• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

UA-RU | DISCUSSIONS

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yingyang said:
Yes I made this point recently. As it has not been declared war by Russia against Ukraine they have limitations on power projection. This and military aid benefits from west is why this is still going on. Totally different circumstances by now should it have been a declared war.
Click to expand...
Right....Sure Russia can bring more, sure. They have used tanks, missiles, drones, artillery, lost 10s of thousands of soldiers, have had 100s of aircraft shot down, lost their Black Sea flag ship, took 82 days to seize one city, abandoned 100s of working vehicles and committed documented war crimes.....all because they were just holding back. They could have easily have avoided all that if they declared war? That is the line now? So instead of opting to save lives and equipment they went the long drawn out war of attrition route....just cuz? As far as them being limited to their power projections due to not declaring war, is it now the argument that we have only seen a fraction of Russian might and power? Keep hanging on to that dream....
 
Rhazaghul said:
Right....Sure Russia can bring more, sure. They have used tanks, missiles, drones, artillery, lost 10s of thousands of soldiers, have had 100s of aircraft shot down, lost their Black Sea flag ship, took 82 days to seize one city, abandoned 100s of working vehicles and committed documented war crimes.....all because they were just holding back. They could have easily have avoided all that if they declared war? That is the line now? So instead of opting to save lives and equipment they went the long drawn out war of attrition route....just cuz? As far as them being limited to their power projections due to not declaring war, is it now the argument that we have only seen a fraction of Russian might and power? Keep hanging on to that dream....
Click to expand...
Answers to questions.
1. Yes
2.could be
3. Russian mistake misconception.
4. Yes
I previously made the same comment recently . You must have missed it.🤷🏻‍♂️
Feel free to refer back.
1.Finland Sweden nato membership my post #111.
2. UA-RU/MAY1ST-20TH DISCUSSION. #462/#468/#469. ENJOY.
please keep in mind we are all entitled to different opinions. And mine are neutral. Although some here can't or won't except that.🙄 🤣😉🤷🏻‍♂️👍
 
Last edited:
Yingyang said:
Answers to questions.
1. Yes
2.could be
3. Russian mistake misconception.
4. Yes
I previously made the same comment recently . You must have missed it.🤷🏻‍♂️
Click to expand...
Not very convincing
Mostly just an excuse for failure on Russias part.
What will they bring?
Their own previous statements prove this want their strategy at first to take Kiev.
Dead civilians bodies are a good basis of evidence of war crimes
What do they have left their raising the enlistment age because they have this overwhelmingly powerful army ready to pounce.
Have you heard of a Potemkin village?
You can raise the argument but it’s just not believable
 
Guest said:
Not very convincing
Mostly just an excuse for failure on Russias part.
What will they bring?
Their own previous statements prove this want their strategy at first to take Kiev.
Dead civilians bodies are a good basis of evidence of war crimes
What do they have left their raising the enlistment age because they have this overwhelmingly powerful army ready to pounce.
Have you heard of a Potemkin village?
You can raise the argument but it’s just not believable
Click to expand...
It's not hard. Compare what they have used to what they have and that's your answer. And besides if you have no idea and believe Russia has lost most of its capacity-capabilities military wise , then feel free to challenge the other thread about Moldova. Surely that is absolutely ridiculous considering your beliefs. Russia has been crushed military wise now by Ukraine. So what's the point of new Russian threats and threads of expansion. Surely if Russia has lost everything military wise than the threat is over, Ukraine has it in the bag and Moldova issues are just a joke. So you have convinced me like you state. No havn't heard of village and apparently not an issue now Ukraine is winning. No argument was raised only created from my statement. Russians regional war with Ukraine is lost. Relax you have no- reason to be concerned and the west can claim victory.
Finally. Actually 8 yrs isn't that long. I guess. War crimes no argument here i have also previously stated facts and beliefs. Nothing Russia has done nothing at all, the west hasn't already. Hague is purely designed to only bring the enemies of the west accountable for the exact same atrocities they have committed themselves with impunity. FACT. No argument here.🤝👍
 
Last edited:
Yingyang said:
Yes I made this point recently. As it has not been declared war by Russia against Ukraine they have limitations on power projection. This and military aid benefits from west is why this is still going on. Totally different circumstances by now should it have been a declared war.
Click to expand...
It would have been even worse, logistical nightmare, since you can only transport so and so much on the roads and railway tracks with more men more logistics are needed and clearly Russia suffered from a poor planning since their plan A was to take Kiev the first week - second if they go for mobilisation, other contrys would have done the same including Ukraine. Russia is now playing on the Western powers terms, a long painfull campaign. I predict that even with Chinas and even Indias help they cant outproduce them. Much of their industry is from the Western Contrys. ( I personally hope that they learned, after we saw Russias takeovers, they should think about taking steps how they can disable their productions in case they get the same idears ) I acknowledge however that Africa might turn it ( not production wise but as a distraction for more assets there, and ofc Africas resources )
 
Last edited:
Erecon said:
It would have been even worse, logistical nightmare, since you can only transport so and so much on the roads and railway tracks with more men more logistics are needed and clearly Russia suffered from a poor planning since their plan A was to take Kiev the first week - second if they go for mobilisation, other contrys would have done the same including Ukraine. Russia is now playing on the Western powers terms, a long painfull campaign. I predict that even with Chinas and even Indias help they cant outproduce them. Much of their industry is from the Western Contrys. ( I personally hope that they learned, after we saw Russias takeovers, they should think about taking steps how they can disable their productions in case they get the same idears ) I acknowledge however that Africa might turn it ( not production wise but as a distraction for more assets there, and ofc Africas resources )
Click to expand...
Absolutely agree. Personally I would have declared war straight out and simply used land sea air based missiles and artillery destroying airports .industrial and military in one mass wave. Get on phone request a surrender immediately. They say no. Tell them take shelter as I'm now targeting cities and anything else. Use same hardware to strike cities while moving ground forces to cut off on Ukraine side border to Europe, open to one way traffic for refugees to leave . Phone up request one more surrender before unleashing boots and hardware into civilian areas for occupation. Now that would have been a completely different outcome. But hey each to their own. I see it Putin thought they may surrender under the minimal pressure he used and didn't expect what was to happen. Miscalculation of circumstances. 🤦‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️🙄😉
 
DEFCON Warning System said:
Not directly. But there is such thing as collateral damage.
Click to expand...
For one reason or another, Russians have been very reticent when it comes to bombing Kyiv proper. Assuming we're still talking about conventional weapons, it's hard to imagine a scenario where an attack which actually deals damage to the US embassy could be handwaved as "collateral damage".
 
Yingyang said:
Absolutely agree. Personally I would have declared war straight out and simply used land sea air based missiles and artillery destroying airports .industrial and military in one mass wave. Get on phone request a surrender immediately. They say no. Tell them take shelter as I'm now targeting cities and anything else. Use same hardware to strike cities while moving ground forces to cut off on Ukraine side border to Europe, open to one way traffic for refugees to leave . Phone up request one more surrender before unleashing boots and hardware into civilian areas for occupation. Now that would have been a completely different outcome. But hey each to their own. I see it Putin thought they may surrender under the minimal pressure he used and didn't expect what was to happen. Miscalculation of circumstances. 🤦‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️🙄😉
Click to expand...
Interesting they have used pretty much all those resources and to one degree or the other. As well as the targeting of cities air and rail.
Could they have done more? You seem to believe they could have. What’s the source of that.
They have bombed cities and neighborhoods into oblivion.
So their willingness to commit these weapons platforms and strike these targets been more than made clear.
So what serious difference does a deceleration of war make.
Their using air sea ballistic armor striking infrastructure transport and civilian including medical targets.
So the notion that marking a deceleration would somehow unleash more destruction doesn’t follow. They’ve already shown willing to use these weapons on those targets. Putin doesn’t need a declaration of war to just do more of what they are already doing.
 
Guest said:
Interesting they have used pretty much all those resources and to one degree or the other. As well as the targeting of cities air and rail.
Could they have done more? You seem to believe they could have. What’s the source of that.
They have bombed cities and neighborhoods into oblivion.
So their willingness to commit these weapons platforms and strike these targets been more than made clear.
So what serious difference does a deceleration of war make.
Their using air sea ballistic armor striking infrastructure transport and civilian including medical targets.
So the notion that marking a deceleration would somehow unleash more destruction doesn’t follow. They’ve already shown willing to use these weapons on those targets. Putin doesn’t need a declaration of war to just do more of what they are already doing.
Click to expand...
Your either lost in my statement or have no idea on the difference between current Russian claims and the rules and limits associated with that.
And the difference between a declaration of war and the implications, differences and consequences. GOODLUCK. No point asking me as you should study difference through other sources, to achieve an unbiased result on how conflicts really work and the rules behind military projection for different reasons. Homework can enlighten you.
 
Yingyang said:
Your either lost in my statement or have no idea on the difference between current Russian claims and the rules and limits associated with that.
And the difference between a declaration of war and the implications, differences and consequences. GOODLUCK. No point asking me as you should study difference through other sources, to achieve an unbiased result on how conflicts really work and the rules behind military projection for different reasons. Homework can enlighten you.
Click to expand...
Well you haven’t made the case it’s just been repeated what ifs.
What exactly can Russia do in excess of what they have done so far. And what is your indications they have the capabilities to actually do what your alluding to.
The demonstration that they have been unable to defend and hold significant portions of territory. Or prevent the significant losses to their armor and aircraft is a valid demonstration that they do not have the military means to prevent it. A war declaration would have no meaning to that.

Exactly what military force or effort could Russia bring if they declared war that they haven’t already used. Except more of it.
 
Guest said:
Exactly what military force or effort could Russia bring if they declared war that they haven’t already used. Except more of it.
Click to expand...
That's pretty much it. Russia is not some lawless wildland. They have laws they must follow, and calling this a "special action" or whatever means there are certain things they can not do. If they were to formally declare war, they have a lot more options at their disposal.
 
Guest said:
Well you haven’t made the case it’s just been repeated what ifs.
What exactly can Russia do in excess of what they have done so far. And what is your indications they have the capabilities to actually do what your alluding to.
The demonstration that they have been unable to defend and hold significant portions of territory. Or prevent the significant losses to their armor and aircraft is a valid demonstration that they do not have the military means to prevent it. A war declaration would have no meaning to that.

Exactly what military force or effort could Russia bring if they declared war that they haven’t already used. Except more of it.
Click to expand...
<removed, getting personal> I'll give you 1 the first to start with. Find three different sources on Russian military forces. Study each one and pick the differences with information than come to your conclusions. Now do that with every other subject you challenge and don't know the answers. 😏👍
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom