Topic: Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress] - page 65. (Read 73526 times)

Well, you know, never to late to grow balls. Europe is slow, but is not immobile and the risk of Trump as president - pretty much Putin´s wet dreams made true - is certainly creating the conditions for a nuclear able Germany. It think that Europe could create a programme for, let´s say 1000 strategic warheads, so next time it can talk to Ruzzia with some "backup". I am not sure that Trump understands that if Europe feels undefended the non-proliferation is over.

I am not sure where did they get the idea that a glide bomb can be thrown 150 km behind the front... or maybe I am not reading correctly. It simply does not make sense, ATACAMS have a much larger range... bombs are not really that sensitive to EW... I am not sure where they got all that.

Again, you say you are not an expert, but at the same time you are giving credibility to all the opinions that match your narrative, so I am going to make the question again - the one you do not want to answer: To what degree do you think ATACAMS will "not work" and to what degree do you think glide bombs "do not work".

I think that Ukraine has new weapons and has a proper strategy to use them:
1. Make the war costly for Ruzzia. Attrition in vehicles, people and oil&gas facilities.
2. Start degrading Ruzzian airforce to an unacceptable level.
3.  degrade sufficiently Ruzzian air defence.
4. Keep on destroying the Black Sea fleet to the point that is useless.
5. Prepare for an offensive in 2025 - 26.
6. Obviously, avoid loosing key holds.

Meh comparing default risks of Germany vs Russia is not interesting, now Russian war bonds vs. Ukrainian war bonds on a free market would be for a far more interesting conversation.

Ukraine was a perfectly viable country in economic terms in 2013, and there was peace and overall prosperity in EU. You know this, and EU knows this, but US decided to change that status quo with some sweet cookies that some naive people fell for and fuck the EU, EU didn't have the balls to stop it so now we're all paying the consequences.


Once again i'm not a military expert to comment on the specifics, i just collect credible reports from multiple sources and report it here. If you have credible reports that claim otherwise, that Ground Launched Small Diameter Bombs work amazingly for Ukraine do share them, otherwise unless you reveal yourself as some war general or top military strategist, i'll believe media reports over your opinion. Honestly i don't see what you're so held up on, are you just incapable of admitting that some weapons might not work for Ukraine, is that it? There are no reports that ATACMS don't work (there are other issues with them mainly cost and availability but effectiveness doesn't seem to be one of them), yet there are plenty that GLSDB and Excalibur are not effective. Either provide a more credible source claiming otherwise or stop spreading misinformation with your random opinions and pictures/videos.

Even from some UA source defence-ua.com  

Obviously you would not lend to Ruzzia at the same rates as Germany nor you would expect re-structuring from Germany .Again, you are not going to enlighten anyone here about credit ratings.

Ukraine is a perfectly viable independent country in economic terms if the war is ended correctly. You know this, Putin knows this and you both want to avoid this outcome at all costs by asking for a surrender while calling it "peace".

Try to be honest for once will you? You were clearly giving credibility to options about the Ukrainian glide bombs and the western weaponry in terms of "not working". Would you like then to retract and say they are not working 100%?

Particularly, what degree of "not working" and the S300 S400 being enough to deal with the western supplied missiles do you claim? And what degree of "not working" do you attribute to the French glide bombs smashing the east bank of the dnipro?

And, compared to better schools, roads and health insurance, for example, that improves life of average American or European how?

Learn what citations are, and do not attribute my citations to me.  

Oh i see, when you read my citations claiming some system doesn't work you assume a 100% failure and thus feel the need to provide evidence of at least one or two that did work to prove them wrong? No that's not how warfare works at all, there's this whole the sword and the shield concept, where efficiency of of some new weapon is limited in time before countermeasures are developed.


So for example excalibers work in Ukraine, so no need to find videos, but only in 6%. If you feel GMLRS work in Ukraine sure go argue with Pentagon and tell Ukraine to request more of GMLRS instead of some other weapons for the next weapon delivery batch.

High yield? You mean junk-bonds?

The problem is that no one believes that Ukraine can survive for longer than it would take for Russia to "self-demilitarise" as you claim (it's obvious now that China won't allow it and for many other reasons). Thus the outcome is clear, so the options really are either make peace now, or keep fighting "to the last Ukrainian" waste more lives and get worse terms just to get Russia to "self-demilitarise" a tiny bit more. You don't see a conflict of interest here between the interest of the "west" and the Ukrainian people?

In Russia, against the background of a colossal redundancy of any resources, there is a shortage of manpower. The point is not even in the losses at the front (although of course there are those too), and not in the wave of emigration after the start of the special operation (although of course there was that too), but rather in the demographic failure, which is a consequence of the acute crisis of the 1990s after the collapse of the USSR. The current unemployment rate of 2.7% is an unprecedented low in Russia.

Actually, therefore, it is not surprising that Russia offers foreigners from Africa and Latin America favorable conditions and a simplified scheme for obtaining citizenship through a contract with the Ministry of Defense. I think this program will expand.

Well, the report I saw on the Cuban people going to Russia to fight for Putin was talking about four hundred civilians who became military units in the front, that is indeed quite an small number of soldiers, which is unlikely to make a difference on the result of battles by its own, so I am not sure what is the objective of this recruitment campaign. It could be about slowly recruiting foreigners, so Putin would not need to gather his own population and levy for more native Russians to go fight in the front.

I am not sure I would call these people to be used as "cheap meat" as you call them, if the numbers of their salaries and the possibility on getting Russian citizenship are not unfunded, then they are being paid very good salaries, considering they come from a third world country like Cuba. I am not informed on those citizens from Nepal and African countries though, It makes sense something like that could be happening.

Read what is written, do not put words in my mouth. I do not have an island, I guess you are speaking of Great Britain. Sorry if I am breaking this to you, but plenty of the children of the Ruzzian "elite" study in the UK and plenty of their assets are conveniently hidden and sometimes not hidden in the UK.

As far as you are concern, I am a copy of a brain uploaded into an AI living in a world cluster of cloud servers. Just read "The Neuromancer" to understand. The nuclear deterrence cuts both ways.

Today it seems that all the worthless Western weapons that according to daRude "do not make a difference", "do not work", etc.  have "not worked" as far as Mariupol. This is despite daRude assuring everyone here that ATACAMS and all the rest would be stopped by the S300 / 400.

I think that Ruzzia should now try an strategy that Facebook and Twitter followed - renaming e.g. S400 to S500 or even to "S-600 Putin-plus airdefence" so that they start being effective against NATO supplies.

I am just waiting for the F16 to "not work".

---

There is nothing to ask about. You may be discovering how high-yield bonds work, but many of us already know.

Ukraine will pay debt and quite a bit of it will be forgiven in exchange for XYZ. I said this many times, there are winners in this war but they are not Ruzzia, Ukraine nor Europe. All thanks to Putin´s "great geostrategic vision" that has made Gazprom loose money for the first time in 20 years, expand NATO faster than ever and burn through the Soviet weapons legacy platforms faster than ever.

But hey, I would not be surprised if Putin had a significant stake in Blackrock funds through some opaque scheme of companies and actually profiting from Ukraine´s debt. He is not going to die for it, the Ruzzian soldiers do.

Overall, Ruzzia is left with more enemies, Putin is probably making more money than ever and if all goes to plan Ukraine will have their independence and perhaps some generations of peace to build a country - likely under the NATO umbrella. Who are the true losers here? The average Ruzzian / Federated citizen and the families of the Ruzzian mercenaries.

Your other comment is stupid, classic daRude. NATO is not for now deploying troops under the NATO structure or mandate because there is no interest nor incentive in that type of escalation. It is much simpler to allow Ruzzia to be as incompetent as they are and self-demilitarise for a few farms and flattened minor cities for which the US has little interest.

The return on investment for the aid to Ukraine is excellent. Please, keep up the military incompetence, it makes the world a safer place.

This below is probably the tiny tiny bit of an iceberg of Putin assets in "the west" that he claims he is fighting.

Billions in assets. Hint: not in Ruzzia


And his brood is said to be living in Switzerland. Give whatever credit you want to this, is not really that relevant.


https://www.businessinsider.com/putin-children-alina-kabaeva-keeps-them-hidden-in-luxury-report-2023-3

I think it's nothing new here. Already in first year of war we saw people mainly from Nepal, some African countries fighting for Russia.
I don't think Russia is hiring them because they're running out of people. It's more just a way to get some cheap meat. And now it doesn't looks that number of such mercenaries is very significant.

Only just saw this edit. US set the precedent of what such peace terms should look like in Cuba, but luckily I don't expect anything close to that out of Russia, most likely things in Ukraine will just go back to the way they were in 2013 prior to all this madness.

---

Mercs are a closely guarded secret, but at the same time are no surprise to anyone. Look up Ukrainian Foreign Legion and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War#Foreign_fighters_and_volunteers to get some idea of the scale from both sides.

---

All wars need to be financed, and financiers aka banks are the ones doing the financing. Rothschild famously made a fortune by front running news about the outcome of the Battle of Waterloo. Now of course this is not a charity so all war bonds need to be backed by some juicy collateral to be worthwhile. In fact as they're only driven by returns many times they'd finance both sides for arbitrage.


The reason i didn't punch Muhammad Ali is because i was afraid of escalations with him. Otherwise, if he wouldn't escalate and fight back, he'd run crying to his mamma   classic paxmao

NATO is not involved? Seems you lived under a rock for last 10+ years, or maybe you have some strange definition of "involnment"

And NATO is not 10km from Moscow because your whole island would be sent to meet Aquaman

The reason why NATO is not involved fully in the Ukrainian war yet is to prevent escalation. Otherwise, you will be celebrating glorious victories of the Ruzzians 10 km from Moscow. Putin knows this perfectly well.

I guess Branko that being Ukrainian and having their own country makes better sense to Ukrainians than getting sent by the Ruzzians against Letonians, Lithuanians or Finnish.

After all, thats why Rooineks recruited Ukrainians to fight for them

Some news recently said that a few Nepalese volunteers left ("deserted") because of the conditions they had. When a Nepalese guy deserts you army due to "conditions", it is the moment to think what is going on.

But regardless, yes, the Ruzzian army tends not to be Ruzzian, but rather from any of the regions made poor by the regime. If they take Ukraine, they will use Ukrainians against others as well. This is a classic - you do not want to recruit in Moscow or St Petersburg or you may get revolts, you go recruit in Chechenia, Siberia,... and of course internationally in Nepal, China,...

I think that race statistic are not collected, but most of the less dangerous positions are usually given to "the right people" from the right family and place.

But what is the catch for mercs? 2000 usd a month is like a dream come true for half the world right? Well, the catch is that you get paid only while you are alive, so there is a very good incentive to send them to the most dangerous meatwaves. If only 1 out of 20 make it alive the payroll is only 5%.

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/10/asia/nepal-fighters-russia-ukraine-families-intl-cmd/index.html




The Nepalese government only allows joining the Brit army, they have their own units, the Ghurkhas, which are considered among the best prepared for combat. There are 100s of applicants for each available place and they have been known to continue fighting even with 90% loses.

A little bit off topic, but I just read the Kremlin has started to recruit people fromm una in order to keep the war going in the eastern front. Specifically, people from Cuba (where minimum wage is less than 30$) is being kured through internet to join the Russian army in exchange of a salary of 2000$ and the possibility to apply for Russian nationality.
I had heard Ukraine was alledgely running out of people to fight the war, but I did not expect something similar could be happening in Russia.

Obviously, It has been already proven an important percentage of Russians are not willing to get in the front, otherwise many young men would have not fled the country as they did at the beginning of the conflict.
Regardless of what it is actually going on, I doubt those cuban men are fully aware of what they are getting themselves into, though, I would not judge them if they monthly payment in their island is less than what anyone of us would easily spend for dinner.

Hey... another Ukrainian glide bomb "not working".

https://t.me/osirskiy/671


Investment funds do not fund wars as such, they seek opportunities wherever these are. Thanks to Putin, it is very likely that Ukraine will be rebuilt by a combination of European and US companies. The investment funds allocate the investors money (which may even be of the Ruzzian elites!!) to  whatever project or business looks good - and Ukraine will be full of opportunity for business and people if it can be made strong enough as to have Ruzzia not coming back.

Seriously, sometimes I think that Putin is a CIA agent, he has done more for the US weapons industry and for NATO expansion and for US investment than any US president!

The funds to Ukraine, as this may surprise you, come mostly for Europe (I am not sure if right now they are par with US) as state aid. They pay two main things: a) the general spending of the country and the state b) The military aid.

However, the military aid is not sent as money (this is what dumBAss does not get), it is spend in the US and European factories and the products are sent to Ukraine.

Perhaps I misunderstood what kind of investment or business we are talking about then. Did those companies have stakes on Ukraine before or after the war started? Because to this day I had assume most if not all of the war funding coming to Ukraine was being collected by the United States, though the Internal Revenue Service.
If Blackrock and other conglomerates had stakes on Ukraine before the war, in industrial sectors which do not have anything to do with the war effort, then it is different situation than giving money to Ukraine after the war starter, for them to be able to buy ammo and weapons.

Also, I have seen other posts here in the forum on the alledged plan of Blackrock to be part on the rebuilding of Ukraine as soon as the war is over, though, I am not sure about implications of a foreign private entity like that assisting a sovereign country. It would make more sense in the European Union agreed on letting Ukraine to become a member and contribute economically in the recovering of the country.

Here you are, talking against Ukraine, but NOT the people who are 'funding' Ukraine. What is the debt that Ukraine will eventually have to repay? It's almost nothing... so close to nothing that it almost can't be seen. So, where is the real debt?

Suppose you lost an arm in a car accident, and the doctors couldn't save it. You would be lucky, if you were a billionaire. You could buy a new artificial arm that could even give you the simulated sense of touch and feel. But it might cost billions.

Big Business owes the virtually unlimited debt of total lives of something like 600,000 people killed in this useless war. Nobody can even begin to think about what it would really take to give these people their lives back. But it is the fault of Big Business that they died, through their funding of Ukraine.

You are beginning to understand. But you are still missing it.

Why are you surprised that the largest investors in the world, who own stakes in nearly any business out there also have stakes in Ukraine? These are not "benefactors", they are investment funds that look for business where ever they can find an opportunity.

Ukraine eventually will have to repay the debt like any other country. Even Ruzzia was paying the bonds until it defaulted due to being excluded from the payment mechanisms.

So Ukraine has literal investors and big corporations/especulators of Wall Street as backers... That is something I was not quite aware of and it could be indeed a problem for the Ukrainian government and the people of that country to have those kind of benefactors... They do not care at all for the Ukrainian motherland, at all.
They just want to have their money back and have those juicy interests from Kiev, they are in a business after all, not a charity...
I thought most of the money going to Ukraine was being paid indirectly by the American people and the taxpayers from the European Union, it is a completely different to owe money to a state than having to pay to a corporation or a conglomerate of capitalists and business people.

Though, as long as the government of the United States continues to keep a positive standing in favor of the defense of Ukraine, then Kiev could be able to deal a favorable payment plan for those companies and conglomerates.