Russia-Ukraine War

thatsdaft

Reminds me of later days of WW2 where Hitler was so singularly focused on the east overruling his generals that he ignore what was happening out west up to and including ordering that under no circumstances was he to be woken up on day when D day occurred and hence panzer divisions that could have potentially beaten back that invasion just sat around scratching their sacks

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122534767#Comment_122534767

When is he actually going to act on this pressure or red line.

He has already started.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122534453#Comment_122534453

thatsdaft

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122534807#Comment_122534807

What has Putin done exactly?

So far he has placed army in charge, fired them, placed KGB in charge, fired them, now placed his bodyguard in charge

and still an area larger than Russians managed to capture in a year and half at a cost of most of their tank fleet and quarter of million men continues to grow

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122534828#Comment_122534828

And he continues to be able to throw lives in to the meat grinder. He did it at Avdiivka, Vuhledar & Bahkmut; and as backward as that type of warfare is, he is still managing to do it. Will he do the same at Kursk and can Ukraine make it stick?

Despite all the failings you've listed there's little to suggest Putin will have an "unfortunate"😉 accident from a tenth floor window. His (current) General in charge of the response to the Kursk losses was recently indicted for war crimes against Ukrainian infrastructure; I doubt he'll shy away from continuing in this manner because of what the ICC think.

thatsdaft

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122534912#Comment_122534912

Your argument boils down to

Putin is willing to pointlessly have his men die

So Ukrainians should do the same

How dare they play this war outside the rules the master strategist has created

Edit: your username is apt

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122534990#Comment_122534990

Nope. Nowhere did I even hint at that.

Nonsensical response.

thatsdaft

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122534999#Comment_122534999

In your last few posts you have

1. Hinted at Da Bomb being used
2. Propagate the “Russia has endless manpower” meme which Kursk shows is a joke
3. Are exasperated like Russians as to why Ukrainians won’t sink to their level of battlefield stupidity
4. Try to downplay the size of the area lost in Kursk by playing at the “Russia is big” meme
5. Ignore the non military consequences that Putin and Russia are trying hard to sweep under rug

https://twitter.com/DarthPutinKGB/status/1826613176554979798

weisses

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122534803#Comment_122534803

I think Rommel being in Germany (because of the very bad weather in the English channel) had more of a negative impact … Hitler even when notified at 10 ish was reluctant to sign for additional forces to be released, (thinking the Allies could be easily defeated anyway)

josip

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122534246#Comment_122534246

"Still 550 miles from the city of Kursk"

To me, it looks like they are 70km from Kursk? Although I would expect that 70km to be well defended by now and I don't see any point trying to capture the city even if they did get there. But to get close enough to bring it under their fire control would be a big poke in the eye for Putin.

CelticRambler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122534912#Comment_122534912

There's something that you (and all the other "Putin's making gains" posters) continually overlook - or disregard: back in 2022 Putin controlled more than 50000 additional km² of Ukraine. He lost that, and nothing he has done in the two years since has recovered it. Despite the hundreds of thousands of conscripts, criminals, immigrants and other "disposable forces" that he's sent to fight, he has been barely able to recover even one hundreth of the ground he already lost.

And yet the Ukrainians managed to capture a comparable amount of Russian territory in a fortnight, with minimal losses. And destroy a few airfields at the same time. And destroy a major strategic reserve oil storage facility. And continue to shoot down most of the drones and missiles that Russian fires into Ukrainian airspace.

So whatever Putin is "managing to do" it's certainly not wage an effective war against anyone. Like his orange-tinted admirer in the other hemisphere, he is a loser by every metric.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535044#Comment_122535044

Hinted at Da Bomb being used

No I havent. Thats now the third time that lazy nonsense has been bandied about. I actually think 'da bomb' bluff has been called a long time ago and whould hope it remains that way but in any case your wrong, so good start.

2. Propagate the “Russia has endless manpower” meme which Kursk shows is a joke

It doesn't; Kursk was poorly defended; it's been widely commented on.

3. Are exasperated like Russians as to why Ukrainians won’t sink to their level of battlefield stupidity

Never have I even hinted at that- show me where I've said this.

4. Try to downplay the size of the area lost in Kursk by playing at the “Russia is big” meme

Not the "Russia is big" part - wrong again but that the area won in Kursk V what they are looking likely to lose & what they've lost already should also be included before we get ahead of ourselves. Granted the Ukrainian incursion in Kursk is only a few weeks old, so hopefully not finished but there's a long way to go yet.

5. Ignore the non military consequences that Putin and Russia are trying hard to sweep under rug

Like what?

Sleepy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122534912#Comment_122534912

And in the battles at Avdiivka, Vuhledar and Bahkmut he wasted the majority of his modern armor and artillery. Armor and artillery he can't replace easily, cheaply or at a rate faster than Ukraine have been destroying them due to sanctions from the west and his throwing his workforce into the meat grinder of those battles.

Recent Ukrainian strikes on airfields, weapons stores, fuel stores and downing of aircraft will have also reduced his ability to strike Ukrainian defence lines with the glidebombs that preceded the meat wave attacks in those battles too.

He may still be able to throw barely trained, poorly armed infantry at Ukrainian lines and even back them up with some cold war/ WW2 era armor (or Chinese golf buggies) but the law of diminishing returns will certainly factor into the equation (if indeed, it hasn't already.

weisses

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535097#Comment_122535097

Even if it was poorly defended …Ukrainian troops would be overstretched and would not have the numbers to take a city the size of Kursk …I think it was never an option anyway to take it

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535116#Comment_122535116

There's something that you (and all the other "Putin's making gains" posters)

But he is making gains…and I've never denied the losses.

It seems you cannot reference the gains without being quickly labelled some Putin shill. Have a read of my posts on this and you'll see you're quite wrong.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535120#Comment_122535120

Hopefully but the war wasn't 12 months old when we heard the same - "Russia has lost too much and are a spent force"; yet here we still are unfortunately.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535097#Comment_122535097

Yes you're correct - fat fingers. I'd crudely pulled a line that was 55 miles.

weisses

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535131#Comment_122535131

Well if you gain 2 square kilometer in on place and loose 1200km2 in another you could be obtuse and state he's gaining ground "somewhere"… But its not the smartest point to make.

Russia is not making any net gain and they havent since they got their asses kicked in the Kharkiv and Kherson regions

Avatar in the Post

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535118#Comment_122535118

You did hint at 'da bomb' - it was subsequently changed to chemical weapons (similar response too if he did use 'Da bomb') once Nukes were mentioned as a response to your original post advising not to antagonise Putin in case he gets cross.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535122#Comment_122535122

They don't need to be getting bogged down policing a whole city either. Peacetime population of 440k so even assuming some have left it's still an unnecessary burden. Strike at any rail and motorways in the vicinity and that would be good enough.

Would love to see them just flatten it from a distance.

Avatar in the Post

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535148#Comment_122535148

Unfortunately… right.

If Ukraine shouldn't put Russia on the back foot to avoid antagonising Putin, as you advise, by invading Russia… Do you think Ukraine should request a ceasefire and be ready to give up land so they can have peace in the rest of Ukraine?

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535177#Comment_122535177

Are the 2km/2 V the 1200km/s comparable to what I've said though? Povrovsk & Chasiv Yar are in no way "2km/s" loss.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535206#Comment_122535206

Unfortunately… right.

Is it not unfortunate? Is it good that we're still watching this?

If Ukraine shouldn't put Russia on the back foot to avoid antagonising Putin, as you advise, by invading Russia…

Nice twisting of words/outright misrepreentation; I never 'advised' this in any way, shape or form. Have a look at post 4821 - "Any success by Ukraine is to be welcomed"

AndyBoBandy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122534531#Comment_122534531

Every time I ever read about or hear about an A10, I have to immediately go to Youtube to hear a few brrrrrrrrrtttt's

I remember hearing somewhere years ago that they could lose a half of a wing and still maintain controlled flight…

Avatar in the Post

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535225#Comment_122535225

How about answering the question?

And if you are playing silly buggers, isn't 'right' an affirmative to what you said?

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535234#Comment_122535234

How about answering the question?

How about admitting the misrepresentation of what I said before making demands.

And if you are playing silly buggers, isn't 'right' an affirmative to what you said?

And if you are playing silly buggers, isn't '….right' sarcasm on your part as if to insinuate what I had written as disingenuous. Why include it in that manner if only to make it look disingenuous?

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535187#Comment_122535187

I never mentioned "da bomb" or "Nukes". I did say chemical/biological (as used in Syria is what I'd mentioned)

To say I subsequently "changed" is a lie you've made up.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535225#Comment_122535225

"Any success by Ukraine is to be welcomed"

Oh well that settles it then. No one would ever in the history of the internet sends post after post laden with content against someone and then throw in a one liner supporting them 🤣

weisses

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535297#Comment_122535297

What is the difference ? all three are weapons of mass destruction.

Putin already used chemical weapons in Ukraine anyway

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535305#Comment_122535305

The best you can do? Couldn't read the other posts no?

That settles it then.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535326#Comment_122535326

I read them.

You are 100% pro Russia and no amount of "I want Ukraine to win but" is gonna fool anyone.

Suckler

double post

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535338#Comment_122535338

Wrong again, nothing I've written hints at being 100% pro-Russian. It seems to be all you have.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535311#Comment_122535311

A nuclear war hasn't been seen in actuality in 80 years; (cold war dick swinging aside) it would be a significant escalation to say the least. Far more than chemical warfare. As I said though, the nuclear bluff's been called a few times now.

But that's still not addressing the fact that what you'd stated I'd written was wholly incorrect.

Sleepy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535346#Comment_122535346

And no matter how many times his mouthpieces mention the word nuclear… Putin can't go there. Not only would he lose Chinese backing, Biden has told him it'll be the end of his conventional forces if he does.

Just imagine the damage a single squadron of F35s could do to Russia's military capabilities. Then consider what the entire air power of NATO could do. Russia would be bombed back to the stone age.

weisses

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535399#Comment_122535399

Technically we never had a Nuclear war… as where two sides using them. The closest we got was 1962

On the one hand Russia using a tactical nuke somewhere might be a blessing, it would end this conflict pretty quick

Russia using proper chemical and/or biological agents would just as much be seen as an escalation.

amandstu

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535450#Comment_122535450

"

"On the one hand Russia using a tactical nuke somewhere might be a blessing, it would end this conflict pretty quick"

You will have to explain how it could be a good idea for Russia to use a tactical nuclear bomb on innocent Ukrainians.

A blessing for who?

Avatar in the Post

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535297#Comment_122535297

Dear gawd, having to read through your, er, contributions is bad enough the first time.

"The danger in all of these recent Ukrainian success's is that the response from Putin also increases in its requirement for retribution - both in actuality on the ground and in propaganda."

This is your post - "retribution" are you saying it's totally unreasonable to assume you're talking about 'Da bomb' here, considering the context?

Once I mentioned nukes you pivoted to chemical weapons etc as possible retribution.

Anyway, now that that is cleared up for any reasonable person, are you advocating Ukraine seek peace as it's best option right now?

thatsdaft

Meanwhile ISIS taken over a prison in Volgograd and running riot with hostages

Poor Putin can’t get a break

Avatar in the Post

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535526#Comment_122535526

Second time that's happened. What's that saying, first time is a misfortune, second time is careless. 😂

paul71

Another 5 pages of shite from another poster who thinks the Russian army is the power that the Soviet army was in 1945 to 1989, without the Warsaw pact economies, without 1/3 of the population of the Soviet Union, with 30 years of theft and lies of the post communist era, with the black sea fleet now sitting on the ocean floor, and with 2 years of battlefield loss, and currently begging from North Korea.

It is actually pathetic to think how gullable some people are.

weisses

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535481#Comment_122535481

It would not be a good idea for the Russians to use one. (hence me saying it could be a blessing for the Ukrainians) Using a Tactical nuke on an Ukrainian military target would be pretty gruesome, I would assume that after the russians using one, the rest of this bloody conflict would be short lived, saving thousands upon thousands of innocent lives.

But escalation wise Russia will not use one and strategically its not wise to do so either, mainly because you cannot occupy a position you just nuked ( Russians digging around Chernobyl thought otherwise)

Interesting piece below for relevance

https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/AUPress/Book-Reviews/Display/Article/2462838/atomic-salvation-how-the-a-bomb-saved-the-lives-of-32-million-people/#:~:text=Lewis%20estimates%20that%20the%20bombing,of%20roughly%2030%20million%20people.

"Lewis estimates that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, to the extent that it induced Japanese surrender, saved the lives of roughly 30 million people."

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535490#Comment_122535490

Again I didn't pivot, you made an assumption in your , er, contributions and were proven incorrect.

I didn't infer/mean/imply 'Da bomb'; when it was put to me I unequivocally stated that is not what I had been referring to.

I'd even quoted another post to clarify what retribution could be expected.

I do expect Putin to respond the only way he knows how to. Lashing out and destroying civilian infrastructure and accommodation.

I fully expect to hear horrific reports of hospitals, schools, power generation facilities, etc, to be targeted on a much larger level shortly.

Because thats just the kind of cnut he is.

Is that clear enough for you or do you need to continue to misrepresent what I read to countenance your assumption and misunderstanding of what I wrote?

junkyarddog

https://x.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1826933184765784433

IS terrorists take over a russian prison!!

Deliberately didn't embed the link correctly as it's NSFW,but it has been blurred.

Avatar in the Post

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535562#Comment_122535562

How can I be proven incorrect. It was reasonable to assume that's the "sky is falling" meaning of your post was 'Da Bomb' - I wasn't the only one to assume such. You subsequently went on to say it could be Chemical Weapons Putin uses, both are war crimes. So, I was hardly (at worst) far off.

But, now that you've cleared that up to your own satisfaction, are you still going to run from my question? You do realise, acknowledging the question and ignoring it equally serves my purpose. Thank you.

Dubh Geannain

Decent animation with a decent margin of error but it's still very interesting to watch.

https://twitter.com/TarmoFella/status/1826948553169576421

Re: Korenevo, it looks like the main plan might be to try and cut it off if they can make it to the Seym River to the North via Tolpino of the town then they'll achieve that.

Avatar in the Post

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535562#Comment_122535562

As I mentioned, you posted your clarification as possibly the war crimes that are chemical weapons - AFTER I said 'Nukes'. You'll not change the narrative.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535595#Comment_122535595

How can I be proven incorrect. It was reasonable to assume that's the "sky is falling" meaning of your post. You subsequently went on to say it could be Chemical Weapons Putin uses, both are war crimes. So, I was hardly (at worst) far off.

If you read the follow up posts I was quite clear, you just chose to ignore them. You made an assumption and jumped on it without reading all I wrote, and were plainly wrong in your assumption/assertion.

But, now that you've cleared that up to your own satisfaction, are you still going to run from my question? You do realise, acknowledging the question and ignoring it equally serves my purpose. Thank you.

which question?

Paddigol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122533589#Comment_122533589

The name calling is embarrassing lads. Primary school stuff. All because someone took great offence at the above innocuous post.

junkyarddog

https://twitter.com/NOELreports/status/1826922317286379854

Aftermath of yesterdays fuel ferry strike!

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122535617#Comment_122535617

You assumed 'Nukes'. I did not. You'll not change the narrative indeed.