Ukraine conflict
05-06-2024, 07:55 PM
#2951
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,903
Russian talking point: America, which is supplying Ukraine with weapons to defend their borders only, is the "merchant of death", not the peaceful Russians, who had no choice but to invade Ukraine, wreck its cities, rape its women, and steal its children.
The fact that a few of you can't see this kind of gaslighting for what it is is flabbergasting. One might even come to the conclusion that at least some of the shills on social media lately are actually on the Russian payroll what, with the vigor of their arguments and how closely they match Kremlin messaging.
The fact that a few of you can't see this kind of gaslighting for what it is is flabbergasting. One might even come to the conclusion that at least some of the shills on social media lately are actually on the Russian payroll what, with the vigor of their arguments and how closely they match Kremlin messaging.
05-06-2024, 08:09 PM
#2952
Always Working
Joined APC: Jul 2021
Posts: 342
And my questions were the beginning of trying to get you to understand the reasons, but you have no interest in answering them. So hubcapped is correct. All you want to do is argue and you aren't listening. If you do, start by answering the questions.
05-06-2024, 08:19 PM
#2953
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,903
The enemy doesn’t gas about your questions. What’s best for everyone else? What do WE want? How do WE achieve that? Old Ukraine is done. Work on the next iteration.
05-06-2024, 08:49 PM
#2954
Always Working
Joined APC: Jul 2021
Posts: 342
I didn't ask the enemy, which is Russia and their supporters. You just proved you have no interest in the reasons by repeatedly not answering the questions.
05-06-2024, 09:02 PM
#2955
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 12,252
The major European NATO nations are useless as tit$ on a boar hog. They weren't pulling their weight even before the USSR went under and they've been taking "peace dividends" for the last thirty years. THEY NEVER HAD THAT MUCH MILITARILY WHEN THIS STARTED AND MUCH OF WHAT THEY DID HAVE - POORLY MAINTAINED AND INADEQUATELY SUPPLIED WITH ORDNANCE AS IT WAS - they've already given to Ukraine. You don't repair thirty years of fecklessness in two years. They've been PROMISING TO increase their defense spending for the last six US administrations and haven't done it yet. Germany didn't do it when they were riding high on cheap Russian oil and they are less likely to do it now since they are either already in a recession or teetering on the edge of one.
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/finance/ne...061724845.html
France isn't in much better shape:
https://www.euractiv.com/section/eco...any-stay-weak/
Ukraine has had its population declining and aging since 1993
https://www.macrotrends.net/global-m...%20from%202020.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...2040.5%20years.
and even before the war had one of the lowest birth rates in Europe.
https://www.intellinews.com/ukraine-...cial%20Studies.
They do not currently have the military manpower they need to counter the Russians and high end weapons have not been capable of offsetting those numbers. Their formations are shot up and just plain worn out. Even more weapons will not offset that.
So if you are going to insist upon making restoration of internationally recognized borders in the Donbas and Crimea the only acceptable goal, just how do you intend to achieve that? Basically you have two options:
a. NATO boots on the ground (and for all the jawing Britain and France are doing those boots are still overwhelmingly going to have to have American feet in them).
b. Nukes.
Which are you going to choose?
05-06-2024, 09:06 PM
#2956
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2023
Posts: 721
So if you are going to insist upon making restoration of internationally recognized borders in the Donbas and Crimea the only acceptable goal, just how do you intend to achieve that? Basically you have two options:
a. NATO boots on the ground (and for all the jawing Britain and France are doing those boots are still overwhelmingly going to have to have American feet in them).
b. Nukes.
Which are you going to choose?
a. NATO boots on the ground (and for all the jawing Britain and France are doing those boots are still overwhelmingly going to have to have American feet in them).
b. Nukes.
Which are you going to choose?
Oh I know, because it's a false choice and a loaded question.
05-06-2024, 10:02 PM
#2957
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 12,252
https://www.politico.eu/article/ukra...tion-concerns/
an excerpt:
The Ukrainian president held a meeting with the National Security and Defense Council to discuss the corruption allegations involving military officials. There are already 112 criminal proceedings open against military recruiting officials, he said
Zelenskyy said many officials across multiple departments and Ukrainian regions were involved in illegal activities, including illegal enrichment. “Some took cash, some took cryptocurrency. That’s the only difference,” he said. “The cynicism is the same everywhere.”
Zelenskyy said many officials across multiple departments and Ukrainian regions were involved in illegal activities, including illegal enrichment. “Some took cash, some took cryptocurrency. That’s the only difference,” he said. “The cynicism is the same everywhere.”
https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/28/europ...ntl/index.html
Most of Ukrainian combat troops have been at it for over two years with only poorly trained replacements. While war is not entirely a young man's game, trench warfare generally isn't done with troops with an average age of 43. And the BBC estimates that at least 650,000 draft eligible men have dodged the draft by leaving the country.
https://www.politico.eu/article/ukra...ing-the-draft/
The average age of Ukraine’s frontline soldiers is 43 — and evidence of draft-dodging is mounting.
The BBC recently reported that 650,000 Ukrainian men of fighting age have fled the country in the past two years, most slipping across its borders with Poland and Slovakia, some with false exemption papers allowing them to exit Ukraine despite a ban on fighting-age men leaving the country.
Last year nearly 1,300 draft-dodgers found themselves before the courts, but officials acknowledge this is just a small fraction of those avoiding enlistment. A draft system is in effect to supplement the ranks of volunteers, but lawmakers say it is dysfunctional and is hampered by the failure of thousands to register their details and whereabouts. Enforcement is haphazard, depending largely on random spot checks of documents by police, who are more vigilant in some areas of the country than in others.
The BBC recently reported that 650,000 Ukrainian men of fighting age have fled the country in the past two years, most slipping across its borders with Poland and Slovakia, some with false exemption papers allowing them to exit Ukraine despite a ban on fighting-age men leaving the country.
Last year nearly 1,300 draft-dodgers found themselves before the courts, but officials acknowledge this is just a small fraction of those avoiding enlistment. A draft system is in effect to supplement the ranks of volunteers, but lawmakers say it is dysfunctional and is hampered by the failure of thousands to register their details and whereabouts. Enforcement is haphazard, depending largely on random spot checks of documents by police, who are more vigilant in some areas of the country than in others.
And that doesn't even consider the accumulated damage the infrastructure of the country itself is acruing. Just to rebuild the infrastructure already destroyed will cost a half TRILLION dollars.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe...rnment%20found.
and that number will continue to climb every day until peace comes.
So no, unfortunately, that's NOT a false choice. Not if you buy into Zelensky's current rhetoric.
05-06-2024, 11:14 PM
#2958
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2023
Posts: 721
Every single reputable report - even those from the Ukraine government itself - shows they are desperately short of manpower. The general who commanded during the initial invasion when Ukraine stopped the Russians short of Kyiv and forced them halfway back -commander-in-chief Valerii Zaluzhnyi - stated publicly that they needed 500,000 new troops - that was in December. Ukraine has ALWAYS had trouble with conscription and recruiting. Back in August Zelensky fired all the regional recruiting Chiefs for rampant corruption and taking bribes to grant deferments and exemptions:
https://www.politico.eu/article/ukra...tion-concerns/
an excerpt:
it isn't a stalemate, Russian troops are advancing and Ukrainian troops are giving ground:
https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/28/europ...ntl/index.html
Most of Ukrainian combat troops have been at it for over two years with only poorly trained replacements. While war is not entirely a young man's game, trench warfare generally isn't done with troops with an average age of 43. And the BBC estimates that at least 650,000 draft eligible men have dodged the draft by leaving the country.
https://www.politico.eu/article/ukra...ing-the-draft/
Now you can WISH this was a stalemate and will remain one and you can WISH that the Ukraine had the manpower to maintain a stalemate on their own, but that won't make it so.
And that doesn't even consider the accumulated damage the infrastructure of the country itself is acruing. Just to rebuild the infrastructure already destroyed will cost a half TRILLION dollars.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe...rnment%20found.
and that number will continue to climb every day until peace comes.
So no, unfortunately, that's NOT a false choice. Not if you buy into Zelensky's current rhetoric.
https://www.politico.eu/article/ukra...tion-concerns/
an excerpt:
it isn't a stalemate, Russian troops are advancing and Ukrainian troops are giving ground:
https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/28/europ...ntl/index.html
Most of Ukrainian combat troops have been at it for over two years with only poorly trained replacements. While war is not entirely a young man's game, trench warfare generally isn't done with troops with an average age of 43. And the BBC estimates that at least 650,000 draft eligible men have dodged the draft by leaving the country.
https://www.politico.eu/article/ukra...ing-the-draft/
Now you can WISH this was a stalemate and will remain one and you can WISH that the Ukraine had the manpower to maintain a stalemate on their own, but that won't make it so.
And that doesn't even consider the accumulated damage the infrastructure of the country itself is acruing. Just to rebuild the infrastructure already destroyed will cost a half TRILLION dollars.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe...rnment%20found.
and that number will continue to climb every day until peace comes.
So no, unfortunately, that's NOT a false choice. Not if you buy into Zelensky's current rhetoric.
Signs are that Russia is also on it's way to zero men. The Ruble is worth less than $0.01. Civil unrest, political assassinations, and general disarray inside of Russia is happening and an increasing rate.
Wars of attrition are about who goes to zero first. Which is why giving the Ukrainians lifelines are vitally important.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kG93gJ7rlpI
Destroy the Kerch Bridge. Crimea goes. And so does Putin.
05-07-2024, 05:45 AM
#2959
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2023
Posts: 197
You and Excargo have some valid points. The problem I have is that you tend to like to wrap them up in what sounds an awful lot like it came out of the old Soviet Pravda. Is the course of this war guaranteed if the US continues aid? Of course not. Not difficult to figure out what happens if we cut aid off though. Are the Ukrainians struggling with manpower? Yes. Should the US vigorously debate where it's foreign aid goes? Of course. Does wrapping those arguments up in rhetoric that portrays the US as the root of all the world's evil & that it is on the verge of becoming a failed state if it spends one more dollar on aid to Ukraine make you sound a whole lot like a Russian bot? Yup.
05-07-2024, 06:31 AM
#2960
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 12,252
You and Excargo have some valid points. The problem I have is that you tend to like to wrap them up in what sounds an awful lot like it came out of the old Soviet Pravda. Is the course of this war guaranteed if the US continues aid? Of course not. Not difficult to figure out what happens if we cut aid off though. Are the Ukrainians struggling with manpower? Yes. Should the US vigorously debate where it's foreign aid goes? Of course. Does wrapping those arguments up in rhetoric that portrays the US as the root of all the world's evil & that it is on the verge of becoming a failed state if it spends one more dollar on aid to Ukraine make you sound a whole lot like a Russian bot? Yup.
And again the ad hominem attack. You admit that the points are valid but you automatically discount them because someone you dislike may have said something similar, then take the next step and infer - or in the case of other postings - slander the one who you have just admitted has valid points.
That is fundamentally irrational and emotion driven thinking. It is sloppy thinking. Nothing I post will change the reality of the situation in Ukraine. One can deny the reality - but it doesn't change it. Now, even admitting the reality, you are castigating those who point it out.
I wish the Ukraine-Russian war had never happened. I wish that the things done historically that led to tens of thousands of deaths of the conscripts on both sides had never happened. But it's like the posting I made on how WW1 started and how the reparations levied against Germany in the Treaty of Versailles that they could not possibly meet lead to the demise of the Weimar Republic and the rise of Hitler and ultimately WW2. These things aren't as simple as Napolean/Hitler/Putin = bad, or Russian = bad or Ukraine = good and certainly not conscripts of either side being bad.
I'd like for Ukraine to win by their definition - that is to recover all the land up to the limit of their internationally recognized borders, but right now the only way I can see that happening is option a or option b, both of which entail considerable risk of escalation that will only widen the carnage. Other outcomes - the Ukrainian military being able to overcome their manpower disadvantage or their logistic disadvantage in a country that is far more beaten up by war and with an army far more beaten up by war than when they started is not realistic - it's magical thinking - praying for a miracle.
And in the end, this is either going to have to be settled at the negotiating table or by the unconditional surrender or complete destruction of one of the combatants. That's simple reality. And assuming they both survive, they are still going to be living cheek to jowl along a 600+ mile border.
The question to ask is will Ukraine be in a better negotiating position six months from now? I don't think so. They are a small country that is growing smaller. They have a smaller population that is growing smaller. They had some of the poorest infrastructure in Europe at the beginning of this war and it's in worse shape now. What is going to change in the next six months that will substantially improve Ukraine's chances of actually winning a war against a larger adversary absent option a or b? It's not that I don't wish it would happen but wishing will not make it happen, either my wishes or yours.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
