Live Conflict Ukraine-Russia War

xizhimen

Experienced member
Messages
7,391
Reactions
384
Nation of residence
China
Nation of origin
China
Nato is all talk, they pull out all stops trying to discredit Russia yet dare not to take on Russia head on. If Russia was indeed as weak as what the west claimed, US would have jumped right into this war just like they did in Iraq, Lybia, Afganistan, Syria...., but now they all do big talk, bullies only pick on weaklings, when bigger guys like Russia comes along, they just run and hide.
 

B.t.N

Committed member
Messages
280
Reactions
299
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
i see a 15 month war period with Serbs also its not just the ukrainians they are fighting.
Foreign legion getting rekt on arrival in Severodonetsk.


so technically Russia Vs NATO + ukraine > NATO vs Serbs. That video is not BS either unless you want to argue that the foreign allegiance doesnt work for NATO

I have a suspicion that one of the guys realized how fucked they are and quickly shot himself in the hand ASAP, before the evacuation vehicle left :ROFLMAO:

I guess regular russian conscripts are not too shabby if they are giving these people high casaulties.
So you think you are fighting the French Legion in Ukraine? I wonder if there is any greater praise out there for the Ukrainian troops;)
 

Anastasius

Contributor
Moderator
Azerbaijan Moderator
Messages
1,423
Reactions
6 3,176
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
Azerbaijan
i see a 15 month war period with Serbs also its not just the ukrainians they are fighting.
Foreign legion getting rekt on arrival in Severodonetsk.


so technically Russia Vs NATO + ukraine > NATO vs Serbs. That video is not BS either unless you want to argue that the foreign allegiance doesnt work for NATO

I have a suspicion that one of the guys realized how fucked they are and quickly shot himself in the hand ASAP, before the evacuation vehicle left :ROFLMAO:

I guess regular russian conscripts are not too shabby if they are giving these people high casaulties.
15 month war? NATO didn't fight an actual war against Serbs. They operated a bombing campaign to assist allies in the region in stopping Serbian advances.

I've watched the video. It's foreign volunteers, which nobody has been hiding. But Russian shills like you repeatedly try to pretend are "NATO boots on the ground". No footage of them getting rekt either. Do you just expect people not to examine the material you put forward?

BTW, even your media has admitted that Ukraine has counter-attacked and retaken territory. So Russian forces were quite literally baited into a trap because Putin is so desperate for any gains that the Russian high command makes soldiers charge into certain death without checking if they are getting baited.

So, high casualties according to who? Your media? Hmm, excuse me if I don't take it too seriously.

No, regular Russian conscripts are terrible. You are carrying insane, actually verifiable casualties and are barely able to hold on against a country that was quite literally considered a joke until a couple of months ago. And you know this, hence why you keep trying to BS people that it's actually "Russia vs. Ukraine + NATO".

Sometimes I legitimately wish Russian politicians were stupid enough to pick a direct fight with NATO just so I can see Russian shills like you desperately trying to justify Russia getting blitzed and partitioned in the span of a week as anything other than a catastrophic defeat for Russia.

Hell, your buddy China would probably join in. From what I hear they are already wargaming strategies for annexing eastern Russia when the opportunity comes and Vladivostok is basically 50% Chinese now.
 

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
8,361
Reactions
22 12,853
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
These people will find all kinds of political failure of the US to cope with the losses in Ukraine.

One type will point out that the US and coalition lost to the Taliban, the other will point out Vietnam, Serbia and Iraq.

All of which doesn't have anything to do with NATO military prowess in the battlefield.

Serbia is mainly a bombing campaign, not offensive military operations to topple the regime in Belgrade. Its basically a scaled up version of what the US did in Syria after the Douma chemical attacks in 2018.

Vietnam war is basically a war to keep the South to be separated from the communist North. Not a war to unite the two. The 17th parallel literally stops US advances right into the North.

Iraq ? Yeah Russia failed at trying to do the same the coalition did 31 years ago.

Afghanistan ? The US and the coalition knows the ANA is hopeless, and the Taliban would later prove to be a loyal serfs to the US in its anti ISIS campaign, not to mention the Taliban is now turning on its own fighters
and allies (TTP and Al-Qaeda). Its by all means a win.

Not to mention the ultracomical cope like "W e HaVE NoT yeT useD 7% of OuR arMy"
 

Avanti

Active member
Messages
61
Reactions
257
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
Kiev was an embarrassment but overall Russia is not doing that bad considering the endless supply and support of the richest countries in the world to Ukraine. You have to consider Russia is not a superpower just a regional power with nuclear bombs

I think soon all these different kind of equipment from different countries will hurt Ukrainian military because they have to train their soldiers how to properly use all this new weapons. If they continue to take losses it will be a logistics nightmare I think. Not that the US empire actually cares about Ukrainians they just want to make Russia bleed as much as possible
 

Sami1234

Committed member
Messages
257
Reactions
293
Nation of residence
Algeria
Nation of origin
Algeria
How? Afghanistan, Iraq and Serbia are far less equipped than Ukraine and still took NATO longer than the current occupation in ukraine. The only one here is coping is you. Unless your saying it's apples and oranges because russias opponents are far better than NATOs opponents?(which your not denying) that's like saying turkey failed against Syria for having to sign a cease fire by the Saudis and ruskies which is same logic you are using.
At least the US and Europe are supporting Ukraine what did Russia do to Iraq in 2003 and libya 2011?
 
Last edited:

Kathirz

Contributor
Moderator
Spain Moderator
Messages
476
Reactions
2 1,135
Nation of residence
Spain
Nation of origin
Spain
Regarding the last informations about Spain handing over Shorad Spide missiles and Leopards 2/A4 to Ukraine which appeared in a newspaper close to the goverment.


Spain has about 50 Leopards 2/A4 in "hibernated" state for about 10 years, waiting for bugdet for reconverting them in engineering vehicles among others.
Those were purchased from Germany in 1995 and will need Scholz's OK.

For putting these tanks in operational state, it will take about two months once approved and about 40 tanks are in condition to be transfered once maintenance is done.

The interesting part in the discussions about this new military aid, it includes training for ukranian operators in Latvia and Spain.
If I'm not wrong Poland, Finland and Sweden, among others, have Leopards 2A4 and might be interested also in transfering them to Ukraine.
 
Last edited:

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,276
Reactions
147 16,478
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Nato is all talk, they pull out all stops trying to discredit Russia yet dare not to take on Russia head on. If Russia was indeed as weak as what the west claimed, US would have jumped right into this war just like they did in Iraq, Lybia, Afganistan, Syria...., but now they all do big talk, bullies only pick on weaklings, when bigger guys like Russia comes along, they just run and hide.
Would China fight Russia head on? NO!!
Two nuclear powers will never do. NATO is a nuclear power.
They will use proxies.
When it is Non nuclear countries they are attacking , then yes they will.
 

Fuzuli NL

Experienced member
Germany Correspondent
Messages
3,081
Reactions
27 8,772
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
this is extreme cope, Serbia was a far smaller country and far less equipped than Ukraine and the timeframe took way fucking longer so I dont follow you unless your putting Russia into god tier status that they are suppose to take ukraine faster than Serbia.

Also since Donetsk finally got hit by Ukraine this is what happened next today. Also I am begging those HIMARS to have 500km missiles

View attachment 44532

View attachment 44533
I think Copium kills brain cells. Just say no!

Again, you're comparing a failed invasion of a clown show in Ukraine, with NATO's air campaign in Serbia, and no, Serbia had a strong military, way more than Ukraine in the beginning of the war.

And BTW, Iraq had the strongest army in the region at that time. Stronger than Syria, Iran and even Egypt, and the coalition wiped Saddam's armed forces out of existence.

In Russia's case with its failed attempt to invade and demilitarise Ukraine, Ukraine ended up having equipment it would've never dreamed of acquiring, let alone having them thrown at her in tons for free! So, what happened here is that you made Ukraine stronger, you've destroyed a substantial portion of your armed forces (for lack of modern instruments mostly), your people are going to be hungrier than ever although from the amount of looting we can see that they are already hungry. Your economic situation hasn't hit yet, I know you'd say it's fine but just wait for it.

Another thing that is really different between the two, is that during Desert Storm, many US and western equipment got battle tested therefore a great advertisement for most of them, whereas in Ukraine, Z has become the trademark of every shitty equipment. We could see the filled with egg cartons and being burned like they were timber, the world could also see the inside of your equipment --which by the way you've lost in thousands within such a short time but you're still selectively blind-- and that showed us that even your "stat-of-art" equipment were nothing but a decent-looking hull with actual crap inside. Nobody wants Russian junk any more.

In short, you're comparing successful military campaigns of NATO, with Russian failure in Ukraine.

So, answer me please,
Since you couldn't even demilitarise weak Ukraine which you were constantly bragging about taking its entirety within days or weeks,

How, pray, are you going to demilitarise NATO?
 

LENFYS

New member
Messages
4
Reactions
5
Nation of residence
Poland
Nation of origin
Ukraine
Kiev was an embarrassment but overall Russia is not doing that bad considering the endless supply and support of the richest countries in the world to Ukraine. You have to consider Russia is not a superpower just a regional power with nuclear bombs

I think soon all these different kind of equipment from different countries will hurt Ukrainian military because they have to train their soldiers how to properly use all this new weapons. If they continue to take losses it will be a logistics nightmare I think. Not that the US empire actually cares about Ukrainians they just want to make Russia bleed as much as possible
And what's next? Ukrainians are learning fast, I don't see any problems, but in this case the United States is helping Ukraine not only to support the war against Russia. For example, I am, a citizen of Ukraine, do not want to live under the "Russian world" and we want to fight for our independence, because if we won't we will lose everything that has come down to us for centuries.
 

GoatsMilk

Experienced member
Messages
3,487
Reactions
15 9,317
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
I must say that the Russians progress has been methodical, rather than rapid. Slowly, day by day wearing the Ukrainians down, maintaining a high-moderate operational tempo. Rather than the rapid encirclements and destruction of company and brigade sized forces. They are just destroying them with air and artillery fire, then moving into the ground with infantry. Not much use of MBT and IFV's, very interesting I think. Totally not how the Germans did it in WW2 or how the Americans did it. More like WW1 British doctrine and operational art, when the British were very successful. One thing that is clear for me is the Russians can clearly do both, the fast moving encirclement and firepower, as well as the slow advance using firepower. Both things work and have their place. I get caught up in there being one best way to fight a war, but there is more than one way or even 3-4 different ways to skin the cat in war. The Russians ability to change operationally in two weeks is very impressive. The Russians ability to logistically maintain the operational tempo is impressive too.

The Russians haven't suffered a single operational defeat, against the second best army in Europe. Also the Russians are only using 60-80,000 men throughout the war at any one time. Then rotating these forces in and out. This is very impressive too. Again this is stuff and a level of professionalism that the Russians need to be recognized for. The Ukrainian army and western support has been very disappointing, from my perspective I didn't think the Russians could have invaded Ukraine, destroyed its air defences and air force, encircled its army in the east and then systematically destroyed it. I expected the Ukrainians to pull back west of the big river, keeping 30,000 in the major urban centers and for them to slug it out, in an even contest, but the Russians bringing up the heavy weapons and more men. It hasn't gone like this at all.

Its been shockingly bad. Clownish even.
 

GoatsMilk

Experienced member
Messages
3,487
Reactions
15 9,317
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Is there any Russian fanboys on here who have the dignity to call a spade a spade?

I'm pro Turks in general, but it never stopped me even once calling out something stupid or wrong Turks have done, not once.

This zombie like mindset where "you have to defend Russia" doesn't matter what they do, doesn't matter how evil and it doesn't matter how stupid they act. You got to defend them and show every failure as a success and every lie as a truth.

I would hate to live a life like that, trapped mentally to be someone else's tool forever. Because that's what happens to people who think like that, they are mentally trapped. You become something to be used and abused by billionaire power hungry criminals.
 

Blackbeardsgoldfish

Committed member
Moderator
Germany Moderator
Messages
282
Reactions
1 458
Nation of residence
Austria
Nation of origin
Austria
Would China fight Russia head on? NO!!
Two nuclear powers will never do. NATO is a nuclear power.
They will use proxies.
When it is Non nuclear countries they are attacking , then yes they will.
It's not just that a war between two nuclear powers is unlikely, China sees the immense benefit of keeping the border with Russia calm and stable. They don't want to go back to the cold war days and the military standoff between them.
They need to focus their resources towards the Pacific, SCS and the border with India, the most likely theaters for conflict. Russia is a vital partner for energy and commodities and also remains a crucial supplier of military hardware and know-how.

Should Russia actually be defeated by Ukraine in this war, or get into conflict with NATO, only then we will likely see a decisive chinese diplomatic intervention. In that case, will China take their chance and reconquer the Qing territories? If nuclear war can somehow be avoided, then that is fairly likely, otherwise I don't see a chance. And in a two front war against NATO and China, Russia will undoubtedly go nuclear.

The overtures of the west to Ukraine before the war were clearly designed to keep russian forces away from the far east and out of any conflict between US+allies and China. Russia's invasion was meant to create a buffer and proxy state to allow a concentration of force elsewhere. The longer a frontline Russia had to defend against NATO, the less could be put to use against NATO in the pacific. If Ukraine were to win and join NATO and EU, along with now Finland and Sweden, then Russia has failed in every way.
 

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
8,361
Reactions
22 12,853
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
They need to focus their resources towards the Pacific, SCS and the border with India, the most likely theaters for conflict. Russia is a vital partner for energy and commodities and also remains a crucial supplier of military hardware and know-how.
This. China knows it cannot be both a land power and a sea power. The budget they have will be only be enough for a buildup in the Pacific, don't matter what vows china made before the invasion, they knew they'll not be able to divide their attention for a (land) war in Europe..Not without risking strategic competition with Washington in the Pacific.

Russia is by all account alone...


First, composite land-sea powers cannot be very strong in the maritime and continental directions simultaneously over the long term. They must abide by the principle of strategic concentration, choosing clearly and decisively one orientation over the other. Second, land-sea powers are always in danger of being squeezed by hostile powers on the landward and seaward flanks concurrently. Indeed, two-front wars have invariably spelled disaster for past great powers. Third, land-sea powers must devote resources against liabilities and commitments in the continental and maritime directions. As such, they constantly run the risk of diluting scarce resources. Finally, high-quality leadership is essential for composite land-sea powers to navigate the geostrategic dangers.80

Liu Zhongmin, a professor at Shanghai International Studies University, draws similar lessons from his study of Imperial Germany, Tsarist Russia, and the Soviet Union. To him, Wilhelmine Germany’s “excessive worship” and “blind development” of seapower led Berlin to turn its back on its vital interests on the European continent. The Kaiser’s challenge to British naval supremacy led to the emergence of the Triple Entente between Britain, France, and Russia, a countervailing coalition on land and at sea that encircled Germany.81 Liu discerns similar strategic errors by Tsarist and Soviet leaders. Russia’s quest for seapower not only added an unnecessary burden to its existing landward commitments, but it also compelled great power competitors to form counterbalancing maritime-continental coalitions.82 Concurring, Gu Tianjiao of Jilin University cautions that composite land-sea powers must recognize and obey the limits imposed by natural geographic conditions. Countries that exceed those constraints, like Germany and Russia in the past, are likely to bring about misfortune.83
 
Top Bottom