Jump to content
UnevenEdge

Putin: "Stick to the timeline!"


tsar4

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

While somewhat on the rhetorical side, I agree with this op-ed's opinion that Russia doesn't have the capability to attack a NATO country (they don't even have the capacity to attack non-NATO Ukraine). Therefore they won't and the fear that they will is unfounded. 

Russia remains, and is likely to remain, in term of both numbers and quality, at a military disadvantage to Nato. But not only would Russia lose quickly; Russia neither has the intent nor military capability to launch an armed attack on Nato in the first place.

 

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/russia-will-not-attack-nato/

Edited by Icarus27k
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At any get together, enjoy the explosive taste of HIMARS brand cigarettes -

image.png.c9bdc362ce35f5047ba5e9f020b36d3b.png

Just ask the folks at this restaurant preparing to celebrate the anniversary of the Russian People's Republic in occupied Donetsk, UA...uh...nevermind.

image.png.84892198769743142ae7ea17dcbccca1.png

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Putin is plotting ‘physical attacks’ on the West, says GCHQ chief

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/05/14/putin-plotting-physical-attacks-west-gchq-chief/

"Vladimir Putin’s Russia is preparing “physical attacks” against the West, the head of GCHQ has warned, as British and American intelligence officials laid bare the dual threat posed by Moscow and Beijing.

Anne Keast-Butler, who was appointed to lead Britain’s signals intelligence operations last May, used her first major speech to highlight the immediate threat posed by the Kremlin and the “epoch-defining” risk posed by China to the UK and its allies.

The GCHQ director told a gathering of cyber security experts in Birmingham that her agency believed Moscow was looking to go further than attacks simply in cyberspace.

The signals agency is “increasingly concerned about growing links between the Russian intelligence services and proxy groups to conduct cyber-attacks – as well as suspected physical surveillance and sabotage operations”."

 

The source is sketchy, but it follows a lot of other talk in the last couple of weeks about Russia making a move against NATO. Germany is talking about mandatory conscription again. Eastern European nations are saying its time to ramp up military readiness. Some in NATO are growing louder in their calls for sending actual troops into Ukraine. It also ties in to shortly after Speaker Johnson received a briefing by the CIA and moved quickly to pass the military aid package.

Something has shifted to cause this kind of rhetorical swing from "its a proxy war" to "prepare for direct conflict".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/14/2024 at 9:24 AM, Master-Debater131 said:

Putin is plotting ‘physical attacks’ on the West, says GCHQ chief

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/05/14/putin-plotting-physical-attacks-west-gchq-chief/

"Vladimir Putin’s Russia is preparing “physical attacks” against the West, the head of GCHQ has warned, as British and American intelligence officials laid bare the dual threat posed by Moscow and Beijing.

Anne Keast-Butler, who was appointed to lead Britain’s signals intelligence operations last May, used her first major speech to highlight the immediate threat posed by the Kremlin and the “epoch-defining” risk posed by China to the UK and its allies.

The GCHQ director told a gathering of cyber security experts in Birmingham that her agency believed Moscow was looking to go further than attacks simply in cyberspace.

The signals agency is “increasingly concerned about growing links between the Russian intelligence services and proxy groups to conduct cyber-attacks – as well as suspected physical surveillance and sabotage operations”."

Russia wouldn't win a ground war against NATO, probably not against most NATO states. The only reason it's still in Ukraine is because Ukraine is not in NATO. Similar story with Georgia.

Putin is panicking. The illusion he's been able to present internationally of Russia being a global player and an existential threat is falling away. The main reason it has any sort of global reach no is its natural resources and its willingness to send its mercenaries anywhere to support tinpot dictators. It's rotting from the inside and Russia as it is now will probably die shortly after Putin.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/6/2024 at 10:19 PM, Icarus27k said:

While somewhat on the rhetorical side, I agree with this op-ed's opinion that Russia doesn't have the capability to attack a NATO country (they don't even have the capacity to attack non-NATO Ukraine). Therefore they won't and the fear that they will is unfounded. 

Russia remains, and is likely to remain, in term of both numbers and quality, at a military disadvantage to Nato. But not only would Russia lose quickly; Russia neither has the intent nor military capability to launch an armed attack on Nato in the first place.

 

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/russia-will-not-attack-nato/

Where Russia has excelled is convincing low-information voters and RW media addicts that it is a "sleeping bear." I use that term because some guy I work with at a Head Start nonprofit is apparently MAGA and started going off about how NATO is hurting our program to this guy off the street who said he appreciated what Head Start does. That random guy was like "WTF" and parted ways. I yelled at them that I didn't want to hear about politics when I was trying to eat lunch. Another real life experience was at a volunteer thing I do and one of the guys is very left wing started talking about how "NATO is no better than Russia" when Ukraine was attacked, referring to Russia trying to how Russia was just trying to "protect itself."

What I get from this is that the US needs to inform its citizens why NATO is a good thing, how much life would suck without it and why Russia has to be quarantined.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tsar4 said:

 

The general rule, "Offense is harder than defense", strikes again here.

I have been skeptical about both sides' ability to go on offense throughout the war. That's why the Ukrainians' offensive successes in 2022 were so shocking. Logically, the Ukrainians shouldn't have been able to do all of that. 

But since the start of 2023, the war has fallen back to conventional wisdom where both sides haven't had anywhere near the offensive success as they had in 2022. And I assume it will continue that way from here on out. I don't think the frontline is going to change that much now.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, katt_goddess said:

iTs NoT dEmEnTiA!

It may not be, look at what Ron Ziegler (Press Secretary) said during the Nixon Administration:

"To be responsive at this time, though I will simply say that, as I said - and therefore this is a repeat of what I said previously - that which I am unable to offer in response is based on information available to make no such statement."

Could be he's just saying something while really saying nothing.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, tsar4 said:

It may not be, look at what Ron Ziegler (Press Secretary) said during the Nixon Administration:

"To be responsive at this time, though I will simply say that, as I said - and therefore this is a repeat of what I said previously - that which I am unable to offer in response is based on information available to make no such statement."

Could be he's just saying something while really saying nothing.

Ron Ziegler as acting press secretary literally pointed out that he couldn't say anything at that time, he just took the scenic route to that exact statement. 'No comment' wasn't flowery enough. :D 

Dumpster isn't able to stay on topic if that topic isn't how great he is and how he has all these powerful enemies constantly out to get him [ most recent likely enemy is the guy at the closest McD's that didn't give him a food bag of fries when he ordered the large ] . He didn't even take the scenic route because Ukraine is on his deep state shit list, everyone knows it, he's on the record as telling Russia to go for it. Since he couldn't answer like that, he rambled until he ran out of related words. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Russia Lost 1290 Troops, 102 Vehicles, 65 Artillery Systems in a Day: Kyiv

https://www.newsweek.com/russia-casualties-tanks-apvs-vehicles-lost-artillery-systems-ukraine-1907814

"Russian forces lost nearly 1,300 fighters, more than 100 vehicles of various types and 65 artillery systems in the past day, according to Ukraine, shortly after Kyiv reported the highest number of monthly Russian casualties and artillery losses in the war-torn country."

 

These are numbers coming from Ukraine, so keep that in mind, but they are pretty staggering.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/3/2024 at 5:51 PM, tsar4 said:

It may not be, look at what Ron Ziegler (Press Secretary) said during the Nixon Administration:

"To be responsive at this time, though I will simply say that, as I said - and therefore this is a repeat of what I said previously - that which I am unable to offer in response is based on information available to make no such statement."

Could be he's just saying something while really saying nothing.

No, Trump has dementia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, scoobdog said:

No, Trump has dementia.

He's pretty much a goldfish at this point, just chasing whatever pellets he sees in front of him at the moment. I'm bemused over the mental gymnastics his MAGA believers can do in order to try to make his word salads make sense. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Kofman, an analyst who has become very renowned and trusted during this war, says in this video from two days ago the frontline in Ukraine is going to become less important to the outcome of the war going forward. In his words, the war isn't going to be based on who controls 10-20 kilometers to the west or east of the current frontline. He doesn't say it explicitly, but he suspects the frontline is stalemated and isn't going to change much. 

 

 

 

I agree with him, but I thought the same thing 18 months ago after the last big shift in the front line (Ukraine's retaking of Kherson west of the Dnieper River). At the time I said, ten years in the future we're not going to be talking about whether the frontline settles 100 miles west or east from where it is. 

 

It's still a war, but neither side is going to be able to go on the offensive to the extent to dramatically shift the front. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real test is going to be what happens when the F-16s hit the field. Can Ukraine use them effectively to hit Russian assets and potentially disrupt the ability for Russia to press into Ukraine, or not?

Depending on how the F-16s are used they could have the potential to disrupt Russian efforts enough to give Ukraine the advantage. No one has air superiority right now, and if either side can establish that then they will have a massive advantage over the other. Drones are one thing, modern jets are an entirely different beast.

If, and thats a gigantic IF, Ukraine can use the F-16s to establish air superiority in the regions where they are fighting then they will be able to push back on the Russians in a big way. Its hard to overstate just how important air superiority is in modern war.

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...