Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Russia-Ukraine War (Threadbanned in op)

1139140142144145168

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,450 ✭✭✭RedXIV


    It's worth acknowledging the courage the young fella he referenced in his squad who refused to go forward and kill and was shot for his disobedience. It was likely a known consequence of his actions and he did it anyway.

    There is some brave people there, whether folks like to admit it or not. Its just a shame they are in such a minority



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,796 ✭✭✭Paddigol


    Who do you mean when you say the 'Russians' - the current members of the Russian army? The population of the entire of Russia? Or just the population of Moscow, St. Petersburg etc? Or just the provincial Russians? Because for the size of the country, I don't see the massive queues of Russians lining up to volunteer that you'd expect in an existential war. I do hear a lot of talk of conscripts. And before you mention Ukrainian conscripts, there is a vast difference in population size as well as the fact that as the invaded country (i) their volunteers have already been fighting for a couple of years and (ii) many Ukrainians, facing an existential threat, fled from the war with their families in the early weeks/ months.

    I don't see any evidence of the Russians seeing this war as an existential threat. There was no threat before Putin ordered the invasion - he was at great pains to tell everyone that. There's been hardly any attacks on Russian territory. And there's been no sign of any popular resistance to the Ukrainians to date.

    Which all makes sense - even thinking back to WW2, the only point at which the poorly equipped and unmotivated Russians stopped running from the Germans was when it ultimately did become an existential fight for survival. At that point, for sure, the Russians' ability to endure proved decisive. Right now, I don't see the Russians rushing to fight an enemy who aren't coming for them, in defence of an elite who even they surely can see don't give two f**ks about them.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,087 ✭✭✭rolling boh


    Ideally I would love to see Ukraine beating the Russians back from land taken by the Russians rather than Ukraine taking fairly inconsequential in the grand scheme of things land in Russia .I can't see Ukraine getting the upper hand in both cases .Is the trade off worth the trouble ,just can't see Ukraine sustaining it .No doubt it was great boost for morale but that won't last if the price is high which unfortunately it proberly is .Time will tell of course .



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,548 ✭✭✭weisses


    From your link

    "My worry is that in the longer term, Ukraine, which is facing dangerous shortfalls in manpower and equipment, will deplete elite units that would have been needed elsewhere. In a war of attrition, manpower and equipment are essential. 

    But in material terms, not much can be expected in terms of lasting impact. Ukraine will be forced to retreat from Russia, and its surviving troops and equipment will be redistributed, after rest and refit, to other critical areas of Ukraine’s front with Russia."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,202 ✭✭✭rogber


    Here's one about Kursk being precursor to march on Moscow:

    Re: Russia-Ukraine War
    by W******* · 4 days ago ·
    They should be measuring it in distance from Moscow,,, the countdown is on

    And here's the other:

    Re: Russia-Ukraine War
    by Th****** · 2 days ago
    Literally,first shot fired and they'll surrender

    If you didn't insist on it I wouldn't even bother. But you did insist. You really need to get over your obsession with trying to "catch people out", it wastes your and their time

    Post edited by rogber on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,133 ✭✭✭✭briany


    Let's look at this in simple terms: you say that the cost of Ukraine's operation in Kursk is probably high. I say that the price of Ukraine driving at Russian lines in the east would almost certainly be far higher.

    I'm no Sun Tzu, but even I know that armies should seek to strike the enemy where they are weak, not where they are strong.

    OK, if the land Ukraine is occupying is really just inconsequential, then I'm sure it won't particularly bother Putin to let them have it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 70 ✭✭doyle55


    Surprise the Russian stooge David Sacks uses Kyiv to describe the Ukrainian capital.

    His paymaster won't be happy.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,699 ✭✭✭✭Say my name


    One of the results of Putin closing off Russia to become North Korea II has been the desertion of trained flight crew and pilots from it's national airline Aeroflot to other countries and airlines abroad.

    He was never the sharpest tool in the box but somehow the public cowed under his thugs to now see Russia fall apart and become a sister of North Korea.

    Words from Кара-Мурза.

    Earlier, Kara-Murza expressed the opinion that after the fall of the Putin regime, the Russian people will have a lot of work to do to correct their mistakes, and the most important task will be healing and education regarding the events that took place, as well as accepting public responsibility for what happened.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,373 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    It's not just territory… it's Russia diverting forces in response to this, and possibly having to focus more on defence in future. And Ukraine using the incursion, from advanced positions hitting Russian targets, logistics - assets being used to wage war in Ukraine.

    So even if Ukraine withdraws from the territory, it will have permanently altered the future equation.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,311 ✭✭✭Virgil°


    Not to mention the biggest thing. Which is as most people suspected: That the Russian red lines are simply fashioned from whole cloth. We literally have Marders and Bradleys rolling around capturing internationally recognized Russian territory and Putin hasn't even declared war yet!

    No nukes, not even a threat of mobilization. The drip drip escalation management strategy is now completely redundant.

    Still it's incredibly frustrating to see Bidens administration still not allowing ATACMs and even the Brits not allowing Storm Shadow on Russian territory. Just imagine the great things Ukraine could be doing if they were actually let off the leash.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,202 ✭✭✭rogber


    Yes it should be full licence to use all weapons in self defence, which means no deliberate targeting of civilians, but everything else is fair game, including on Russian territory.

    This is a war, every day people are dying and suffering horrible injuries, it needs to end asap and letting Ukraine play their full hand is the best hope of that



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,051 ✭✭✭✭josip


    Zero chance of Russia accepting any responsibility. I can't think of many countries apart from Germany post WWII that accepted responsibility for what happened. And that only happened after much of their country was destroyed and under the complete control of the victors who were able to get the guilt trip going.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_collective_guilt

    Even if this ends well for Ukraine, there's no chance of Russia paying reparations and I hope the sanctions remain in place until at some point in the future it fractures into its constituent republics, only capable of acting the bollix with each other and let the rest of us get on with our lives without their interference.



  • Registered Users Posts: 710 ✭✭✭scottser


    A real long term worry indeed but that's only if Ukraine get caught in another situation where their forces are under attrition. Ukraine has shown that fast counter-offences behind enemy lines yield far better results and if anything, you might see Russia imitating them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,995 ✭✭✭RoyalCelt


    I have my doubts it crashed like this due to a fault. Personally I think the Ukrainians managed to take it out but Russia will never admit that unless it's absolutely obvious and even then sometimes they'd deny it.

    In other news I see a HIMARS system was taken out by an iskander missile. It's incredible that in 2 and a half years of this war only 2/3 of them have been taken out. At that rate they're easily replaced and I believe one of the others taken out was sent away for repairs so not fully destroyed.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    What? I'm not trying to catch anyone out.

    I simply said that those lads who refused to fight and are been sent to Kursk, will fire off a couple rounds then surrender.

    All eyes on Kursk. Slava Ukraini.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,796 ✭✭✭Paddigol


    I don't understand why they don't just privately tell the Ukrainians that they can use those long-range weapons whatever way they want within the limits of the Geneva Convention. And then just pull a Putin and gaslight/ deny when the Russians start complaining.

    There's no need to play the whole thing out in the world's media - we don't need a press conference with Biden/ Starmer announcing that those weapons can no be used.

    Let Putin start shouting when it happens, and then just kind of "oh, we've no report of that… are you sure?… we'll investigate"…



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,548 ✭✭✭weisses


    Dont you follow the war ? Ukraine's forces are under pressure in the east with Russian forces gaining ground every day.

    RE offensives, Russia did exactly that at day one of this war…. Broke through Ukraine's border defence with ease. It is what happened after that is interesting, because Ukraine might face the same issue



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,796 ✭✭✭Paddigol


    The Russians have shown zero capacity to be able to conduct fast, effective mobile assaults to date. I'd almost like to see them try it, because I'm pretty sure they'd be dispatched without much trouble by the Ukrainians.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,719 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Just let them use what they want.

    It's very clear at this stage that cowardly Putin isn't gonna back up all this talk provocation and escalation.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,796 ✭✭✭Paddigol


    Can we deal with facts for a second - the 'day one of this war' you're referring to is the worst possible comparator as it was literally the opening shots of a lightening invasion which Putin had promised the world was not happening… just military exercises in Russia he said. Of course they were going to have a huge impact. But all it demonstrates is that even with every advantage conceivable, the Russian army is a relative shambles. And it's only degenerated since then.

    There is almost no grounds to compare that event with this incursion by the UAF. The Ukrainians drove the Russians back through use of speed and adaptability. When have Russia shown any capacity for that in this war? They rely solely on (a) overwhelming numbers and (b) artillery firepower. As soon as that looks to be the threat to the Ukrainians in Kursk they can just withdraw to whatever defensive lines they've set without losing as much as a single metre of Ukrainian territory. Rinse and repeat.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,526 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    I never suggested Russia collapsing or having a coup. My point, which was formed based on an assessment of factors which support it as set out above, is that this is not an existential war from Russia and, despite claiming that it is, they know it is not. You think to the contrary, but haven't really explained why. I guess we are at an impasse so!



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,526 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    The land itself is not that significant. The important point is that Russia are weak there and Ukraine have been able to successfully attack there causing a lot of Russian casualties and surrenders. It also allows Ukraine to exercise their advantage - in mobile warfare.

    So I think you are assuming, incorrectly, that this assault is causing more Ukrainian casualties than Russian casualties, for which there is no evidence of. The price of attacking where Russia is weak is far lower than the price of attacking where Russia is stronger, so it is an ideal strategy if the intention is to cost the Russians more than it costs themselves. Together with the other benefits of attacking on Russian soil.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 754 ✭✭✭thatsdaft


    Square kilometres gained per day in north

    Square meters lost per day in east

    As per ISW daily reports

    But most importantly unsustainable personnel and equipment losses on Russian side which we now see manifest in Ukrainians just walking across border and no one to defend

    At rate Russians are advancing in east it will take 150-200 years just to regain what they captured and then lost in 2022



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 754 ✭✭✭thatsdaft


    we’ve gone from 1000 troops that Russians boasted to have stopped 8 days ago

    To 10-12000

    according to the guy who repeatedly lied to Irish population on our media



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,575 ✭✭✭swampgas


    "Still it's incredibly frustrating to see Bidens administration still not allowing ATACMs and even the Brits not allowing Storm Shadow on Russian territory. Just imagine the great things Ukraine could be doing if they were actually let off the leash."

    NATO and Russia are still pointing nuclear missiles at each other, and scanning the skies for any sign of a first strike by the other side. Having large, advanced missiles entering Russian airspace at high speed is inherently more dangerous than a column of tanks heading to Moscow. There's the risk of automated response systems triggering a nuclear exchange. If you are a paranoid Russian leader, you might suspect NATO might attempt a first strike using the cover of Ukranian attacks. I'm not surprised at all that there is considerable caution being exercised here.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,719 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    3 years into a 3 day war they stop an 8 day invasion on the 1st day 🤣



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 754 ✭✭✭thatsdaft


    A war the same ambassador told us repeatedly before it started would be “insane”

    I guess he was right about that

    Days before the war began, Yury Filatov branded the suggestion that Russia would invade Ukraine “insane”.

    https://www.kentonline.co.uk/news/national/russian-ambassador-denies-lying-to-irish-public-over-ukraine-57130/

    This guy has the credibility of a used condom in a whorehouse trash bin



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 754 ✭✭✭thatsdaft


    That works both ways tho

    We’ve seen both missiles and drones traverse NATO on way to Ukraine, and just yesterday chemical attack on couple NATO bases water supplies

    And an interesting point was made on Ukraine the Latest podcast, while Ukrainian hands are tied when it comes to long range weapons the Russians are daily lobbing missiles full of western microchips



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,572 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    whatever way you try to frame it this Kursk thing will Peter out and its probably damaged Ukraine's chances to hold on to all their lines, I dont see the Russians being in a hurry to negotiate

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



Advertisement