Ukrainian Defensive War against the Russian Invasion - Mark IV: The Partitioning of Discussion

[AgendaPoster]

Stolen from the vatnik thread. This zei squirrel person was a hardcore progressive, socialist account for years, dunking non stop on chuds and nazis, but since the war started things have... changed, and the account switched to Russian imperialism enjoying.
Simply read what the "Pulitzer, unbiased" Sy Hersh journalist is saying, the dude responsible for the Nord Stream article.
Let's be clear, the US might have done it, but I want hard proof, or I'll laugh you off the room.
Not ashamed to say I fucking hate these pathetic "socialist" losers that thrive only on anti-Western politics and pretend to be progressives. Only US does evil things, China, Russia, everyone else is smol country righteously fighting against the US globalists for a totally cozy multipolar NWO. If you have doubts, peasant, just rest assured, a world where Pax Americana no longer exists and Russia, China, EU and the US fight openly for resources and spheres of influence will TOTALLY be great.
I'm sure you recognize the Kremlin narrative in the Sy Hersh statements. It's basically identical.

https://twitter.com/zei_squirrel/status/1626878540175101953?s=20

 

[Fait Accompli]

Any economics nerds here? Lots of posts about Russias economy flourishing even though they lost a big market, prices are down and large assets of theirs have been frozen

Been seeing tons of videos/texts that shows the annual Russian budget, it shows a reduce of total revenue by 35% ( which is quite extreme ) and a rise in expenditure of like 56%
Is this true? Or is it just someone analyzing and not the actual russian budget?

If true, it really shows how fucked they are

 

[draggs]

Stolen from the vatnik thread. This zei squirrel account was hardcore progressive, socialist account for years, dunking non stop on chuds and nazis, but since the war started things have... changed, and the account switched to Russian imperialism enjoying.
Simply read what the "Pulitzer, unbiased" Sy Hersh journalist is saying, the dude responsible for the Nord Stream article.
Let's be clear, the US might have done it, but I want hard proof, or I'll laugh you off the room.
Not ashamed to say I fucking hate these pathetic "socialist" losers that thrive only on anti-Western politics and pretend to be progressives. Only US does evil things, China, Russia, everyone else is smol country righteously fighting against the US globalists for a totally cozy multipolar NWO. If you have doubts, peasant, just rest assured, a world where Pax Americana no longer exists and Russia, China, EU and the US fight openly for resources and spheres of influence will TOTALLY be great.
I'm sure you recognize the Kremlin narrative in the Sy Hersh statements. It's basically identical.

https://twitter.com/zei_squirrel/status/1626878540175101953?s=20

View attachment 4570026

The propaganda is so ham fisted

I have always enjoyed the everyone else in the world is a smol child with no "agency" and can only react to the big meanie America leaning on them. If America would just go away everyone would be nice and we'd have fully automated luxury space whatever

But at the same time America will crumble like a rotten log in 2 seconds whenever the forbearance of these smol children is finally expended

Very revealing of the insecurities of various species of useful idiots and foreign trash. And amusing, of course

 

[Fait Accompli]

The propaganda is so ham fisted

I have always enjoyed the everyone else in the world is a smol child with no "agency" and can only react to the big meanie America leaning on them. If America would just go away everyone would be nice and we'd have fully automated luxury space whatever

But at the same time America will crumble like a rotten log in 2 seconds whenever the forbearance of these smol children is finally expended

Very revealing of the insecurities of various species of useful idiots and foreign trash. And amusing, of course

Like, i can understand why people dislike " Pax-America ", there are absolutely problems with this and America is no pure hearted saint. But lets be real, if Pax America falls, the world will be divided into more regional powers, with no clear laws or rules, no superpower that can restore order or threaten dictators to stop their shit. The world would divide into several parts and conflicts would inrease, thus increasing the risk of refugee streams, economic despair, death and disease.

 

[DumbDude43]

Any economics nerds here? Lots of posts about Russias economy flourishing even though they lost a big market, prices are down and large assets of theirs have been frozen

Been seeing tons of videos/texts that shows the annual Russian budget, it shows a reduce of total revenue by 35% ( which is quite extreme ) and a rise in expenditure of like 56%
Is this true? Or is it just someone analyzing and not the actual russian budget?

If true, it really shows how fucked they are

this is a decent summary of the economic situation:

it's from end of last year, so not fully up to date, but the major points still apply
tl;dr russian economy is suffering severe damages, war propagandists are hard at work trying to hide it

But lets be real, if Pax America falls, the world will be divided into more regional powers, with no clear laws or rules, no superpower that can restore order or threaten dictators to stop their shit.

if american hegemony ends, it is simply replaced with russian hegemony in western eurasia and chinese hegemony in eastern eurasia and the pacific. only thing that really changes is which state is on top and how severe the repressions are against its vassals. vatniks like to talk about "multipolar world" and portray it as some kind of liberation from oppression, but what it really means is replacing burger rule with vatnik rule. problem is just that many countries remember vatnik rule all too well, it has barely been 30 years after all, and burger rule is generally the lesser evil compared to that.

 

[Fait Accompli]

this is a decent summary of the economic situation:

it's from end of last year, so not fully up to date, but the major points still apply
tl;dr russian economy is suffering severe damages, war propagandists are hard at work trying to hide it


if american hegemony ends, it is simply replaced with russian hegemony in western eurasia and chinese hegemony in eastern eurasia and the pacific. only thing that really changes is which state is on top and how severe the repressions are against its vassals.

All the talk of that sanctions are doing nothing while Europe suffers really seemed too good to be true, after alot of well educated Russians fled and western businesses pulled out, Russia is now more than ever mostly a supplier of energy and raw resources. If prices drop and they lose markets, it just seems reasonable that their budget which is very export focused would suffer greatly

True, i think it would cause alot more harm and damage to the world on top of that tho

 

[AgendaPoster]

Only a video with the statement in article.
Let's see if the Pajeet in Chief is going to actually do this, or if it's just posturing.

https://archive.ph/hx4VN

Ukraine war: UK will be first country to give Ukraine longer-range weapons, says PM Rishi Sunak

Speaking at the Munich Security Conference, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said "we must help Ukraine to shield its cities from Russian bombs and Iranian drones". He also joined the US in calling out Russia's "sickening war crimes".

news.sky.com

 

[Ghostse]

General statement:
Remember with current battle lines, Bahkmut is more important for Russia to help secure Donetsk than it is for Ukraine. If Russia takes Bakhmut, they still have a long way to go to take anything of serious strategic importance. While Ukraine holds Bahkmut, they have a geographically advantageous location



@Snekposter

You forgot one important thing about the A-10: it was designed for the expected high-attrition battlefields of Europe, and so by airplane standards its A. cheap, B. durable, and C. easily repairable. A isn't a major concern in this since Ukraine isn't paying (at least right now they aren't), but B and C certainly are considering you could wrap bailing wire and duct tape around a damaged wing spar and the plane would still be able to do its job just fine. Christ, you could probably just have Slav armorers literally hammer bent airframe members into something resembling proper specs and it would fly just fine. And considering the lack of PGM's on both sides its far better than any fast mover for CAS so long as it can land back at the airfield in something resembling working order. I'm not saying its unkillable or invincible for anything like that, but if Ukraine could make spare parts on their own for any plane in NATO inventory, it would the A-10.

tl;dr The A-10 was designed to negate the Soviet advantage in armor, but while billed as a "tank buster" tanks were not what the A-10 was designed to wreck (especially not in the early days of WWIII). The A-10 was supposed to overfly the Soviet armored fist and unleash unspeakable hell on the mechanized infantry & logistics moving up to follow a soviet armored thrust; Russia could have the best tanks and tankers, but if they don't have enough fuel to get to Berlin the attack is stalled.
I think there was also some cope from Western planners that if there weren't infantry to support the tanks, no commander would be retarded enough to send unsupported tanks into urban war zones, something we know now for certain was incorrect.

It depends right now. The war in of itself is at an important crossroads. Russia can still win this war even though it's mud season if Russia wins Bakhmut and argues for a ceasefire it could leave the war with more territory. There is a chance that the second mobilization could go into full effect. This would really drag out a million+ men, gear and equipment and allow them to head to the front. Even if the Russian conscripts are given bad surplus WW2 rifles and old uniforms if you have a million of them that is a quality in of itself.

With the Ukrainian army they simply have to get more western equipment, do deferred maintenance on all the equipment they captured, and they will probably have an armored force double the size they had with last year's summer counter offensive.


If the winter was actually cold and the ground froze this year we would have seen some real big winter offensive from either Ukraine or Russia. Instead what we've seen is mud season has decided to last from November to April of this year assuming the rainy season is heavy as usual.

Because of the heavy mud you can only use the roads, This is why most of the heaviest fighting near Bakhmut is essentially trench combat in some places.

No side can essentially do any mass advances at the current moment. Now let's say when the ground more or less dries out around April/may then you will see the return of offensive operations. Ukraine will have western tech with a larger more trained force. The Russian will have mobilized probably a million men and we will get to see Abrams vs the T-72/T-90m tanks and we can finally settle which tank is better, Leopard 2, Abrams, or T-90m and prove the morons wrong.

It's rather miserable conditions because in wet cold weather you don't have the ability to merely just bundle up and keep warm. You have to also keep yourself dry as well. From what I've noticed both sides do have enough basic winter clothing. Russians have to deal with snow 6-8months of the year. It's not like they are adverse to cold weather. even the Ukrainian army understands the importance of cold weather gear. Some of the Carpathian mountains have snow year round on the peaks in Ukraine.


Mud season boys has been extended until March/April this year. Might give some time for both the Russians to regroup and rearm along with the Ukies.
Wagner is more or less probably running probing operations near Bakhmut now as their units are basically replacing conscripts and soldiers whose families are making a huge fuss in Russia right now.
Looking at early march weather the area near the Kherson front should be warm and dry. Highs in the 50s lows in the 30s. (Not great but paradise compared to the wet cold weather.) Meanwhile it's still going to be wet and cold near Kharkiv and Zaporhyzia.

Any economics nerds here? Lots of posts about Russias economy flourishing even though they lost a big market, prices are down and large assets of theirs have been frozen

Been seeing tons of videos/texts that shows the annual Russian budget, it shows a reduce of total revenue by 35% ( which is quite extreme ) and a rise in expenditure of like 56%
Is this true? Or is it just someone analyzing and not the actual russian budget?

If true, it really shows how fucked they are

I haven't seen anything about their budgets, but I don't speak Commie so it'd need to rely on interpretation anyway. But the official document will be a lie anyway.

The problem is the world's economy has been pants on head retarded... really since the 80s but 2008 made it go extra levels of stupid. The listed values of things doesn't reflect reality. Russia's economy could be the best its ever been, but if investment is considered toxic or undesirable, investments there will be worth nothing. On the other hand Russia's economy could a complete trashfire, but if there's money or advantage to be made pumping their assets, Russia investments will be valued to the moon.

Regarding where the rubber meets the road:
Russia's central bank, via the magic of hyperinflation, can keep the wheels on for as long as they can maintain a monopoly on violence inside their borders. Wars make all that idle capital sitting idle spring into action, so Russia's economy will take a dip as they get cut off from international markets, then bounce up as they have to now internally source everything. It will trend generally upwards until raw materials start to run thin where it will level off. If needed raw materials are cut off, stocks + salavage should keep the wheels on for a while, but then once something is needed is gone, the economy will suddenly seize and crash.

Its hard to say if that will happen with Russia though. While WWII isn't a great model for current conflicts, its the last time we got to really a war economy collapse. And it only collapsed because they were completely cut off and being invaded/bombed. in 1943, where things were just starting to turn, German war economy was as strong as ever despite sanctions and complete loss of the US imports.
The civilian economy was doing less great with rationing and food shortages.


Daily reminder that while doubled teamed like a pair of chinese finger cuffs, Nazi germany was still putting out 200 fighters every month until about a month before the of the war. War economies don't slow, they grind to a catastrophic halt.

 

[East_Clintwood]

Let's see if the Pajeet in Chief is going to actually do this, or if it's just posturing.

Wouldn't surprise me if he did it, our defence secretary Ben Wallace is incredibly hawkish on Russia and has long been championing Ukraine's cause. The real question is what systems they're talking about sending. I've seen a lot of speculation including shit up to Storm Shadow cruise missiles which seems kinda unlikely for a number of reasons.

 

[King George III]

Wet cold weather sounds like absoulte the fucking worse to fight in.
I wonder how many soliders on either sides are getting trenchfoot...

Being cold and wet fucking sucks. Being cold, wet, and unable to get warm & dry is a death sentence.

 

[Snekposter]

tl;dr The A-10 was designed to negate the Soviet advantage in armor, but while billed as a "tank buster" tanks were not what the A-10 was designed to wreck (especially not in the early days of WWIII). The A-10 was supposed to overfly the Soviet armored fist and unleash unspeakable hell on the mechanized infantry & logistics moving up to follow a soviet armored thrust; Russia could have the best tanks and tankers, but if they don't have enough fuel to get to Berlin the attack is stalled.
I think there was also some cope from Western planners that if there weren't infantry to support the tanks, no commander would be retarded enough to send unsupported tanks into urban war zones, something we know now for certain was incorrect.

Well, it certainly wasn't designed to fly into the teeth of SAM sites, but considering the issues with Shilkas it could probably do okay there, and the engines were explicitly placed high and to the rear to minimize the ability to MANPADS to get a lock. It certainly wasn't designed by idiots like many of its detractors assume.

@Ghostse As to the German economy, they didn't actually fully mobilize until 1943, still having substantial civilian production until then, and their overall food status was no less secure than that of the English. They also had the resources of pretty much all of Europe to draw from to fuel things. French iron and coal they yoinked out at French expense, Romanian oil they consistently refused to pay for, their pre-war loans for the build-up had been paid off using plundered Czech and Austrian gold reserves, a lot of production was done by unpaid slave labor... you can get by for a long time by robbing Peter to pay Paul when there's a lot more of Peter than Paul. I'm not sure Russia has the same ability to exploit lands Nazi Germany did because unlike Germany they actually are internally sourcing things as opposed to yanking it from occupied lands or allies they don't give a shit about, nor do they have the massive GULAG system the USSR did to use as a labor source. Plus I'm not sure how much spare capital there is or was considering the perennial corruption issues. Nothing sucks up capital like corruption, nor is there anything that hinders its use like corruption.

You're also forgetting the single biggest thing Nazi Germany had for it when it came to running a top-down war economy: Albert Speer. The German home front was an unmitigated clusterfuck before he was put in charge, with no less than three people given unlimited power to run things in Hitler's stead. There's been no evidence someone of his caliber exists anywhere in Russia, save perhaps a shallow grave since a man of his talents would be a threat to the ruling class.

 

[Elämällä on väliä]

Even if the Russian conscripts are given bad surplus WW2 rifles and old uniforms if you have a million of them that is a quality in of itself.

Yes, they will be a perfect target for missiles. Large, vulnerable targets.

Is this true?

Yes. For some time (even years) they will go on reserves, credits and so one whit each iteriation more risky and stupid (war bonds, compulsolary war bonds, rationing some items, scrapping some civilian shit for resources, sending compulsolary workers to industry and so one) but they on path to anihilate most of economy.

Lets say :

1/ in january you have in january income of $2000, costs on $1250 and reserves worth $10000.
2/ in february you have income of $1700, costs of $1450, reserves of $10750.
3/ in march you have income of $1600, costs of $1550, reserves of $11000
4/ in april you have income of $1500, costs of $1650, reserves of $10900.

As you see problems was first observed in february, but reserves started to go down in april, but slighty. And if you are creative you can just compare reserves in february and april and STILL have incrase of them. But thing are going in wrong direction.

And in macroeconomics they are another problems than in micro. In micro, with money of possibility to take a credit you can just buy whatever you want. In macro if you run out of something you can hit the wall if that thing will not be possible to buy (and this is easily to happen, e.g. hardware that is crucial for some industry but only imported).

@Ghostse and we must remember that some production cannot be halted. Crude oil and natgas for example: it is impossible to shut down mines in that industry without destruction of infrastructure.

And also, nazi Germoney was creative to the extreme in terms of currency and money. In fact even before war they have several different currencies in use (! yes, most of them without possibility of export or exchenge) all called 'reichsmark'.

 

[Fait Accompli]

Yes, they will be a perfect target for missiles. Large, vulnerable targets.

Yes. For some time (even years) they will go on reserves, credits and so one whit each iteriation more risky and stupid (war bonds, compulsolary war bonds, rationing some items, scrapping some civilian shit for resources, sending compulsolary workers to industry and so one) but they on path to anihilate most of economy.

Lets say :

1/ in january you have in january income of $2000, costs on $1250 and reserves worth $10000.
2/ in february you have income of $1700, costs of $1450, reserves of $10750.
3/ in march you have income of $1600, costs of $1550, reserves of $11000
4/ in april you have income of $1500, costs of $1650, reserves of $10900.

As you see problems was first observed in february, but reserves started to go down in april, but slighty. And if you are creative you can just compare reserves in february and april and STILL have incrase of them. But thing are going in wrong direction.

And in macroeconomics they are another problems than in micro. In micro, with money of possibility to take a credit you can just buy whatever you want. In macro if you run out of something you can hit the wall if that thing will not be possible to buy (and this is easily to happen, e.g. hardware that is crucial for some industry but only imported).

@Ghostse and we must remember that some production cannot be halted. Crude oil and natgas for example: it is impossible to shut down mines in that industry without destruction of infrastructure.

And also, nazi Germoney was creative to the extreme in terms of currency and money. In fact even before war they have several different currencies in use (! yes, most of them without possibility of export or exchenge) all called 'reichsmark'.

Yeah, sounds reasonable. Alot of people gave facts and numbers that pointed to that Russias economy was doing quite well ( even though losing a ton of equipment in Ukraine, having to administer and rebuild, losing a large market, destroyed infrastructure, a lot of well educated people fleeing, etc etc ) it didnt seem like sanctions and events were having an effect, i actually began doubting. But i guess we see the effects first now, compounding and delayed.

 

[Replacement Account]

You're also forgetting the single biggest thing Nazi Germany had for it when it came to running a top-down war economy: Albert Speer. The German home front was an unmitigated clusterfuck before he was put in charge, with no less than three people given unlimited power to run things in Hitler's stead. There's been no evidence someone of his caliber exists anywhere in Russia, save perhaps a shallow grave since a man of his talents would be a threat to the ruling class.

I'd hardly call it the same thing or the same caliber, but IIRC people tend to think that the lady in charge of the russian central bank has done as well as she can done (with what she has considering sanctions and all that) in order to stop the russian economy from burning to the ground then falling into the sea but I've not looked into things recently.

She might have tried to resign at one point actually, but I don't remember.

But yeah, even if you did have some super production minister or something their efforts would be eaten away to some extent by corruption and then they would 'fall out of a window' or 'die from overdosing on frog venom during a shamanic ritual' or whatever it is the russian glowies want to come up with this time.

 

[AgendaPoster]

There are rumors going around an alleged Chinese "peace plan":

(A)
Such a plan, if it really exists, would be interesting just as to see the reaction from Russia and Ukraine.
If territorial integrity is indeed China's goal, it's inevitable that it would be coupled with full demilitarization of Crimea and Donbass, autonomy, minority rights for Russians and basically anything needed to stop Ukraine from bullying those areas.
Yet Russia has kinda sunk its teeth in them, and it's nearly impossible to see it let go, especially of Crimea.
China is a large player here. If it truly got pissed with this destabilization and wants its stability back, it might push Russia around a bit to make some concessions, and the West might do the same with Ukraine.
PS: needless to say that Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus etc. would have to sign some sort of stuff that they will never join NATO and EU, and NATO and EU would have to acknowledge that Russia is too spergy and paranoid without a buffer area. In a way, it would be another iron curtain.
Still very hard to see any of this accepted and discussed diplomatically in such a hostile and autistic conflict/environment.

 

[Ghostse]

Well, it certainly wasn't designed to fly into the teeth of SAM sites, but considering the issues with Shilkas it could probably do okay there, and the engines were explicitly placed high and to the rear to minimize the ability to MANPADS to get a lock. It certainly wasn't designed by idiots like many of its detractors assume.

Oh I'm not saying the A-10 is terrible, its a beast of a plane and the F-35 isn't even in the same league when it comes to a CAS role; I want to punch every GenDyn shill trying to pitch that shit.

I'm saying that currently in Ukraine, CAS is a fools game for either side.

The Russian airforce has been garbage since the 60s, and it was expected that NATO would have air supremacy if it could keep Russian armor from overrunning the airfields.
In the 80s and 90s, an A-10 squadron was going to take SAMs, and it was going to take flak, but in Fulda gap scenario you'd be sending your initial response of A-10s with GAU-8 and cluster bombs around the main action to fuck up the Soviet Rear. Sure they'd get shot up, but the plane was tough enough to take it, do the mission, and get home.
After that initial thrust, NATO warplanes were expected to achieve air superiority if not supremacy as WARPACT took unsustainable air losses, and with no WARPACT fighters you could use the A-10 for traditional CAS until Ivan tapped out.

In modern times, the A-10 can still do that mission, but SAMs have gone from 20 km ranges to 90km+. At 420mph you can't just tank the first strike and be out of range by the time they launch the second anymore. Russian-occupied ukraine is rotten with S-300s, backed up by untouchable S400s,

20 or even 10 years go, it'd have been a different story. In addition to lower SAM tech levels, you'd have had the possibility of new A-10s.
A-10 production lines have been shuttered and parts have been idle.

@Ghostse As to the German economy, they didn't actually fully mobilize until 1943, still having substantial civilian production until then, and their overall food status was no less secure than that of the English. They also had the resources of pretty much all of Europe to draw from to fuel things. French iron and coal they yoinked out at French expense, Romanian oil they consistently refused to pay for, their pre-war loans for the build-up had been paid off using plundered Czech and Austrian gold reserves, a lot of production was done by unpaid slave labor... you can get by for a long time by robbing Peter to pay Paul when there's a lot more of Peter than Paul. I'm not sure Russia has the same ability to exploit lands Nazi Germany did because unlike Germany they actually are internally sourcing things as opposed to yanking it from occupied lands or allies they don't give a shit about, nor do they have the massive GULAG system the USSR did to use as a labor source. Plus I'm not sure how much spare capital there is or was considering the perennial corruption issues. Nothing sucks up capital like corruption, nor is there anything that hinders its use like corruption.

You're also forgetting the single biggest thing Nazi Germany had for it when it came to running a top-down war economy: Albert Speer. The German home front was an unmitigated clusterfuck before he was put in charge, with no less than three people given unlimited power to run things in Hitler's stead. There's been no evidence someone of his caliber exists anywhere in Russia, save perhaps a shallow grave since a man of his talents would be a threat to the ruling class.

Oh I admit I'm over simplifying, but I'm saying Russia is Germany in 41 or 42 - they have not been cut off from all international markets yet even if they're being throttled heavily. Russia has shit ton of resources, and small neighbors to bully for more.

@Ghostse and we must remember that some production cannot be halted. Crude oil and natgas for example: it is impossible to shut down mines in that industry without destruction of infrastructure.

And also, nazi Germoney was creative to the extreme in terms of currency and money. In fact even before war they have several different currencies in use (! yes, most of them without possibility of export or exchenge) all called 'reichsmark'.

Fair, but China has an infinite thirst for those items and is currently happy to let the US and Russia fight while it benefits.

Russia is definitely pissing their pants in the snow w/r/t the economy, but they can keep pissing for a long, long time before they need to pay the piper.

 

[mindlessobserver]

There are rumors going around an alleged Chinese "peace plan":
View attachment 4572916
(A)
Such a plan, if it really exists, would be interesting just as to see the reaction from Russia and Ukraine.
If territorial integrity is indeed China's goal, it's inevitable that it would be coupled with full demilitarization of Crimea and Donbass, autonomy, minority rights for Russians and basically anything needed to stop Ukraine from bullying those areas.
Yet Russia has kinda sunk its teeth in them, and it's nearly impossible to see it let go, especially of Crimea.
China is a large player here. If it truly got pissed with this destabilization and wants its stability back, it might push Russia around a bit to make some concessions, and the West might do the same with Ukraine.
PS: needless to say that Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus etc. would have to sign some sort of stuff that they will never join NATO and EU, and NATO and EU would have to acknowledge that Russia is too spergy and paranoid without a buffer area. In a way, it would be another iron curtain.
Still very hard to see any of this accepted and discussed diplomatically in such a hostile and autistic conflict/environment.

All this talk about NATO expansion, territorial integrity, demilitarization and so on would have been relevant before a general war started. The problem with every peace proposal since the war started is that they are proposals that would have been relevant had the war been an impending threat rather then an actual reality. With both sides at each others throats now, there is little incentive for compromise. Especially since both sides think they can achieve their maximalist objectives if they just stay the course and keep fighting. I don't think there is a prayer of any significant peace talks until at least 2024.

 

[LeChampion1992]

All the talk of that sanctions are doing nothing while Europe suffers really seemed too good to be true, after alot of well educated Russians fled and western businesses pulled out, Russia is now more than ever mostly a supplier of energy and raw resources. If prices drop and they lose markets, it just seems reasonable that their budget which is very export focused would suffer greatly

True, i think it would cause alot more harm and damage to the world on top of that tho

The Russian federation and their CSTO members have a unified trade deal so even if Russia turns into a North Korea 2.0 they are an export producing nation and more or less self reliant when it comes to food, fuel, and natural resources.
You won't see Russian citizens starving anytime soon but you will see something similar to the 80s in terms of certain goods are going to have to be smuggled in essentially into Russia and vice versa.

Stolen from the vatnik thread. This zei squirrel person was a hardcore progressive, socialist account for years, dunking non stop on chuds and nazis, but since the war started things have... changed, and the account switched to Russian imperialism enjoying.
Simply read what the "Pulitzer, unbiased" Sy Hersh journalist is saying, the dude responsible for the Nord Stream article.
Let's be clear, the US might have done it, but I want hard proof, or I'll laugh you off the room.
Not ashamed to say I fucking hate these pathetic "socialist" losers that thrive only on anti-Western politics and pretend to be progressives. Only US does evil things, China, Russia, everyone else is smol country righteously fighting against the US globalists for a totally cozy multipolar NWO. If you have doubts, peasant, just rest assured, a world where Pax Americana no longer exists and Russia, China, EU and the US fight openly for resources and spheres of influence will TOTALLY be great.
I'm sure you recognize the Kremlin narrative in the Sy Hersh statements. It's basically identical.

https://twitter.com/zei_squirrel/status/1626878540175101953?s=20

View attachment 4570026

Sy hersh is probably a Russian media friend but he might be telling the truth about The Nordstream pipeline. I mean we're talking about the US government here would you really put it past the American government to use Special operations soldiers to blow up a Pipeline illegally so they can help an ally gain a political advantage. Gotta use the noggin cap here. I'll give the Vatnik types a break for once. They like a broken clock might be right here.
Anyone who said this is a clean war is fooling themselves.

 

[mindlessobserver]

I would believe the USA destroyed the Nordstream pipeline. It makes way more sense that America destroyed it rather then Russia. Russia's entire leverage over Germany relied on them being able to maintain the gas flow. Russia blowing up the pipeline would make no sense as it would be like cutting off their nose to spite the face.

Conversely, the USA had every incentive to destroy Nordstream. The US had been bitching about Germanies cozy relationship with Russia for years prior to Trump getting up in front of the UN and calling the Germans retards for relying on Russia for Gas. Destroying Nord Stream accomplished two things. It cut the cord between the EU and Russia, and also forced them into a position where they had to pick a side. Do they call out the Americans for doing it, or do they fall in line.

They fell in line.

 

[draggs]

Oh I'm not saying the A-10 is terrible, its a beast of a plane and the F-35 isn't even in the same league when it comes to a CAS role; I want to punch every GenDyn shill trying to pitch that shit.

I'm saying that currently in Ukraine, CAS is a fools game for either side.

The Russian airforce has been garbage since the 60s, and it was expected that NATO would have air supremacy if it could keep Russian armor from overrunning the airfields.
In the 80s and 90s, an A-10 squadron was going to take SAMs, and it was going to take flak, but in Fulda gap scenario you'd be sending your initial response of A-10s with GAU-8 and cluster bombs around the main action to fuck up the Soviet Rear. Sure they'd get shot up, but the plane was tough enough to take it, do the mission, and get home.
After that initial thrust, NATO warplanes were expected to achieve air superiority if not supremacy as WARPACT took unsustainable air losses, and with no WARPACT fighters you could use the A-10 for traditional CAS until Ivan tapped out.

In modern times, the A-10 can still do that mission, but SAMs have gone from 20 km ranges to 90km+. At 420mph you can't just tank the first strike and be out of range by the time they launch the second anymore. Russian-occupied ukraine is rotten with S-300s, backed up by untouchable S400s,

20 or even 10 years go, it'd have been a different story. In addition to lower SAM tech levels, you'd have had the possibility of new A-10s.
A-10 production lines have been shuttered and parts have been idle.

I strongly doubt the alleged capabilities of modern anti-air missile batteries, at least if they aren't backed up by the level of situational awareness and responsiveness other assets give militaries like America's or Israel's. The S- series has not exactly made the most of the chances provided to show its worth in Syria and Ukraine. Israel routinely did whatever it wanted in Syrian airspace until Russia threw a big enough tantrum that the IAF decided to fly over Lebanese airspace and shoot missiles from there instead. Which they still blow up what they want to blow up around Damascus with. Sure, that's using F-35s, the worst plane ever made that Israel somehow manages to make useful, but Russian anti-air systems used by both sides in Ukraine have been... kinda meh at best. Ukrainian air force is still flying ground-attack sorties in 1970s and 1980s Su- models modernized up to maybe early 1990s levels. Russian planes, most of which are at the same level or a little better of modernization, are still carrying out missions successfully as well. The Russians lose a couple planes a week, maybe a couple more some weeks, maybe only one or two or none, big fucking deal. That's not gonna knock the Russian air force for a loop any time soon, or ever

Maybe the technology is amazing, but the supporting infrastructure (communications and shit) is ass, or the doctrine is ass, or the training is ass, or the soldiers are just plain ass because they're drunken slavniggers, but muh S-over 9000s sure aren't the overpowering weapon they were made out to be. Fly low and fast and you have a good chance of making it home, old rules against AA radar still seem to apply. Neither side has the stuff to try the American way, go after the launchers as hard as you can, so they try to not get hit by them instead and have been doing a decent job of it

Used judiciously I think the A-10 could deliver good service in the hands of Samuyil Hydenskyy