Russian Invasion of Ukraine (2022): Thread 1 - Ukrainian Liars vs Russian Liars with Air and Artillery Superiority

How well is the combat this going for Russia?

  • ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ Blyatskrieg

    Votes: 46 6.6%
  • ⭐⭐⭐⭐ A well planned strike with few faults

    Votes: 45 6.5%
  • ⭐⭐⭐ Competent attack with some upsets

    Votes: 292 42.1%
  • ⭐⭐ Worse than expected

    Votes: 269 38.8%
  • ⭐ Ukraine takes back Crimea 2022

    Votes: 42 6.1%

  • Total voters
    694
Status
Not open for further replies.
I wonder if that what he feared/expected so unsupported drops for all. It wouldn't be the first time a leader sent their elite to die due to suspecting their leaders of being less than loyal.
If true, if true, he'll send some of the elite naval infantry into the meat grinder at Odessa. Maybe have their ship go into a minefield or heavily defended position on the coast. Then zerg rush with loyal vatnik grunts once the elites are dead.
 
Putin is finished! :lit:
1646620555006.png
 
Well maybe Zelensky should have thought about that when he was provoking the much more powerful country he bordered that literally has the largest nuclear arsenal on earth.
Sorry, I don't victim blame.

A megalomaniac literally wants to rebuild the USSR and doesn't believe in the sovereignty of Ukraine. Nothing Ukraine did or didn't do would have ever changed that.

NATO is just Putin's excuse, and it's a poor one at that.
 
It's more like Greek and Turkish Cypriots generally lived together pretty well, but suddenly when it was politically convenient for the Turks the Greek Cypriots, who didn't want to join with Greece, decided to genocide the Turkish Cypriots. Which justified the Turks invading Cyprus and remaining there to this day, of course. And NATO just looks the other way, not because they need the Turks to die for them, but because the Turks, a nation that wouldn't know anything about committing genocide and brutalizing ethnic minorities, makes a purely moral decision.

It might be the autism kicking in but this is sarcasm, right?
 
The reason I don’t give a shit about Yemen is that both sides are muslim sand niggers who would quite happily rape and murder every member of my race and religion if they weren’t too hideously incompetent iron-age inbreds. They can kill each other to their heart’s content and I don’t give a shit.
 
it looks like Zelensky has a hold on the wine mom demographic
Truly the most important demo to court when conducting a losing war on your own soil.
Poverty and drugs drive them to become whores so they get massive fake tits for nasty coomers to jerk off to. That’s just a guess.
Sir, Sakova's milkers are 100% all natural, ain't no silicon in those beauties. That said, breast cancer is a nigger.
 
The reason I don’t give a shit about Yemen is that both sides are muslim sand niggers who would quite happily rape and murder every member of my race and religion if they weren’t too hideously incompetent iron-age inbreds. They can kill each other to their heart’s content and I don’t give a shit.
To be fair the Yemenis aren't the DNC's whorehouse and they aren't asking Americans to get involved; in fact they's ask us to gtfo.

But I get your point.
 
It might be the autism kicking in but this is sarcasm, right?
Most of it, excepting the first part, historically Cypriots tolerated each other more than your usual Greeks and Turks. Tensions were high around Enosis though. My geopolitical views tend towards Realpolitik and Realism so "They did it because the poor Turkish Cypriots and totally not for geopolitical reasons," is never an acceptable answer, because it's almost never the correct answer. Nations don't play the Great Game for moral reasons. Especially Turks.
 
I actually liked Zelensky at the start of this thing, but this whole jet and No Fly Zone shit has made me hate him, for fucks sake they clearly don't want to give you that, so bring it down to being much more reasonable and ask for medium and long range SAMs, NATO countries barely fucking use them anyways.
I'm not sure how much good medium and long range SAMs would do them at the moment. Ye olde youtube algorithm just recommended to me some new video of some random Estonian reservist giving his take on the whole "Russia not having air superiority in Ukraine" thing:
He's basically arguing that the Russian airforce is something of a paper tiger. Big in size, but poorly trained, having worse simulators and maybe half the yearly flight time as NATO pilots. He also argues that their initial bombardment that was done by supposedly their best smart bombs was pretty ineffective. A couple of released photos available show a few buildings hit, a few planes hit, but runways undamaged and a lot of planes intact. Which in turn suggests that the initial bombardment by Russia's supposedly most accurate missles failed to neutralize Ukraine's air defenses. Which in turn helps explain why we see Russian helicopters and jets flying low enough to be hit by MANPADs, they're flying low to avoid the still intact air defenses. The airforce also seems to have had a lack of coordination with their ground forces.

If his take is reasonably accurate, which it does jive with some of the other things we've seen, Russia simply doesn't have the smart munitions it needs to take out the air defenses at range. So Russia's airforce is big enough that the Ukrainian airforce can't take them directly, but they're at risk of getting torn apart if they fly combat operations deeper in Ukraine. Fly high and surviving air defenses can shoot them down. Fly low, and MANPADs can shoot them down. Stick to flying over Russian forces or territory they hold, and survive.

So the demands for a no-fly zone are either an attempt at getting a "No-fly zone" that lets Ukraine planes fly and is tantamount to NATO acting as Ukraine's defensive air force so that Ukraine's actual air force can go on the offensive without being swarmed by Russian planes. Or it's an attempt to strip Russian ground troops of air support so that Ukraine troops don't have to worry about trying to shoot down helicopters when they're already taking fire from infantry and artillery.
 
It might be the autism kicking in but this is sarcasm, right?
It's propaganda. Nato exists as much to defend against Russia as to sit on Europe's grudges. After the Second World War the the USA was done with the petty squabbles of Europeans over whose clay was rightful clay and decreed the borders frozen forever and into perpetuity. It was naive to be sure but it's worked for now.

Greece and Turkey bitching at each other goes back a thousand years and NATO froze the conflict. The Cyprus crisis risked breaking this out, but the USA tard wrangled the Greeks and the Turks and then designated the totally neutral UK as arbiter in Cyprus. To this day British troops patrol the border with the implicit threat that if Greece or Turkey fucks with them America will go full Soviet intervention in Hungary on their ass. It's kept the peace since.

It's a shame the current state of things. The Pax Americana has brought to Europe almost a century of unprecedented peace and prosperity. But the fucking children who inherited that peace are not the equals to their fathers. It's a damn shame.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back