Ukraine-Russia War Take 2
Here is what the preliminary take on the Ukraine thread disappearing is:
The site was hit with a massive spam attack where hundreds of spam threads were created. In the case where, for example, I see a single spam thread and delete it, that is called a soft delete, and mods can still see them but forum members cannot. Those deletion can be undone.
When a massive attack hits with hundreds of threads, an admin uses a different procedure where the hundreds of spam threads are merged and then hard deleted, where the threads are gone, and no note is left behind. As I have mentioned with my own experience of just soft deleting a large number of posts, sometimes a post or thread gets checked or merged accidentally and is deleted by mistake. Dealing with hundreds of spam threads takes a sledgehammer, not a scalpel.
It appears that our Ukraine thread may have gotten caught up in that recent net of spam threads. If so, it is likely gone for good. I cant say this for sure, and am awaiting comments from admins on this issue. Yes, this sucks. And hopefully there was some other software glitch that caused the disappearance, and we may recover it in the future.
But in the meantime, I have created this new Ukraine-Russia War thread to enable the conversation to continue. Obviously continuity with earlier discussions will be lost. There is no way around that. So as best as possible, let's pick up the conversation with recent events and go from there.
If you have any questions about this, please post them in the mod thread, not here. Let's keep this thread going with posts about the war, not the disappearance of the old thread.
Thanks.
The issue is part of Russia's demands is Ukraine's army needs to be capped to a very weak force that wouldn't be able to repel a future invasion. In your proposal, is Ukraine allowed to have freedom to arm themselves as they see fit minus nukes and a strict DMZ for both sides of the border with Russia also paying some reparations for their invasion?
Absolutely, Ukraine wouldn't join NATO but could arm itself plus have a DMZ zone. The reparations are probably a deal-breaker for Putin since it'd go against his narrative of triumph, so in my proposal that wouldn't be included.
why would Ukraine ever agree to Russian land grabs unless they could re-draw their NEW country borders and then could join NATO???
one obstacle I guess is...worthless POS Trump, bending over to take it up the a** from his superior fanboy Putin who says No?
Because the alternative could be the assassination of many more ukrainians
Absolutely, Ukraine wouldn't join NATO but could arm itself plus have a DMZ zone. The reparations are probably a deal-breaker for Putin since it'd go against his narrative of triumph, so in my proposal that wouldn't be included.
Well we'll see if Putin softens his stance on Ukraine being able to arm itself.
like this is not a pro Ukraine or anti Ukraine position this is just common sense and a weird hill to die on. if anything im being pro Ukraine here guilting Americans.
I haven't called your agrument anti-Ukaine. It's not a weird hill to die on and I'm not going to die on it.
The worry here is if trump stops giving aid that will also lead to NATO not giving aid by seeing it as a lost cause or just trump forcing them not too. which would have a trickle effect of Ukraine moral plummeting and capitulation. Which is why trumps advisers wont do it but ya.
NATO does not give aid. They provide logistics support and training but they do not give aid. European countries which bilaterally give aid will pobably try to rush through a peace deal, but I do not believe they will stop providing aid befoe a peace deal is worked out because they understand the threat this is to Europe.
continuing the war effort without aid is ****ing stupid and also just not smart of Ukraine perspective and would actually make the Ukraine government what Russia says it is as they send hundreds of thousands to their deaths for no reason. Stall the surrender and prepare an insurgency? now were talking but the conventional war would be over
Read some of my previous posts about what the peace deals that Putin offers entails. Read the posts about how Russia treats occupied territory. Ukraine (correctly in my opinion) views capitulation as worse than fighting. They do not want to be shipped to Siberia, have their children stolen and brainwashed, have their country russified, and then be turned into slave soldiers and sent to fight the next war like what happened to LPR and DPR. (This doesn't mention even half of the bad things that happen if Ukraine capitulates.)
WHAT DO YOU MEAN. THE ENTIRE WAR EFFORT IS BEING HELD TOGETHER BY AID. Why do you keep repeating this nonsense
"Despite generous military support for Ukraine by allies and partners, unless Congress passes the Defense Department's supplemental funding request, Ukraine will not be able to defend itself against Russian aggression, a senior defense official told the news media today."
wait you watch this guy? hes my favorite youtuber on the war. How do you watch him and have some of these takes all he talks about is lines for future negotiations THATHAVE TO HAPPEN AT SOME POINT.
I already watched this and got that 109 year statistic from it
8 minutes in on cutting aid to Ukraine:
"long time lines on maps enthusiasts know that increasing or decreasing a county's share of power does not end conflict. It just shifts the expected outcome of war, increrasing what the benefacto's demands in negotiations, and decrreasing the other side's demands."
Can you guys help me to realize whether this a good or bad scenario for us?
Let's assume Trump forces Ukraine -and Europe- into a peace deal where Russia gets to keep the lands it has conquered. My question is: wouldn't it be actually a good thing?
I fail to see why a peace deal like the one I described is bad:
Because it's appeasement, and we know where that leads. The aggressor, having congratulated himself on his successful aggression and being given the green light by the Western appeasers, will move on to his next target and up the ante.
I guess his people leaked a plan to WSJ.
I mean, ofc its not a real plan but thats the "plan" that they are talking about for discussion purposes I guess.
Two of Trump's advisors, retired General Keith Kellogg and Fred Fleitz
LOL
I guess his people leaked a plan to WSJ.
I mean, ofc its not a real plan but thats the "plan" that they are talking about for discussion purposes I guess.
Your boy Ryan Mcbeth made an interesting point. When Putin rebuffs Trump's proposal, little Donnie's ego may be so bruised he could start piling weapons into Ukraine as reprisal.
What weapons? USA and the West are out of weapons for the most part. That's why Russia is winning. And the weapons that are left are necessary to "finish the job" in Gaza and West Asia.
What weapons? USA and the West are out of weapons for the most part. That's why Russia is winning. And the weapons that are left are necessary to "finish the job" in Gaza and West Asia.
Bro, they've been ramping up production since the invasion, should be at 50% Russian capacity by 2026.
Now Russia numbers are probably inflated because why they need to come hat in hand to N Korea for artillery shells?
Haha nice
Your boy Ryan Mcbeth made an interesting point. When Putin rebuffs Trump's proposal, little Donnie's ego may be so bruised he could start piling weapons into Ukraine as reprisal.
Putin won't rebuff it most likely, there will be a large blame game, and a flooding of propaganda blaming Ukraine. How large the bruise to Donnie's ego is depends entirely upon the outrage that he failed to end the war and his policies are resulting in a drastic increase of Ukrainian deaths and a collapse of their front.
Bro, they've been ramping up production since the invasion, should be at 50% Russian capacity by 2026.
Now Russia numbers are probably inflated because why they need to come hat in hand to N Korea for artillery shells?
It's estimated that more than half of Russia's artillery fires are using North Korean ammo. The ramp up has been enormous from USA already. After the aid package was passed Ukraine's fires disadvantage went from something like 7 to 1 (estimated at 10 to 1 in some important areas) down to 2 to 1. This has resulted in such a drastic shift that Russia has had to completely change its tactics.
Meawhile USA and Europe are still ramping up production. Even if this is not enough ammo, that doesn't mean it makes any sense to pull it.
At the start of this year Ukraine had a major manpower and ammunition issue. For the most part the ammunition issue at this exact moment is no longer one of Ukirane's main problems, and the vast majority of problems are due to manpower.
Putin won't rebuff it most likely, there will be a large blame game, and a flooding of propaganda blaming Ukraine. How large the bruise to Donnie's ego is depends entirely upon the outrage that he failed to end the war and his policies are resulting in a drastic increase of Ukrainian deaths and a collapse of their front.
You've made a pretty strong case in this thread that I adhere to that Putin is going to demand Ukraine has a capped military as part of any peace negotiations. I think that's going to be a big sticking point in any negotiations.
It's estimated that more than half of Russia's artillery fires are using North Korean ammo. The ramp up has been enormous from USA already. After the aid package was passed Ukraine's fires disadvantage went from something like 7 to 1 (estimated at 10 to 1 in some important areas) down to 2 to 1. This has resulted in such a drastic shift that Russia has had to completely change its tactics.
Meawhile USA and Europe are still ramping up production. Even if this is not enough ammo, that doesn't mean
I was mostly joking about that. I think the west collectively was projected by 2025 to be able to match Russian production? A couple things about that though
Is it actually needed as much? Doesn't Ukraine themselves now have capability to manufacture millions of drones a year?
Also it's interesting how long it takes to get production ramped for artillery. Companies are sitting there with blank checks and guarantee purchases and that's as fast as they can go. Makes you wonder about Trump's plans for tariffs to bring jobs back to the US. Stuff doesn't happen overnight.
You've made a pretty strong case in this thread that I adhere to that Putin is going to demand Ukraine has a capped military as part of any peace negotiations. I think that's going to be a big sticking point in any negotiations.
100%. Putin is unlikely at any point to rebuke Trump though. I think it will always be phrased as Ukraine refusing to adhere to reasonable demands no matter how unreasonable they are.
I was mostly joking about that. I think the west collectively was projected by 2025 to be able to match Russian production? A couple things about that though
Is it actually needed as much? Doesn't Ukraine themselves now have capability to manufacture millions of drones a year?
Also it's interesting how long it takes to get production ramped for artillery. Companies are sitting there with blank checks and guarantee purchases and that's as fast as they can go. Makes you wonder about Trump's plans for tariffs to bring jobs back to the US. Stuff doesn't happen overnight.
The way I view it is that drones are largely there to compensate for not having more artillery. The artillery is meant to halt advances before Ukraine has to actually fight them person to person where Ukraine now has a major disadvantage. The way Russia now fights against this is by sending in small teams of 4-6, so Ukraine has to decide if it's worth using the shells they have. At the moment there's really no good option except giving Ukraine more ammo. The less artillery and drones they have, the more they have to risk lives. It's grim.
155mm shells are extremely complex. The price for them has inflated up to $3000 per shell (at least for some companies, I don't know if that's universal, I don't follow it enough). Earlier this year there were Ukrainians saying to just start producing dumb shells so they have something to fire, and there were some in depth arguments explaining why that is a bad idea. Unfortunately I don't recall a lot of the arguments but I remember I was sold on it.
Higher estimates are that North Korea actually sends 2x the amount of shells that Russia uses. There are lots of complaints about the weight of shells being different, resulting in them shooting several hundred meters short or past their target. There's also some videos of them blowing up in the cannon, it's straight up Looney Toons.
not beating the party of putin allegations
Putin is going to push hard pre-trump inauguration to get a better deal
__
In Kryvyi Rih bodies of three children and their mother were taken from under the debris after Russian missile hit residential building.
Mother was 32-years-old, elder son was 10, middle son was 2 and baby daughter was only 2-months-old.
Russia is a babykiller state.
Can you guys help me to realize whether this a good or bad scenario for us?
Let's assume Trump forces Ukraine -and Europe- into a peace deal where Russia gets to keep the lands it has conquered. My question is: wouldn't it be actually a good thing?
U mean basically what actually happen in the same country with the same aggressor couple years ago in Crimea ?
Did it work great today ?
Look where we at again ….
This is the guy who Trump picked as national security advisor
There is hope for Ukraine
