171–180 of 419 posts
Information from either side is to be taken with a grain of salt, although Ukraine is winning the social media ops-game hands down. I think since after the 1st week of troop movements it's pretty clear: - Russia aims at encircling cities, draining the resistance there, forcing them into negotiations and so that enemy combatants can evacuate into western Ukraine (like they did in Syria) - Ukraine aims at short-term lu…
Information from either side is to be taken with a grain of salt, although Ukraine is winning the social media ops-game hands down. I think since after the 1st week of troop movements it's pretty clear: - Russia aims at encircling cities, draining the resistance there, forcing them into negotiations and so that enemy combatants can evacuate into western Ukraine (like they did in Syria) - Ukraine aims at short-term lu…
In what way is Ukraine "preventing" humanitarian corridors? Ukraine is requesting them daily, but Russian troops keep bombing them and disrupting the evacuation of civilians, daily.
Armies have momentum. Germany almost lost in 1941 when Barbarossa failed. Hitler managed to keep his armies from disintegrating, but it was a near thing. Japan's armies went far further then they had any right too in the same period, because of the perception of invincibility, higher morale, and everyone underestimating them for racial reasons. It's very clear that the Russians badly screwed up their logistics chain…
The Russian government knew there would be sanctions no matter what happened. They had already decided to accept those even in the event of victory. They aren't in a no-win scenario either. Kyiv cannot hold out forever. The Russians have an overwhelming numeric advantage and they can simply wait out the defenders, using that time to fix their supply lines. It's tempting to exaggerate a Russian setback into a total co…
They don't have to. They only have to hold out longer than the Russians.
In the north, the Russians are running out of supplies and their logistics is halted so they are not going to get more supplies any time soon.
In the south, Russia appears to have better logistics and they are still moving, but slower and slower. Their southern logistics is the railroad through Crimea - that is a major weak point. They have been trying with all their might to take Mariupol which would give them an alternative (albeit road-based) logistics path but have been fought to a standstill there too.
Meanwhile, Ukraine has an open logistics path through Poland all the way to the front lines (uncontested by Russia, unlike Russia's logistics paths which are long and vulnerable) and military supplies are pouring in.
Ukraine is getting stronger and the Russian troops are running out of men, diesel, food, and probably ammunition.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The insurgency in Iraq was also a minority- most supported the US Russians also think that most Ukrainians support Russia, it doesn't mean it's true. Same with believes that most Iraqis supported US.
Have you researched your assertion about Iraqi support for the US? https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2022/02/da... > Petraeus: Ukraine is not only bigger but some 50 percent more populous than Iraq, and the Iraqi population included many millions—Kurds, Christians, Yezidis, Shabak, and many of the Shia—who broadly supported the coalition forces throughout our time there. Only a minority of the Iraqi p…
is not supported by
> the Iraqi population included many millions ... who broadly supported the coalition forces
"Many millions" !- "most"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Russia may not be a paper tiger, but they sure can’t do much against an enemy many times smaller than them. How long did it take for the US to take Afghanistan?
The logistics of taking a country that is thousands of miles away are very different from taking one you share a border with. It took 47 days to take Kabul, counting from the first day the CIA agents were sent to prepare the invasion. Furthermore, the objective was to find bin Laden, not to take cities. The war in Ukraine isn't really comparable to Afghanistan. The US mostly "softened" strategic objectives with air s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There was a saying in falling Germany in 1944: "each day our victories are closer to Germany than the previous day". You can follow the bombings, for example: if Kyiv is being shelled (and reported in Russian media), it's not under Russian control. If the shelling last for days, the city is holding. If some city was being shelled, but there are no more news about it, but the news are a nearby and further city is bein…
"It seems the Russian invasion is crawling" During WW2, the siege of Leningrad lasted 872 days. Ukraine has only been under attack for 13 days.
Instead you see things like the US does where you gain air superiority, take out all command and control via decapitation attacks, and then remove all the armor from the map with missiles and aircraft.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are also getting fresh soldiers. I saw a claim from a Canadian vet in Kyiv that 40,000 foreign fighters were already in Kyiv. The Canadian was part of a 500-man exclusively Canadian urban battalion. There was also a report on BBC that Russia had summoned foreign ambassadors in Moscow to complain about foreign volunteers traveling to Ukraine to fight against Russia [1]. I've also been on Telegram channels helping…
Eventually the question becomes "if these guest fighters are successful, at what point do they consider going north through the contested border and attacking Russian (or, more likely, Belurussian) cities?"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For your third point I think you are mixing things up. Zaporizhzhia was shelled and afaik no increase in radiation was mentioned in any news I read. News also stressed that an office building was shelled, not the actual reactor. Chernobyl there were rumors about a nuclear waste depot being blown up and subsequent increase in radiation. However, it was always mentioned that this could be due to troop movement over con…
Only the reactors 5 and 6 were shut down, 1-4 not. I never heard that the control room was on fire, only that Chechens attached explosives to the reactors. The shelling was at the training reactor building, and the administrative building was shot at and set on fire.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you researched your assertion about Iraqi support for the US? https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2022/02/da... > Petraeus: Ukraine is not only bigger but some 50 percent more populous than Iraq, and the Iraqi population included many millions—Kurds, Christians, Yezidis, Shabak, and many of the Shia—who broadly supported the coalition forces throughout our time there. Only a minority of the Iraqi p…
I'm not sure David Petraeus is an impartial source regarding the Iraq war, but even in that interview he avoids the claim that the majority of the Iraqi population supported the US invasion. Instead, he says that supporters of the insurgency are in the minority (you can dislike the invasion and occupation of your country by the US without supporting the Sunni insurgency or the Shia militia) and that "many millions" s…