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

[otherdispair]

Leave it to the Europeans to larp the Azamanga Daioh gag with the three dumbest girls in the class adding their test scores together to beat the smartest girl in class.

Sure when you break US aid down by state so you can have a state by state comparison.
Every country is on a continent but North America is on the US

1. Poland and Lithuania are trying to get approval from the EU to draft Ukrainian aged men back to Ukraine and Macron keeps saying, "I am going to send troops, I am going to do it, I am going to do it." Makes it seem the KIA and casualties have to be really bad than what Wikipedia estimated.
2. General of Russia states conflict ends in 2025 and Late January Putin stated 617,000 troops are involved in the conflict and that they don't need more than that.
3. We gave the same kind of funding we did before in weapons for the Spring counteroffensive. Ukraine was supposed to capture three cities, four towns and all villages in between. They didn't even get close just 6km of their planned 190km after six months of action. Wouldn't the same funding, same amount of weapons for another Ukrainian counteroffensive give the same results?

Is the mind set of this thread at the we know Ukraine will lose we just want them to raise as much hell as possible for Russia or users here actually see the light at the end of the tunnel for Ukraine's victory and if so can you explain why given the 3 circumstances I have stated?

1. The russians have also recruited a lot more man than even the ukies own claimed number of russian casualties .What is happening is that both sides armies are growing in numbers as the war shifts into trench warfare from the Dnieper to the border. Manning those trench lines takes a lot off men. You also need to keep reserves, rotate troops, do extra training, man the supply system ect. This is where Ukraine's smaller population is a problem but don't confuse keeping up with the need to keep expending the army with the army getting obliterated.
2. "Russia said" the russian general staff also thought that the initial invasion would take two weeks before it would be occupation duties. That bit of gloating aside. The russian MOD seems to be basing this off of their kill claims and hence how much more of the Ukrainian army they have to degrade it before they can just rush on Kiev again. Kill claims are always higher, in the case of russian kill claims to a ridiculous extent. Remember that the russian MOD has claimed it destroyed the ukie ariforce on the first day of the war and has claimed enough planes shot down (ukie onws for a change) to have shot down the ukie airforce twice over by now. So the russian MOD know that this is bullshit because they know their kill claims are bullshit.
And Putins 617,000 number is about trice the original invasion effort so if russia has to triple it's involved personnel so does Ukraine and now you can start to see why 1. isn't the proof of disastrous Ukrainian losses you think it is.
3. We gave a lot off funding and weapons but different systems for different goals. The idea in 2023 was to take to the offensive and get to the black sea/sea of azov. But to do so with in part NATO donated vehicles following NATO doctrine. Just without the key part of NATO doctrine, air superiority and massive fires. So it bogged down after 6km after a week. The russians still haven't driven the ukies out of most of the small amout of land the ukies took and not for a lack of trying.
That beign said. There isn't any indication that there are plans for a 2024 offencive on Ukraines part. But instead to dig in and let russia keep sending men over no ones land.
How do the Ukrainians/the west plan to win? By letting russia lose. How so russia isn't a magical place it has a economy like any other country and iff you put enough stress on it things will start to break.
That being said and not being a ukie. I don't need them to win, I need russia to lose enough that can't pull off an other nvasion for a decade or two. Not don't want too or to costly but can't as in lost so many men and so much stuff they can't muster an new invasion force. That is the west win condition, let russia fuck it's self over so hard in this war that they become not just a global non factor but a regional one as well.

 

[DumbDude43]

Is the mind set of this thread at the we know Ukraine will lose we just want them to raise as much hell as possible for Russia or users here actually see the light at the end of the tunnel for Ukraine's victory and if so can you explain why given the 3 circumstances I have stated?

i want ukraine to win but i don't expect it to happen

 

[jalopy]

Been thinking about the R&D allocations given to the US Airforce in the Ukraine aid bill. $406,834,000 worth of R&D allocation.
Perhaps this is retarded but would a glide bomb deployed mine clearing line charge make sense if Ukraine ever went on the offensive again? With F16 available several could be deployed simultaneously along a narrow area. In my head it would only need to be a tube with a deployable parachute attached to the line charge that would pop out the back. Throw on a glide/guidance kit and you've bodged something together.

---

I had the misfortune of trying to watch Shapiro interviewing American Presidential candidate Robert Kennedy Jr.
Kennedy appears to know nothing of military matters. To quote ""not only did we put missiles in Romania and Poland, which are Aegis systems which, are, you know, which are Tomahawk missiles which are nuclear ready, which are Lockheed's missiles, 12 minutes from the Kremlin". Not everything is the Cuban Missile Crisis and read literally anything about missile systems.

 

[Mikoyan]

Been thinking about the R&D allocations given to the US Airforce in the Ukraine aid bill. $406,834,000 worth of R&D allocation.
Perhaps this is retarded but would a glide bomb deployed mine clearing line charge make sense if Ukraine ever went on the offensive again? With F16 available several could be deployed simultaneously along a narrow area. In my head it would only need to be a tube with a deployable parachute attached to the line charge that would pop out the back. Throw on a glide/guidance kit and you've bodged something together.

---

I had the misfortune of trying to watch Shapiro interviewing American Presidential candidate Robert Kennedy Jr.
Kennedy appears to know nothing of military matters. To quote ""not only did we put missiles in Romania and Poland, which are Aegis systems which, are, you know, which are Tomahawk missiles which are nuclear ready, which are Lockheed's missiles, 12 minutes from the Kremlin". Not everything is the Cuban Missile Crisis and read literally anything about missile systems.

1: Not really. Shit's heavy, is more or less why not. Also don't put your fighters at low level over the FEBA if you can help it.
2: That is a lot of conflation and inaccurary for one sentence.

 

[The Morning Visitor]

i want ukraine to win but i don't expect it to happen

It's hard to define a "win". I definitely think this invasion was a net loss for Russia, but I'm having a hard time seeing Ukraine get Crimea back.

Potential outcomes:

1. Putin dies or is assassinated, new leader pulls the troops home since his ass isn't on the line for sending them in the first place. This is what a lot of people were hoping for when Prigozhin was doing his march last summer; Uncle Prig may have been a monster but he would have had no financial or political incentive to keep the war going.
2. Russia recruits enough meat to outnumber Ukrainian bullets and push through Ukrainian defenses. They've been trying to do this for the past 2 years and have failed spectacularly.
3. NATO/US forces get personally involved, will kick Russian ass but risk nuclear escalation.
4. Ukraine runs out of manpower and/or foreign aid and negotiates immediate NATO membership if they concede the territory Russia currently occupies (ending the war, but not on the best of terms).

I try not to be a doomer, but it seems like every day #4 becomes more likely.

 

[Ghostse]

Perhaps this is retarded but would a glide bomb deployed mine clearing line charge make sense if Ukraine ever went on the offensive again?

ITs not retarded but its nearly unfeasible at current. explosive rope is heavy, and at terminal velcolity there are a lot of physics in play that make deploying a long tail of explosives not a great idea.

I think you'd be better off making a Daisy Cutter missile or glide bomb, but my mine-fu is weak and I can't remember if modern Russian mines have anti-shock features (or if they'd matter at the level of a FAB)

 

[OG Swolemaster]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/01/europe/us-russia-ukraine-chemical-weapons-intl-hnk/index.html

Now that POCCNN has been confirmed to have deployed chemical weapons in Ukraine it is only fair that Ukraine launches CBRN attacks of its own.

It sounds like its about time to put those NATO biolabs to good use, and deploy the ethnovirus that will EXTERMINATE THE ORCS.

 

[Fatsuit Shinji]

Problem with Russian mines isn't the mines themselves but how Russian stored, transport, (mis)handled and etc. them. So even if they had anti-shock features nobody knows it still works, inert to it's hair triggered to exploded if a gnat farts within a klick of it.

Edit: FFS Ukraine haves the support it haves partly due to being on the moral high horse by adhering to moral standards. Them using chemical and biological weapons is the worst thing to do. Secondly the response to those weapons is nukes. As nukes are a known quality and quantity unlike the unpredictable biological and chemical weapons. Any NBC response is best left to Ukraine's nuclear power allies i.e. United States, England and France.

 

[OG Swolemaster]

It is worth noting that due to the widespread prevalence of HIV and dedovshchina in the Russian army(and Russians in general) a bioweapon would be disproportionately effective compared to other WMDs.

 

[DumbDude43]

bioweapons are a meme
its nice source material for horror movies but in practice i really dont see a way to make good use of it, especially not against a country right next to your own
whatever plague you could put into russia, it's gonna spread into ukraine and europe eventually and just ruin shit for everyone
and of course it would mostly just fuck up random innocent civilians while government and military are the first to deploy protection and countermeasures

 

[Jewthulhu]

it is only fair that Ukraine launches CBRN attacks of its own.

It's politically best for Ukraine to not do something that could jeopardize its relationship with the west.

As for the article itself, Russia used chloropicrin, a choking agent. There's no evidence as of yet of them using something deadlier like sarin. It's still a warcrime, but among Russia's long list of warcrimes, it's not the biggest one IMO.

Secondly the response to those weapons is nukes.

It's a response, not the response.

 

[Fanatical Pragmatist]

It's hard to define a "win". I definitely think this invasion was a net loss for Russia, but I'm having a hard time seeing Ukraine get Crimea back.

4. Ukraine runs out of manpower and/or foreign aid and negotiates immediate NATO membership if they concede the territory Russia currently occupies (ending the war, but not on the best of terms).

Even in Scenario 4, Russia now has to deal with insurgencies and guerilla wars in its newly conquered territories.

Granted, the west then has to deal with the likely future Russian attempt to go for the Baltics or the Suwalki Gap.

Is the mind set of this thread at the we know Ukraine will lose we just want them to raise as much hell as possible for Russia or users here actually see the light at the end of the tunnel for Ukraine's victory and if so can you explain why given the 3 circumstances I have stated?

I'm of the mindset that Ukraine has already won its war for survival, and no amount of Russian conscript spam waves are going to breach Dnipro, much less Kiev or Odessa, at this point in the war.
Russia has invaded a country, and in that invasion undeniably failed to kill, capture or force the capitulation of the invadee's leadership and all repeated offensives have only resulted in slow and grinding captures of peripheral territory while losing a disproportionately larger amount of men and material.

However, by that token Ukraine has also sustained long-term damages and the scars of this war, and has lost a massively disproportionate amount of infrastructure and civilian casualties. It's hard to say Ukraine has won anything beyond its survival and its existence.

At the geopolitical level, Russia can still pull a lose strategic 'win' in that they can still walk out of this war with *some* gains, (albeit war-torn, depopulated and rife with minefields and insurgents) but more importantly basically prove that invading your neighbors to conquer and annex their territory is en vogue again and the west is just going to sit back, shit their pants and do nothing.
Russia is right now fighting for 1) prove NATO/US "collective defense"/"collective deterrence" is borderline worthless 2) a chance to lick its wounds, regroup, rebuild, resupply, figure out what the fuck went wrong the first time, and come back harder and heavier next time

 

[The Morning Visitor]

Even in Scenario 4, Russia now has to deal with insurgencies and guerilla wars in its newly conquered territories.

Which is part of why I say that Russia has a "net loss". They cannot manage the territory they conquered unless they clear it out and colonize it (they're already doing the first half by forcibly enlisting DPR and LPR men and doing general warcrimey, rapey, white-phosphorusy stuff). Hell, they have commie insurgents at home derailing their trains.

Granted, the west then has to deal with the likely future Russian attempt to go for the Baltics or the Suwalki Gap.

As long as NATO is backed by the US, they won't do it. Putin's already been offered offramps from Ukraine, and he's rejected them because it means publicly admitting his 3-day "Special Military Operation" was a mistake, but he's not going to start a hot war with the West. Assuming it doesn't end in nuclear fire because of Mutually Assured Destruction, Russia would implode. Again. For the third time.

 

[Bunny Wigglesworth]

Ah yes allies. I remember those Ukranian soldiers patrolling Iraq with me.

I remember quite a few Georgians. That worked out well for their country. Thoughts & prayers.

I went into the other Ukraine war thread and asked them why they support Russia in this particular conflict.

Almost every single response I got was retarded to a shocking degree. Those people live in a complete fantasy land.
One guy openly admitted he was dumb and didn't understand the conflict at all.

I was honestly expecting paragraphs of explanations, referencing historical events and leaders. Nope, just some of the dumbest shit I've ever heard, completely detached from reality.

You see, MIC Shill, it all started over a millenia ago with Yaroslav the Wise...bear with me, this will take 1 minute, 2 minutes at most...

Macron doesn't rule out sending troops to Ukraine if Russians break through line of contact​

Source: European Pravda; Macron in an interview with The Economist

Details: Macron replied affirmatively that he still stands by his words regarding the possibility of deploying allies' troops in Ukraine.

Quote from Macron: "I’m not ruling anything out, because we are facing someone who is not ruling anything out. We have undoubtedly been too hesitant by defining the limits of our action to someone who no longer has any and who is the aggressor!"

He insists that withholding from the adversary a full understanding of what actions can or should not be expected is also a deterrence tool.

"Otherwise we weaken ourselves, which is the framework within which we have been operating until now. In fact, many countries said that in the weeks that followed that they understood our approach, that they agreed with our position and that this position was a good thing," added the French president.

Macron noted that the French military has recently intervened in Africa, to fight terrorism at the request of other sovereign states.

Quote from Macron: "If the Russians were to break through the front lines, if there were a Ukrainian request—which is not the case today—we would legitimately have to ask ourselves this question. So I think to rule it out a priori is not to learn the lessons of the past two years."

He added that the aggressive reaction from Moscow to his initial statements proved that they had the desired effect.

Quote from Macron: "I have a clear strategic objective: Russia cannot win in Ukraine. If Russia wins in Ukraine, there will be no security in Europe. Who can pretend that Russia will stop there? What security will there be for the other neighbouring countries, Moldova, Romania, Poland, Lithuania and the others?

And behind that, what credibility for Europeans who would have spent billions, said that the survival of the continent was at stake and not have given themselves the means to stop Russia? So yes, we mustn’t rule anything out because our objective is that Russia must never be able to win in Ukraine."

He also explained he was talking about a number of threats, starting with direct military ones, when he said Europe "can fall apart" in a recent speech.

Talk is cheap.

 

[Agamemnon Busmalis]

It is worth noting that due to the widespread prevalence of HIV and dedovshchina in the Russian army(and Russians in general) a bioweapon would be disproportionately effective compared to other WMDs.

Problem is plague doesn't care which side it kills. Russia's male life expectancy is ranked 149th in the world, on par with Eritrea.

Ukraine isn't much better but it's understandable given how long they suffered under Russia. And they don't LARP as the based and trad Third Rome with a US-peer military.

 

[Ghostse]

You forget there are two parts to a bioweapon.

First, vaccines. You made the weapon so you have them, they don't. So you innoculate your troops so they are fine while the enemy is bleeding from their eyes shitting out their kidneys.

Second, if the bio weapon is to be lethal it meant to kill, and kill quickly. The plague can't spread if there's no one to spread it.

Additionally, Bioweapons were much more viable as a WMD in the 1950s or even the 70s than today. They also aren't super great as a "first strike" weapon, and their utility as a second strike "Fuck you" is greatly reduced now.

tl;dr Before it was't all that hard to to airports/ports/borders, much harder with the interconnection of globohomo. And ideally if they were deployed there was a long escalation period before - your side and the enemy side would have already cut off all trade & transit between each other, meaning there was much less chance of the plague coming back at you.
So you would have MegaPox launchers in your back pocket and if you came out of the nuclear exchange the worse for the wear people really over estimate how much nukes would actually degrade fighting capability, especially in the first 12 months of a conflict (will to fight is another story) the would either work as a threat so you have something to negotiate with, or if you're going to keep going slugging it out, deploy the agent and now the enemy has to deal with a death plague fucking up their economy/production while you try to regroup.

In general though in usual geopolitical fashion, you don't run a Bioweapon program to use it. You run the program so you know what the other guy is probably working on so you know how to counter it.

 

[Astro Galactic Megalul]

I wish there were a higher resolution of this photo. Some details to pick out like:
View attachment 5952594 whitest russian
View attachment 5952595 recrooter (who knows, but is wearing VDV beret so i think it's likely)

Nah, VDV retards are infamous for their love of larping, probably the only army branch to annually dress up and be a nuisance to everyone. Even if they only did 2 (or later 1) year of service, and are now out of shape and remember fuck all from their training. Public fountains hate VDV Day.
Some don't limit themselves to once a year, as you can see.

 

[Gender: Xenomorph]

Nah, is all good, they used donkeys to drag it over here.

View attachment 5952508

Ooga booga

View attachment 5952518

I like how the tank is all beat down and covered in ash, but the USA flag is bright and clean, almost as if it was freshly painted on...

 

[Fuck It We'll Do It Live]

Cameron: Kyiv has right to use UK weapons for strikes in Russia

This private information is unavailable to guests due to policies enforced by third-parties.

The Foreign Secretary visited Ukraine to reiterate the UK's unequivocal support for the Ukrainian people.

This private information is unavailable to guests due to policies enforced by third-parties.

Russia’s Gazprom posts first annual loss in 20 years as sales to Europe collapse

Russia’s gas business will never recover from the war in Ukraine
Hopes of a Chinese rescue look increasingly vain

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Either stop going to the other thread to "just ask questions" and then go back here to farm backpats and updoots, or stop complaining when others do it to you. Either both threads keep jerking off to how smart their "hahaha lookie here, I asked question, and they didznt agree with me, haha other thrad so stooooopid" and stop complaining about it, or you don't jerk your friend when he comes in here for a congratulatory handjob.

I'm sending this message to both threads.