Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Saradain]

They keep saying that Russia is preparing a massive attack on 24 February.

I really wonder now, are they going to keep sending troops until they win? Russia has a large population, how can the west expect to win this? What if they keep doing massive offensives every now and then with the population they have? If they fail again, they can retry later. Russia follows the example of the roman empire.

Russia doesn't have the men or equipment to send until they win. Doesn't matter if there's 500k men with rags and rusty 1 rifle per 10 men. It's gonna be like those Civilization games where you send 1 ancient era warrior unit against a Giant Death Robot.

Russia having a large population doesn't help when their demographics are fucked beyond belief. The more they try to force unwilling mobiks, old people and other not-suited people to a war for just Putin, the more likely is that Russia actually falls apart in the long run. And no one will be there to help them this time.

I have to ask, why is there such a hopeless lament about all this? You have seen how the mighty empire has already failed so goddamn hard, but you (plural) expect Russia to somehow just simply stop dying as they already have and become some sort of miracle weapon?

[Breccia]

"If"

This is the key word, right here.

There is a gulf of difference between "ill-prepared, incompetent, stupid and/or drunk" and "literally suicidal". Putin might be insane, but if he was really going to reduce his entire country to ash by pre-emptively launching, he would have done so by now. There's no reason tanks would be the point of no return when Ukraine's been handed all sorts of deadly weapons that have been working well so far.

If Russia pre-emptively launches, every scrap of goodwill countries like India, China, or even North Korea will evaporate like a gnome in Thunder Bluff. In addition to losing every export and import business they have left, the citizens can/will riot. Or, my personal choice, if Putin is in fact so suicidal that he's willing to order a launch, potentially ending the life of every Russian still inside the country's borders, one of his guards or aides might just shoot him to save his family's lives. The war is not popular in Russia -- ask the people being drafted at gunpoint.

I don't think Putin wants to die. I don't think Putin wants Russia to die. And I don't think the continuing losses in Ukraine are worth it to him to change his mind about either. We've seen multiple "Now USA, don't you send XXX to Ukraine!" with vodka-smelling finger wags that have all amounted to nothing so far. Tanks won't change that...unless Ukraine sends them into Russia, which I don't see happening either, because Zelensky's not suicidal either.

You have two Finns, probably the best informed and most personally connected to the problem people as well as being generally awesome, telling you it's not going to happen.

[Fantomen]

I really wonder now, are they going to keep sending troops until they win?

Russia can retreat from Ukraine and survive, Putin can not. So Putin will send Russian troops to the meatgrinder untill they win, or untill sombady helpe Putin fall out from a window.

[Cthulhu 2020]

So Putin supposedly has cancer (which would explain his extremely unhinged actions) and Russian men are dying by the tens of thousands utterly decimating their demographics.

I hate to say this, but it's probably going to be very cheap to get a Russian mail order bride in the coming decade. That or temporary polygamy.

[Makabreska]

So Putin supposedly has cancer (which would explain his extremely unhinged actions) and Russian men are dying by the tens of thousands utterly decimating their demographics.

I hate to say this, but it's probably going to be very cheap to get a Russian mail order bride in the coming decade. That or temporary polygamy.

Ye well, everyone has been overanalysing Pooties condition since the start of the war. I wouldn't really put much faith in these gossips.

[Twdft]

"It's unbelievable but true," he said. "We are again being threatened by German Leopard tanks."

If only there was a way to avoid being faced by them...

[For_The_Horde]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...david-petraeus


Bruh, old news.

Which one is it - tactical nukes are in or out of question?

Russia is a-okay to nuke Ukraine, Poland, whatever.

The West is evil if they use the same weapon? And in this case, no one said the West/NATO is going to nuke Russia. As said, the West does not need a nuclear weapon to end Russia's invasion. The US has pretty damn good tactical airstrike capability as far as I know. And Russia can't even have air superiority in Ukraine with what, 0 ukrainian fighter planes in the air?

What is fanfiction is your fascination with Russia's complete immunity to any kind of response. You don't glorify Russia, but you think we're gonna just watch over and over again after each and every genocide they are committing.

AGAIN, I'm not f***ing glorifying Russia and the dirty f***ing orks, grow the hell up. At no point did I ever even suggest Russia was immune to response, I'm saying they'll retaliate right back. Russia's military at this point is proven to be a sh*tshow, and course Nato can sink their Black Sea fleet, and demolish any military hardware in Ukraine and Crimea within striking distance. But Russia has assets in Belarus and Moldova and wouldn't hesitate at that point to strike Nato targets. Suddenly a war in one country becomes a war of 4-5 countries with Russia likely relying on its mobile "tactical" nukes for retaliation, which they have alot more of. Russia's military doctrine literally calls for "escalate to deescalate" in that situation, which means freely using tactical nukes to force an adversary to stop it (from invading Russian territory, the boundaries of which they make up as they go).

The US sure as hell isn't going to start nuking Russian targets because that can only lead to one possible scenario. Its the same reason why we're not going to put US boots on the ground in Ukraine. Helping Ukraine fight for itself is one thing, kickstarting a direct MAD war with Russia over Ukraine isn't going to happen. And even if they start using tactical nukes, US and Nato forces would probably rely on conventional weapons to retaliate anyways, if only to weigh the scale of Russian retaliation. We're not going to retaliate with "strategic" nuclear weapons, nobody wants to see a war of "strategic" nuclear weapons, nobody wins anything using those.

There's a reason why we're trying to crush them with a proxy war and economic sanctions, rather than say establishing a no-fly-zone over Ukraine and preventing them from using big hardware. Again its fanfiction for you to think that we're going to somehow magically erase Russia from the region without dramatic escalation and retaliation. The goal now is basically to let them break themselves apart (again) from the inside-out, but that plan might not work so easily this time. Putin is desperate, he needs battlefield wins, and he has thousands of low yield short-range nukes lined up and ready to go. All he needs is an excuse to let a couple small ones fly.

[Saradain]

AGAIN, I'm not f***ing glorifying Russia and the dirty f***ing orks, grow the hell up. At no point did I ever even suggest Russia was immune to response, I'm saying they'll retaliate right back. Russia's military at this point is proven to be a sh*tshow, and course Nato can sink their Black Sea fleet, and demolish any military hardware in Ukraine and Crimea within striking distance. But Russia has assets in Belarus and Moldova and wouldn't hesitate at that point to strike Nato targets. Suddenly a war in one country becomes a war of 4-5 countries with Russia likely relying on its mobile "tactical" nukes for retaliation, which they have alot more of. Russia's military doctrine literally calls for "escalate to deescalate" in that situation, which means freely using tactical nukes to force an adversary to stop it (from invading Russian territory, the boundaries of which they make up as they go).

The US sure as hell isn't going to start nuking Russian targets because that can only lead to one possible scenario. Its the same reason why we're not going to put US boots on the ground in Ukraine. Helping Ukraine fight for itself is one thing, kickstarting a direct MAD war with Russia over Ukraine isn't going to happen. And even if they start using tactical nukes, US and Nato forces would probably rely on conventional weapons to retaliate anyways, if only to weigh the scale of Russian retaliation. We're not going to retaliate with "strategic" nuclear weapons, nobody wants to see a war of "strategic" nuclear weapons, nobody wins anything using those.

There's a reason why we're trying to crush them with a proxy war and economic sanctions, rather than say establishing a no-fly-zone over Ukraine and preventing them from using big hardware. Again its fanfiction for you to think that we're going to somehow magically erase Russia from the region without dramatic escalation and retaliation. The goal now is basically to let them break themselves apart (again) from the inside-out, but that plan might not work so easily this time. Putin is desperate, he needs battlefield wins, and he has thousands of low yield short-range nukes lined up and ready to go. All he needs is an excuse to let a couple small ones fly.

Once again you mistake me for saying that we're gonna start nuking Russia.

Riddle me this, then. If Russia suddenly starts using tactical nuclear weapons, despite of knowing US would dismantle their "special war operation", without using similar weapons. Then what?

We just gonna obey Russia's military doctrine and take it in the ass?

I repeat, the West has no intentions atm to "nuke" Russia, or russian targets ANYWHERE. And I don't get you, I have said many times in the course of this thread that yes, US/NATO alliance will use conventional weapons to end russian presence, in form of weapon supplies to Ukraine, and in case of a tactical nuke usage, more physical (but not nuclear) force.

What part of any of my posting has made you think I call for nuclear armageddon on Russia?

[YUPPIE]

BREAKING NEWS

North Korea is officially joining the warfront

300 to 500 men are likely to be deployed to Ukraine in mid-February or March

[Saradain]

BREAKING NEWS

North Korea is officially joining the warfront

300 to 500 men are likely to be deployed to Ukraine in mid-February or March

North Korea ordered trading companies to send selected personnel to Ukraine’s eastern region of Donbas occupied by Russia to participate in construction works, media reported Thursday.

At least you hurried changing the reddit source, but alas didn't read your own article.

Also:

It was not specified what kind of works the North Koreans would perform in Ukraine. However, the report said it was unlikely they would fight as mercenaries.

[Cynical Asshole]

They keep saying that Russia is preparing a massive attack on 24 February.

I really wonder now, are they going to keep sending troops until they win? Russia has a large population, how can the west expect to win this? What if they keep doing massive offensives every now and then with the population they have? If they fail again, they can retry later. Russia follows the example of the roman empire.

Imagine war plans being common knowledge. LOL.

On topic. No. Eventually Russia will run out of money, toys, oligarch patience, and hopefully also run out of a president.

Whatever happens soon, it's probably Putin's do-or-die, Hail Mary, last stand offensive, and if it fails, and like it will, he will also likely trip and fall in some bullets, as is Russian tradition.

[YUPPIE]

At least you hurried changing the reddit source, but alas didn't read your own article.

I know they claim they're not going to be doing mercenary work, but is still a huge deal because North Korea is sending people over to Ukraine. The fact they're aiding in any capacity out there means they are susceptible to attacks from Ukraine as military personnel regardless. They're not civilians.

And if they're killed in the crossfire, how will Kim respond?

[Calfredd]

I know they claim they're not going to be doing mercenary work, but is still a huge deal because North Korea is sending people over to Ukraine. The fact they're aiding in any capacity out there means they are susceptible to attacks from Ukraine as military personnel regardless. They're not civilians.

And if they're killed in the crossfire, how will Kim respond?

How much do you weigh? I'd imagine living in constant fear, paranoia, and stress has left you quite lean.

[Saradain]

I know they claim they're not going to be doing mercenary work, but is still a huge deal because North Korea is sending people over to Ukraine. The fact they're aiding in any capacity out there means they are susceptible to attacks from Ukraine as military personnel regardless. They're not civilians.

And if they're killed in the crossfire, how will Kim respond?

Continue reading your own source.

The report cited an agreement between Pyongyang and Moscow that allegedly contained a clause protecting North Koreans from being involved in military actions. Thus, the selected personnel would likely participate in the reconstruction works and restoring buildings and roads destroyed during the war.

If they are killed in crossfire, they can blame Russia. I'll even clarify it further. If North Koreans die in the crossfire, it is a breach of contract. Ukraine did not sign any contracts with North Korea.

[YUPPIE]

Continue reading your own source.



If they are killed in crossfire, they can blame Russia.

That protection clause doesn't apply at all to Ukraine. They WILL not and should not hesitate to blow the North Koreans there to bits for aiding the Russians. It isn't a crime in any capacity. There will be no consequences for it.

They are officially military targets.

[Huehuecoyotl]

How much do you weigh? I'd imagine living in constant fear, paranoia, and stress has left you quite lean.

"Yon Cassius has a lean and hungry look. He thinks too much. Such men are dangerous."

Not really apt for that particular poster, is it?

[Saradain]

That protection clause doesn't apply at all to Ukraine. They WILL not and should not hesitate to blow the North Koreans there to bits for aiding the Russians. It isn't a crime in any capacity. There will be no consequences for it.

They are officially military targets.

Foreign volunteers on Ukraine's side have died as well in the war.

Is Russia now officially in war with those nations?

We all know already NK is probably gonna whine and threaten US/NATO/Boogeyman/Tooth Fairy for any NK losses. With their oh-so-terrible-doom.

[YUPPIE]

Is Russia now officially in war with those nations?

If I told you or cited to you how many times Russian diplomats have already said they're officially in a war against the West for their aid to Ukraine, you'd just say that's not actually official wouldn't you?

[Iphie]

If I told you or cited to you how many times Russian diplomats have already said they're officially in a war against the West for their aid to Ukraine, you'd just say that's not actually official wouldn't you?

Eeyup, you're not simply at war because some officials say so, there's a little bit more needed to move from peace to war.

[Saradain]

If I told you or cited to you how many times Russian diplomats have already said they're officially in a war against the West for their aid to Ukraine, you'd just say that's not actually official wouldn't you?

Random diplomats now decide declarations of war?

Where's the first strike, it's been nearly a year soon?

So yes, it most definitely doesn't look like a war between whole West and Russia. If it was, you'd know. You'd SEE.