Jump to content
UnevenEdge

Putin: "Stick to the timeline!"


tsar4

Recommended Posts

The "Kherson offensive" so far looks to be a bloodbath for the poor Ukrainian soldiers who seem to have been sent out for PR reasons so that sympathetic media can exaggerate any temporary gains of "liberating" small mostly empty villages of twenty houses in a field and such, places that Russia could entirely wipe off the map in seconds, with little hope of achieving any actual Ukrainian military objectives, but "we'll see."

Edited by NewBluntsworth
  • D'oh 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is so bleak. Ukraine really trying to play it off like it's actually doing something smh. Media blackout, talking about re-taking a couple "villages" smgdh.

12 hours ago, scoobdog said:

Speaks to the extremely low morale.

You must mean these quotes from Ukrainian soldiers about how their is no actual Kherson offensive underway like Zelensky describes in his smoke and mirror, shadow puppet theater shows.

Somebody needs to throw in the towel for these clowns, ring the goddamn bell ref they're dying in there 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/30/zelenskiy-tells-russian-forces-to-flee-as-ukraine-counteroffensive-begins-in-kherson

 

  • D'oh 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Raptorpat said:

To be fair I think it 100% is a proxy war at this point, but I don't think that diminishes the agency of Ukraine.

It was always a proxy war.  Russia warned United States to not interfere before and at the immediate onset of the invasion explicitly to frame Zelensky and the conflict as proxies for NATO and its influence.

The point of contention is who made it one, and all reputable sources agree that Putin's plan all along was to draw the Biden Administration and the rest of Europe in so that they could turn on each other.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

IThe point of contention is who made it one, and all reputable sources agree that Putin's plan all along was to draw the Biden Administration and the rest of Europe in so that they could turn on each other.

This point really needs to be emphasized. Putin expected NATO to fracture when he attacked Ukraine. Instead NATO is more united now than at any point post 9/11 and has expanded with Sweden and Finland. Even Germany has, reluctantly, come along.

To say he miscalculated is a massive understatement.  We are seeing a rejuvenation of NATO that no one could have predicted even a year ago.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Master-Debater131 said:

This point really needs to be emphasized. Putin expected NATO to fracture when he attacked Ukraine. Instead NATO is more united now than at any point post 9/11 and has expanded with Sweden and Finland. Even Germany has, reluctantly, come along.

To say he miscalculated is a massive understatement.  We are seeing a rejuvenation of NATO that no one could have predicted even a year ago.

I'm not sold that he was so inept that he truly thought NATO wouldn't rally after the invasion.  I think it's more likely he expected to delay the response long enough to get a foothold in Ukraine and force negotiations.  What he miscalculated was how horribly inept his military brass was leading up to the conflict.  You could also say he was blinded by ambition to the point he didn't see some obvious structural deficiencies that would have swayed him from taking what was already a risky military campaign.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, scoobdog said:

and all reputable sources agree that Putin's plan all along was to draw the Biden Administration and the rest of Europe in so that they could turn on each other.

My understanding was that his goal was to fracture NATO prior so that it wouldn't get involved in his plan for regime change and/or annexation. But then it snapped back and clearly did get involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Raptorpat said:

My understanding was that his goal was to fracture NATO prior so that it wouldn't get involved in his plan for regime change and/or annexation. But then it snapped back and clearly did get involved.

Right, hence him calling us out prior to the invasion.  What I meant was that he was aiming for a narrow window where he could take Kyiv before NATO and the EU could mobilize.  There is some logic to the approach:  by calling out the US, NATO and the EU well in advance, he was giving them enough time to mull the prospect of Russia crippling the energy market.  Even though everyone knows it's coming, the time it would take to overcome those differences would still be theoretically long enough for Russian Army to waltz into the capital, take out the President, and render military aide meaningless.  There isn't any scenario where the EU doesn't eventually get involved if the invasion fails, and, ultimately, them banding together is what gave the US enough cover to directly assist Ukraine even though the US was technically leading the way all along by sounding the warnings.

  • Like 1
  • D'oh 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, scoobdog said:

Why do you say that?

And before you answer, you can't use any reference to imperialism or national exceptionalism as part of your answer.

because the soivet union doesnt exist which was the original "purpose" of nato. 

only exists now to provoke and destroy other countries.

and how you even talk about nato without bringing talking about imperialism? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, NewBluntsworth said:

"Why is imperialism bad? And before you answer, you can't use any reference to imperialism as part of your answer" 🤡 🤡 🤡

In all seriousness, your posts offer no valid commentary and are not conducive to any discussion.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Distortedreasoning said:

because the soivet union doesnt exist which was the original "purpose" of nato. 

only exists now to provoke and destroy other countries.

and how you even talk about nato without bringing talking about imperialism? 

Easy.  NATO does not address any actions taken against its member states outside of their home borders.  Just because you're easily swayed by easily debunked fringe leftist nonsense, doesn't mean you can disprove this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Distortedreasoning said:

or how the west kept arming ukraine and kept pushing them out of their neutrality stance which would trigger russia to take action? 

Neutrality stance?!!  So they were suppose to just sit there so the Russians could take their capitol and murder their president?

  • Like 1
  • D'oh 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

Easy.  NATO does not address any actions taken against its member states outside of their home borders.  Just because you're easily swayed by easily debunked fringe leftist nonsense, doesn't mean you can disprove this.

thats why they expanded so they can take action! how you even explain nato outside of europe? 

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

Neutrality stance?!!  So they were suppose to just sit there so the Russians could take their capitol and murder their president?

there was no indication russia was interested in doing that. 

they were working with the west to provide them with energy. makes no sense for them to want to destabilize ukraine.

 

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Distortedreasoning said:

there was no indication russia was interested in doing that. 

they were working with the west to provide them with energy. makes no sense for them to want to destabilize ukraine.

 

 

OMFG

So what were Russian troops doing on the northern border?  Having a fucking circle jerk with the Belarusians?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Distortedreasoning said:

when in february? when they already had enough of nato's bs? 

That must be it.  They had so much time dealing with NATO's bullshit, they could plan their absolute failure of an invasion down to the last Russian caught dead with his hand down his pants. Obviously.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

That must be it.  They had so much time dealing with NATO's bullshit, they could plan their absolute failure of an invasion down to the last Russian caught dead with his hand down his pants. Obviously.

i don't know whats so hard to understand about not wanting to have a hostile group like nato on your boders? we would go crazy and respond much more violently if russia or china set up base in mexico or canada. why even try to escalate things with a nuclear power? we dont need nukes on the table. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Distortedreasoning said:

i don't know whats so hard to understand about not wanting to have a hostile group like nato on your boders? we would go crazy and respond much more violently if russia or china set up base in mexico or canada. why even try to escalate things with a nuclear power? we dont need nukes on the table. 

No, we wouldn't respond more violently.  We also wouldn't send in untrained conscripts with inferior equipment.  There is a fundamental disconnect in your perception that tends to skew your opinions to the point of being borderline absurd.

  • Like 1
  • D'oh 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, scoobdog said:

No, we wouldn't respond more violently.  We also wouldn't send in untrained conscripts with inferior equipment.  There is a fundamental disconnect in your perception that tends to skew your opinions to the point of being borderline absurd.

you know we would, the one time the soviets even attempted to build a base in cuba, we were ready to rain down nukes. tho not a lot of examples to draw from since we are in a good defensive position. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, NewBluntsworth said:

East Ukrainians... duh.

Hmmm...

 

19 minutes ago, Raptorpat said:

Are you talking about the pre-invasion war? Or something else?

Oh, so this is about the separatist fighting in the Donbas?  There were 14,000 deaths in that conflict?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...