No Ukraine offensive without more weapons – Zelensky

[pellinore]

42 minutes ago, Ell said:

If the Ukrain had surrendered on the first day of the Russian invasion, how many people would have been killed, how many villages and cities would have been turned into rubble, how many people would have become fugitives?

All of them. They would have lost their country, and many their lives, many more their homes. If China threatened the US, would the best advice be for the US to just give it to them, to save bother?

[odas]

2 hours ago, Ell said:

If the Ukrain had surrendered on the first day of the Russian invasion, how many people would have been killed, how many villages and cities would have been turned into rubble, how many people would have become fugitives?

?????? You serious? Ok. We will invade your country today. Please surrender immidiately. I am sure your landsmen will appriciate our conquest.

[spartan max2]

2 hours ago, Ell said:

If the Ukrain had surrendered on the first day of the Russian invasion, how many people would have been killed, how many villages and cities would have been turned into rubble, how many people would have become fugitives?

If Putin didn't invade how many Ukrainians and young Russia's would be dead right now?

Putin is responsible for every death in this war 

[spartan max2]

6 hours ago, pellinore said:

Why not? Would you fancy spending a few days on the frontline in Ukraine? It irritates me that armchair warriors in the West cry over spending the equivalent of a few Big Macs a month providing aid to them, when the alternative is having Russia rewarded for its aggression, encouraging other terrorist countries, and then the US really will have to do something. 

Exactly. 

People in the US complaining about us funding Ukraine are victims of politics and propaganda. It's as simple as that.

Our Ukraine funding is not a significant chunk of our budget. Last I checked I don't think it was even a percent. 

Edited March 27, 2023 by spartan max2

[kartikg]

12 hours ago, Occult1 said:

This war is getting too expensive for the West. Time to accept that Ukraine will probably lose eastern Ukraine.

Mostly rampant corruption all along the supply chain. Unconfirmed reports that weapons are being smuggled to far reaches of Africa. 

[jmccr8]

1 hour ago, kartikg said:

Mostly rampant corruption all along the supply chain. Unconfirmed reports that weapons are being smuggled to far reaches of Africa. 

Link please

[+Nuclear Wessel]

2 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

Exactly. 

People in the US complaining about us funding Ukraine are victims of politics and propaganda. It's as simple as that.

Our Ukraine funding is not a significant chunk of our budget. Last I checked I don't think it was even a percent. 

The war in Aghanistan cost nearly $110bn/yr, but I doubt most of the people who are complaining about the funds being sent to Ukraine complained about those funds that were spent on Afghanistan.

The War In Afghanistan Cost America $300 Million Per Day For 20 Years, With Big Bills Yet To Come (forbes.com)

[kartikg]

2 hours ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

The war in Aghanistan cost nearly $110bn/yr, but I doubt most of the people who are complaining about the funds being sent to Ukraine complained about those funds that were spent on Afghanistan.

The War In Afghanistan Cost America $300 Million Per Day For 20 Years, With Big Bills Yet To Come (forbes.com)

And nothing much changed in Afghanistan, the radicals are back in power. 

[jmccr8]

9 minutes ago, kartikg said:

And nothing much changed in Afghanistan, the radicals are back in power. 

Hi Kartikg

There is a significant difference in attitudes between the Ukrainians that are fighting for their freedom after have been under a communist regime that don’t want to live like that and the Afghanistan people who live in fear of their next door neighbour. They wouldn’t fight for their freedom when the west pulled out even though they were trained and given weapons to take care of themselves 

[Tatetopa]

7 hours ago, pellinore said:

If China threatened the US, would the best advice be for the US to just give it to them, to save bother?

Not China.  For the MAGA crowd, it will be Russia.  They admire authoritarian rulers with dictatorial powers.  MAGA folks will give up America and freedom  for a return to comfortable misogyny , racism, and suppression of  anybody different.  If Ukraine actually wins, their belief in the superiority of authoritarian rule gets put into question.

[Occult1]

9 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Not China.  For the MAGA crowd, it will be Russia.  They admire authoritarian rulers with dictatorial powers.  MAGA folks will give up America and freedom  for a return to comfortable misogyny , racism, and suppression of  anybody different.  If Ukraine actually wins, their belief in the superiority of authoritarian rule gets put into question.

The 'MAGA crowd' tends to be non-interventionist in foreign conflicts and opposed to globalism.

They understand that there is no scenario in which Ukraine can 'win' against Russia (a world power with a stockpile of approximately 4,477 nuclear warheads and a huge army).

At least not 'win' in the terms as defined by the U.S and Zelensky.

Edited March 27, 2023 by Occult1

[Unusual Tournament]

57 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Not China.  For the MAGA crowd, it will be Russia.  They admire authoritarian rulers with dictatorial powers.  MAGA folks will give up America and freedom  for a return to comfortable misogyny , racism, and suppression of  anybody different.  If Ukraine actually wins, their belief in the superiority of authoritarian rule gets put into question.

You are correct about the MAGA crowd. They are pro authoritarian because they can limit certain civil rights the main stream has won. But wrong about Ukraine. Ukraine was never going to win. Ukraine is a lesson to Russia to stick to a rules based world system. 
 

But I do wanna also point out. Biden and his administration have ballsed up with Russia. They should never have weaponised the dollar, world trade and the banking system against Russia. This is something that will lead to a weakening American soft power base and multi polarisation 
 

Casualties are on both sides of the Atlantic and Pacific 

Edited March 27, 2023 by Unusual Tournament

[Unusual Tournament]

6 hours ago, odas said:

?????? You serious? Ok. We will invade your country today. Please surrender immidiately. I am sure your landsmen will appriciate our conquest.

Ukraine is not a nation. It’s a historical aftermath of the Soviet Union. Equally divided between Russian speakers and Ukrainians sitting next door to the biggest stockpile of nuclear weapons controlled by a psychopath and playing silly b*****s with the most powerful country in the world to its own detriment. 

[+Nuclear Wessel]

49 minutes ago, Unusual Tournament said:

Ukraine is not a nation.

What the **** are you talking about

[odas]

14 hours ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

What the **** are you talking about

Not even worth replying to his/her delusional post.

[Trelane]

On 3/27/2023 at 10:05 AM, spartan max2 said:

Exactly. 

People in the US complaining about us funding Ukraine are victims of politics and propaganda. It's as simple as that.

Our Ukraine funding is not a significant chunk of our budget. Last I checked I don't think it was even a percent. 

The crucial point is these dullards don't know the actual line of accounting for these packages. They only see a dollar sign affixed and start flapping their wings and honking about their "hard earned tax dollars". They have no idea what the value of equipment is vs the actual cash being disbursed.  These "US is wrong for supporting Ukraine/Russia ain't so bad" types do like to punch at air a lot though. Very amusing.

As was brought up earlier the real time self-destruction of the current Russian state has been of keen interest by western intelligence agencies and western military planners are getting a fantastic real time reveal of current Russian (and associated allies') tactics and capabilities. Vladdy boy has pulled the curtain all the way back and now NATO and the West in general can better plan, prepare for any future conflicts. Additionally, this drastically will alter how countries deal diplomatically with Russia for decades.

Big "OOOOFF!!!!" for Vladdy.

 

p.s.   Has Bakhmut fallen yet?? Thought it was only a matter of days (4 months ago)

Edited March 28, 2023 by Trelane

[Unusual Tournament]

Another reason to rethink the strategy of the west to drip feed Ukraine weaponry.

Ukraine Can Only Win if the U.S. Delivers More Weapons Faster

https://time.com/6266296/ukraine-win-if-the-u-s-delivers-more-weapons/

[jmccr8]

1 hour ago, Unusual Tournament said:

Another reason to rethink the strategy of the west to drip feed Ukraine weaponry.

Ukraine Can Only Win if the U.S. Delivers More Weapons Faster

https://time.com/6266296/ukraine-win-if-the-u-s-delivers-more-weapons/

Hi UT

To start with this is the same rehash that you have been posting for months. Secondly the US is not the only country involved in supplying the Ukraine so dumping on their doorstep in pointless. The west is likely working a plan together and we have known for some time now that this conflict was going to be difficult and take some time.

Edited March 28, 2023 by jmccr8

[DarkHunter]

1 hour ago, Unusual Tournament said:

Another reason to rethink the strategy of the west to drip feed Ukraine weaponry.

The article is heavily flawed it is reasoning and is missing a single very important piece of information.

The Ukranians didnt do the expected winter counter offensive cause they lacked western weapons and ammunition, the Ukranian military didnt do it cause weather didnt allow it.  

Ukraine has two mud seasons, one in the spring and one in the fall.  For a winter offensive to start the ground needs to freeze to a certain depth to allow armored vehicles to be able to move across the ground without sinking into mud.  The problem is this year the winter was extremely mild and the temperature didnt drop low enough and long enough for the ground to freeze enough for armored vehicles.

This is just for January around Melitopol but it has temperature information.

https://weatherspark.com/m/99398/1/Average-Weather-in-January-in-Melitopol’-Ukraine

As can be seen there was really only about a week in January where temperatures dropped below freezing for the whole day.  Also shows that in December and February there were significant periods of time the temperature was above freezing.

While just averages it does show that the freezing temperatures around Melitopol never really got particularly cold, averaging around the mid 20s Farenheit at coldest.  

I'm too lazy to find it again but somewhere out in the internet is the information on air temperature and ground freezing along with military manuals on how deep ground freezing needs to be for various military vehicles to safely travel over it.  From what I remember, which might be wrong, for the ground to freeze enough to allow heavy armored vehicles it generally needs to be between 0 and 10 degrees farenheit for about 5 days straight.  At the barely below freezing temperatures southern Ukraine was at it would take close to a month to a month and a half with out the temperature going above freezing.

The Ukranian military could of tried what the Russian military did at Vuhledar and try assaulting along narrow path ways that would support heavily armored vehicles that have been pre-sighted in by artillery and have minefields already in place but that didnt work out so well for two elite naval infantry brigades.

Ultimately the extremely mild winter had more to do with no Ukranian counter offensive then anything else.

[Unusual Tournament]

16 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

The article is heavily flawed it is reasoning and is missing a single very important piece of information.

The Ukranians didnt do the expected winter counter offensive cause they lacked western weapons and ammunition, the Ukranian military didnt do it cause weather didnt allow it.  

Ukraine has two mud seasons, one in the spring and one in the fall.  For a winter offensive to start the ground needs to freeze to a certain depth to allow armored vehicles to be able to move across the ground without sinking into mud.  The problem is this year the winter was extremely mild and the temperature didnt drop low enough and long enough for the ground to freeze enough for armored vehicles.

This is just for January around Melitopol but it has temperature information.

https://weatherspark.com/m/99398/1/Average-Weather-in-January-in-Melitopol’-Ukraine

As can be seen there was really only about a week in January where temperatures dropped below freezing for the whole day.  Also shows that in December and February there were significant periods of time the temperature was above freezing.

While just averages it does show that the freezing temperatures around Melitopol never really got particularly cold, averaging around the mid 20s Farenheit at coldest.  

I'm too lazy to find it again but somewhere out in the internet is the information on air temperature and ground freezing along with military manuals on how deep ground freezing needs to be for various military vehicles to safely travel over it.  From what I remember, which might be wrong, for the ground to freeze enough to allow heavy armored vehicles it generally needs to be between 0 and 10 degrees farenheit for about 5 days straight.  At the barely below freezing temperatures southern Ukraine was at it would take close to a month to a month and a half with out the temperature going above freezing.

The Ukranian military could of tried what the Russian military did at Vuhledar and try assaulting along narrow path ways that would support heavily armored vehicles that have been pre-sighted in by artillery and have minefields already in place but that didnt work out so well for two elite naval infantry brigades.

Ultimately the extremely mild winter had more to do with no Ukranian counter offensive than anything else.

Time magazine!!!

 

[Unusual Tournament]

@DarkHunter

You might just have to reconsider your views and stop making excuses for Ukraine’s poor showing on the battlefield these last 6 months. 
 

The West is allowing Russia to take a piece of Ukraine by not backing Kyiv with a complete and timely weapons package. This is a fact. 

[+Nuclear Wessel]

8 minutes ago, Unusual Tournament said:

The West is allowing Russia to take a piece of Ukraine by not backing Kyiv with a complete and timely weapons package. This is a fact. 

You have a very loose grasp on facts vs non-facts, so I wouldn't be too confident in your own speculations if I were you.

[DarkHunter]

6 minutes ago, Unusual Tournament said:

Time magazine!!!

 

It being Time magazine doesnt mean the journalist knows what they are actually writing about.  The physical reality is that the ground never froze significantly, that is an established fact and can be verified easily enough by looking at temperature data.  No frozen ground no winter counter offensive.

5 minutes ago, Unusual Tournament said:

You might just have to reconsider your views and stop making excuses for Ukraine’s poor showing on the battlefield these last 6 months. 
 

The West is allowing Russia to take a piece of Ukraine by not backing Kyiv with a complete and timely weapons package. This is a fact. 

You mean the poor showing that saw Ukraine liberate over 6,000 square kilometers and saw the destruction of two elite naval infantry brigades along with Russia failing to capture Bakhmut.

If you want to push Russian propaganda and misinformation at least put some effort into it and make it half decent.

[Unusual Tournament]

40 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

It being Time magazine doesnt mean the journalist knows what they are actually writing about.  The physical reality is that the ground never froze significantly, that is an established fact and can be verified easily enough by looking at temperature data.  No frozen ground no winter counter offensive.

You mean the poor showing that saw Ukraine liberate over 6,000 square kilometers and saw the destruction of two elite naval infantry brigades along with Russia failing to capture Bakhmut.

If you want to push Russian propaganda and misinformation at least put some effort into it and make it half decent.

So you know better than the investigative journalists at Time Magazine. I’m so very privileged to have your views

[DarkHunter]

48 minutes ago, Unusual Tournament said:

So you know better than the investigative journalists at Time Magazine. I’m so very privileged to have your views

Just going to ignore the approximate 6,000 square kilometers liberated by the Ukranian military, the destruction of two Russian elite naval infantry brigades, and the failure of the Russian military to take Bakhmut over the last 6 months.  You claimed the Ukranian military is doing poorly over the last 6 months but yet all of that has happened.  I would of mentioned the liberation of Kherson, the only oblast capital that Russia managed to capture, but I think that happened 7 months back.

I have family who are journalists.  Journalism has changed over the past decade or two, before it used to be about facts and limiting bias.  Now journalism is more about selling a story and narrative, kind of like how journalism was around the time of the Spanish-American war.  It's not about knowing more as it is the journalist is trying to sell a story and this story is Ukraine isnt getting enough weapons and ammunition.

Edited March 28, 2023 by DarkHunter