzian Federation look stupid. c) The main route between China and Ruzzia is halted. d) Millions in fuel burn. e) All of the above.
Once in a while Ukrainian commanders and government officials stop propagandizing. Once in a while they tell the truth about what is really going on.
...
Speaking to journalists from the Spanish newspaper El Pais, a Ukrainian commander codenamed "Ivan" disclosed that his unit is caught between a rock and a hard place....
May I see the link to El Pais or is it fake.
BTW the error on artillery is usually due to either overuse of the barrel or shooting at maximum range.
If you can't find a link to El Pias, you probably can't see it.
Ukraine artillery over use is what is happening, because the Ukraine military is losing the war, and they are frantic. You need to read between the lines.
However, Ukraine might be getting some help if they can hold out as long as it might take for the article, below, to happen. If it happens, the US military will need to recoup its $billions in losses. So, they will probably give Ukraine to their military people.
In what way will they give Ukraine to them? They will order their military people in there to fight against Russia, formally. Then, if the US military wins, the US will formerly take over Ukraine. If they don't, their military people will. And Ukraine won't be able to do anything about it because Ukraine's military is totally depleted as it is. No Ukraine military left to fight either the US or Russia.
https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-12-01-us-troops-refused-covid19-vaccines-sue-government.html More than 8,000 active-duty U.S. service members were discharged from the military for refusing to be administered the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine, which was made compulsory by President Joe Biden's government from August 2021 through January 2023. The mandate was revoked by law as the National Defense Authorization Act – making it the first time in U.S. military history that a vaccine requirement was reversed.
Now, some of these men are filing lawsuits against the federal government, demanding billions of dollars worth of lost pay and benefits when they were discharged from the service. Atty. Dale Saran, a retired Marine and one of the lawyers who reportedly brought down the anthrax vaccine with fellow attorneys Andy Meyer and Brandon Johnson, is representing the former troops in three separate lawsuits they plan to turn into a class action lawsuit, independent news site Breitbart reported.
"The amount of money is in the billions," Saran told the outlet. "That's just flat-out. That's what it is in backpay. It's billions of dollars."
According to the legal counsel that represents all service members who were either kicked out or illegally ordered to stop drilling, resulting in loss of pay or benefits, the lawsuits were filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, which Saran said is a specialized court where illegal discharges are heard. "The Court of Claims has been around since the Reconstruction Era. It's a very old court and kind of a weird one. But in any event, you can go there if you've got a claim and say, 'Hey, I was illegally discharged, or the military did something to impede my pay,' or whatever. The Court of Claims is where you go," he explained.
...
Army is desperate to win back unvaccinated, "involuntarily separated" troop members ...
What happens when you blow up a train carrying tons of jet fuel inside a 19 km long tunnel in Siberia:
a) The tunnel gets badly damaged for a long time. b) The security services of the Ruzzian Federation look stupid. c) The main route between China and Ruzzia is halted. d) Millions in fuel burn. e) All of the above.
Once in a while Ukrainian commanders and government officials stop propagandizing. Once in a while they tell the truth about what is really going on.
...
Speaking to journalists from the Spanish newspaper El Pais, a Ukrainian commander codenamed "Ivan" disclosed that his unit is caught between a rock and a hard place....
May I see the link to El Pais or is it fake.
BTW the error on artillery is usually due to either overuse of the barrel or shooting at maximum range.
Speaking to journalists from the Spanish newspaper El Pais, a Ukrainian commander codenamed "Ivan" disclosed that his unit is caught between a rock and a hard place. According to Ukrainian sources, AFU forces near Avdiivka in the Donetsk People's Republic are grappling with an alarming deficit of ammunition. It has reached the extent that even the weaponry that uses these munitions is in a declining state, suffering from significantly impaired accuracy.
Ivan attested to this predicament, which contrasted with what the mainstream media has been parroting. The commander of the AFU's Paladin Howitzer 47th Brigade remarked that during the defenses of Bakhmut and Orekhovo, Ukrainian forces discharged between 100 and 150 shells each day. But in Avdiivka, they can only manage to fire 15.
"In the summer, my M109A6 Paladin had an accuracy error of seven meters," Ivan said. "Now, near Avdiivka, it is 70 meters."
He also told El Pais journalists that the casualty count in Avdiivka is disproportionately high. Ivan lost his entire platoon, with all 17 of his comrades either being killed or captured by Russian forces.
According to Ivan, the Russians are tactically digging deeper and wider trenches. They have also gained an upper hand, thanks to the up to 300 drones in their arsenal. "The Eagles [Orlan-10 drones] oversee the situation, while the Lancets launch assaults," he added. This air superiority Moscow has, alongside its prowess in artillery, is severely straining the defense capabilities of AFU troops in Avdiivka. ...
Much worse, Putin again used a secret climate weapon and Ukraine was covered with a storm and heavy snowfalls. Even the flag in Kyiv was torn.
If that storm was made by Putin, then it wasn't very successful for them because it hit Russia hard too. Especially Sochi, Crimea - destroyed houses, railway washed away.
In Bakhmut, Wagner took the ruins of an empty city previously known as Bakhmut at a cost in lives that may actually exceed the original population of the city - we will not know, but in the tens of thousands it is for sure. Apart from massive shelling, the advances were based on sending forward the most expendable troops in any number needed. I am sure you consider that a Victory and you are right in taking it as such - that is as much of a victory as is going to get for Ruzzia.
In Rabotino, the Ukrainian Armed Forces took the ruins of an empty village, formerly known as Rabotino, at a cost of lives that may actually exceed the original population of this village - we will not know, but in the tens of thousands this is certain. Apart from massive shelling, the advance was based on sending forward the most expendable troops in any numbers needed. I am sure that you consider this a Victory, and you are right to perceive it as such - that is as much of a victory as is going to get for Ukraine.
There was a failed mechanised attack in Robotyne, not a meatwave, then a successful. Ukraine cannot afford a meatwaves, politically nor in manpower. The objective was not the village, but to generate a breakthrough. While you think it is funny, it is simply not a comparable case.
Anyway, I think that Ukraine is far from having played all cards, while Ruzzia does not seem to generate new strategic nor tactical alternatives to shelling and sending the infantry - after the shelling or during the shelling, whatever they feel like.
In Bakhmut, Wagner took the ruins of an empty city previously known as Bakhmut at a cost in lives that may actually exceed the original population of the city - we will not know, but in the tens of thousands it is for sure. Apart from massive shelling, the advances were based on sending forward the most expendable troops in any number needed. I am sure you consider that a Victory and you are right in taking it as such - that is as much of a victory as is going to get for Ruzzia.
In Rabotino, the Ukrainian Armed Forces took the ruins of an empty village, formerly known as Rabotino, at a cost of lives that may actually exceed the original population of this village - we will not know, but in the tens of thousands this is certain. Apart from massive shelling, the advance was based on sending forward the most expendable troops in any numbers needed. I am sure that you consider this a Victory, and you are right to perceive it as such - that is as much of a victory as is going to get for Ukraine.
I have not yet seen a video from the Ruzzies depicting something like the sea of rusted steel near Avdiivka. Not even the disasters at Vulheldar last year.
RE meatwaves attacks, I have recently seen a document on how Wagner threw the convicts in front. They had the worst equipment, but also were without radio. There was no way they could communicate that they were being hit by friendly fire or retreating. They would not know where the second line was. Thus, any retreat would mean that they would be fired upon by their own (I guess they did not really have "their own").
On this attack the Ukrainians would fire upon them and reveal the positions. Then mortar and artillery fire would be used in the general direction of this positions. Logically, the first line of Ruzzis was very close, so they were as likely to die as the Ukrainians, perhaps more since they were not digged in.
That's Bhakmut, but now the regular army is trying the same technique, but the problem seems to be that at least Wagner had good instructors and good morale in the contractors. The regulars don't, so they just loose the front troops and achieve nothing.
Look, this technique is not that uncommon, the armies use screeners and in the musket age, they had the skirmishers to "protect the main body of the troops" by putting themselves in the middle.
You got it all wrong about who won Bakhmut battle
And recent reveal about 1.1m dead Ukrainian soldiers also tells who had upper hand all this time
Thanks for yet another link at propaganda. The figure you are providing is several multiples out of the even most optimistic Ruzzian hopes.
In Bakhmut, Wagner took the ruins of an empty city previously known as Bakhmut at a cost in lives that may actually exceed the original population of the city - we will not know, but in the tens of thousands it is for sure. Apart from massive shelling, the advances were based on sending forward the most expendable troops in any number needed. I am sure you consider that a Victory and you are right in taking it as such - that is as much of a victory as is going to get for Ruzzia.
The regulars are trying that now, but they just do not have the sauce.
BTW, you think this guy won?
Have you seen the fireworks in the Saky airfield in Crimea? It must be the cold weather that makes the Ruzzis make bonfires? We will have to wait for the next satellite pass to know.
(even though NATO was fine in 2013)
