Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
16 minutes ago, Coffeesforclosers said:

 

What an enlightened position! Have you considered writing a strongly worded post on a message board? 

Yes…you’re very ‘enlightened’, just like all liberals. If you can’t see it happening out your window it’s not happening. Very enlightened indeed. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

So we’re just paying for other people to get killed. Wonderful 

OK let’s recap a little bit here
 

Ukrainians did not invade Russia Russia invaded Ukraine

 

The soldiers that are getting killed are Ukrainians. It’s sucks and war sucks but I would much rather be someone else than our troops. If it Hass to be someone I would rather not be anyone.

 

It’s interesting, because I didn’t hold these beliefs whenever I was an active military member, but as a grow much older, I’m starting to have much more appreciation for life and especially a much further appreciation for our troops lives, because they don’t get a say in whether or not, they get put in a dangerous situation they just have to go

 

No more foreign wars

Posted
9 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

OK let’s recap a little bit here
 

Ukrainians did not invade Russia Russia invaded Ukraine

 

The soldiers that are getting killed are Ukrainians. It’s sucks and war sucks but I would much rather be someone else than our troops. If it Hass to be someone I would rather not be anyone.

 

It’s interesting, because I didn’t hold these beliefs whenever I was an active military member, but as a grow much older, I’m starting to have much more appreciation for life and especially a much further appreciation for our troops lives, because they don’t get a say in whether or not, they get put in a dangerous situation they just have to go

 

No more foreign wars

On us getting involved in another foreign war thing you and I definitely agree. Where we differ is that I believe us paying for other people to die in a war is possibly worse. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
15 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

On us getting involved in another foreign war thing you and I definitely agree. Where we differ is that I believe us paying for other people to die in a war is possibly worse. 

What what would your solution be? Do you think Russia should just take Ukraine?
 

Because that really is the only option other than supporting them without our support, they wouldn’t last for as long as they have

Posted
12 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

What what would your solution be? Do you think Russia should just take Ukraine?
 

Because that really is the only option other than supporting them without our support, they wouldn’t last for as long as they have

Wonderful 

Keep paying for other people to die

An inconvenient truth! 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
10 hours ago, John from Riverside said:

Actually, that was a question to you what would your solution be?

John, I’ve said it so many times on here. I’d have never let this get started to begin with. Putin didn’t parachute into Ukraine or kill the archduke. He telegraphed this for MONTHS. But the world was either a) too busy watching ice skating b) not really all that bothered by the idea of incursion c) relying on the usual level of piss poor intelligence. 
 

But….just so we don’t go in a circle, once he did enter Ukraine it’d have been shock and awe from the world at the very first Russian boot that set foot across the border. Not the piecemeal nonsense we’ve seen. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
8 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

John, I’ve said it so many times on here. I’d have never let this get started to begin with. Putin didn’t parachute into Ukraine or kill the archduke. He telegraphed this for MONTHS. But the world was either a) too busy watching ice skating b) not really all that bothered by the idea of incursion c) relying on the usual level of piss poor intelligence. 
 

But….just so we don’t go in a circle, once he did enter Ukraine it’d have been shock and awe from the world at the very first Russian boot that set foot across the border. Not the piecemeal nonsense we’ve seen. 

 

The "usual level of piss poor intelligence" predicted this with uncanny accuracy prior to the invasion.

 

The proposal you suggest of "shock and awe" assumes the capability to do so, which didn't exist at the time, the result of years of NATO "allies" not living up to their promises/obligations.

 

Of course the regality of facing a nuclear conflagration is not expressed in your suggestion, but certainly a reasonable assumption that has been thankfully avoided.

  • Agree 1
Posted
2 hours ago, sherpa said:

 

The "usual level of piss poor intelligence" predicted this with uncanny accuracy prior to the invasion.

 

The proposal you suggest of "shock and awe" assumes the capability to do so, which didn't exist at the time, the result of years of NATO "allies" not living up to their promises/obligations.

 

Of course the regality of facing a nuclear conflagration is not expressed in your suggestion, but certainly a reasonable assumption that has been thankfully avoided.

I could not disagree more. The boogeyman of nuclear war can be used to explain every conflict since 1945….of which there have been plenty. It’s a totally false argument. 

Posted (edited)

Recent updates on tv news are that Ukraine is getting the sh-t kicked out of them…

 

But I’m sure the U.S. government doesn’t care, because at least we are weakening Russia…😉

 

 

 

Edited by JaCrispy
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
On 7/19/2023 at 7:23 PM, Coffeesforclosers said:

 

...Sure? You're the first person to bring this claim up in this thread, so where does it come from? 

Reality?. 

 

Posted
7 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

Recent updates on tv news are that Ukraine is getting the sh-t kicked out of them…

 

😉

 

MSM gonna MSM. But given what Ukraine wanted to achieve, and what they've achieved so far, it's more right than wrong.

 

Ukraine tried a good, old fashioned Desert Storm style breakthrough. It failed for a bunch of reasons, none of them good for Ukraine.  They're fighting an attritional war right now, focusing on killing Russian commanders, blowing up ammunition dumps, cutting supply routes, and destroying Russian artillery, and they're doing "ok".  But it's definitely a Plan B because plan A was defeated. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Coffeesforclosers said:

If it's that obvious, you should have no trouble posting a link to a source. 

No need. Google Mariupol, Bakhmut and see for yourself.  

Posted
37 minutes ago, Dr.Sack said:

No need. Google Mariupol, Bakhmut and see for yourself.  

 

You can add Popasna, Sevierodonetsk, the 1st Kherson counter offensive, and Soledar to that list too.

 

Doesn't mean the Ukrainian army's been wiped out twice. 

Posted

 

What happened to the Ukrainian counteroffensive?

JAZZ SHAW

 

 

FTA:

 

Quote

 

The counteroffensive began about three weeks later, with Ukraine making initial gains in Donetsk and Luhansk, two regions in eastern Ukraine that were illegally annexed by Russia last year.

Since then, however, the pace of progress has slowed considerably, leading to some frustration from Ukraine’s backers in the West, who hoped that the heavy weaponry and training they had provided would drive the Russian occupiers out of the country’s southeastern provinces.

So far, however, Russia’s defensive positions appear to be holding — while questions about the future of the conflict are growing.

 

 

That’s putting it charitably. The reality of the counteroffensive thus far has been quite different from the initial projections that were making the rounds. Ukraine waited so long to go on the attack that the Russians had more than adequate time to dig anti-tank ditches and set up fields of landmines. Ukraine has been unable to put a significant dent in Russia’s supply of Ka-52 attack helicopters and they have been pounding the advancing Ukrainian columns mercilessly. It’s estimated that Ukraine lost one-fifth of its tanks and heavy armored vehicles (that we gave them) in just the first two weeks of June.

 

This month, Gen. Mark Milley finally conceded that things aren’t going well. He described the current situation as being “a very difficult fight” that will likely “take a considerable amount of time and at a high cost.” One military analyst working with Milley admitted that the Ukrainian forces suffer from an “inability to conduct complex combined arms operations at scale.” In other words, they have plenty of heart and they’ve been fighting bravely, but they are not a modern army and don’t have the training required to take on a force like Russia. The Russian army may have turned out to be weaker than we had previously believed, but they are still a fully modern and well-equipped military force.

 

How much longer are we expected to keep this up? We’re well into the second year of the war and there has been no significant movement in the lines for months. Any suggestions of a negotiated peace deal are shouted down and those bringing up the idea are labeled as “Putin stooges.” All the while, we continue to flush endless resources into a country that is in ruins as we cheer on Ukraine’s forces toward some eventual supposed “victory” that nobody seems to be able to define.

Meanwhile, Russia is making the situation worse not only for Ukraine but for much of the rest of the world now that the grain export deal has gone off the tracks. As The Dispatch pointed out this weekend, any insecurity for the cargo ships in the Black Sea will impact millions of people almost immediately.

 

 

https://hotair.com/jazz-shaw/2023/07/23/what-happened-to-the-ukrainian-counteroffensive-n566560

×
×
  • Create New...