Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Vampiregenesis]

I wasnt aware that Iraq was close to superpower status at some point, it's impressive that saddam was able to field one million troops, yet putin could only bring 200k. There is something wrong here.

[Corvus]

What a dumb thing to say.

Cluster bombs will be an issue for civilians after the war is over, that is why they are typically warned against.

Please, for 500 days while russia deliberately fired cluster munitions into civilian centres they said not a word, but only now when Ukraine is going to use it on russian soldiers, not civilians, it becomes an issue?

Ukraine sees it as the lesser of two evils. Yes, they will have to deal with it after the war but unless they win, the death toll from russia's genocide will be far, far greater than unexploded ordinance.

[Gabriel]

What a dumb thing to say.

Cluster bombs will be an issue for civilians after the war is over, that is why they are typically warned against.

Russian invaders are much more present danger to Ukrainian civilians, wouldn't you agree?

[diller]

Russian invaders are much more present danger to Ukrainian civilians, wouldn't you agree?

Absolutely.

[Belize]

The biggest issue with cluster munitions is they can end up being like land mines.
They didn't explode on initial detonation and then explode later when it's civilians in the area.

TBF, that's an issue with regular shells too, though I see why it could be a bigger issue on lots of small shells.

[Vonazak]

I wasnt aware that Iraq was close to superpower status at some point, it's impressive that saddam was able to field one million troops, yet putin could only bring 200k. There is something wrong here.

Russia is a poor country, big, but poor, wages are lower than here (Chile), AIDs is Africa-tier, institutions are corrupt and inefficient.

Saddam on the other hand, had a lot of good things going on for his people in 2000, none of such, are experienced by Russians in 2023.

In hindsight, it's hilarious to think that US foreign policy considered the Ruskies a threat. They cannot defeat the Ukrainians, and they are poorer than freaking Bolivia.

[Makabreska]

In hindsight, it's hilarious to think that US foreign policy considered the Ruskies a threat. They cannot defeat the Ukrainians, and they are poorer than freaking Bolivia

TBH, entire world thought Russia is a military superpower.

[zealo]

Only mistake with giving Ukraine cluster munitions is that it didn't happen sooner, like a lot of other things the west were initially hesitant with too.

[Vonazak]

TBH, entire world thought Russia is a military superpower.

But the rest of the world do not have the CIA and all the other intelligence agencies. Maybe its other of the direct consequences of having a democratic system were people love to have an "enemy" and politicians have to force a narrative to win elections

Now we are certain that the US can beat Russia if nukes are not involved.

[YUPPIE]

Now we are certain that the US can beat Russia if nukes are not involved.

Not without invoking the same casualties Ukraine has. I mean, even if Ukraine beats Russia, the damage and loss of life to beat back a clownshow of a military power is immeasurable

[unknowndeath]

if you want god to stop war pray the god and he shall hear you and vanquish the evil from the lands of the GOD

[Gabriel]

Not without invoking the same casualties Ukraine has. I mean, even if Ukraine beats Russia, the damage and loss of life to beat back a clownshow of a military power is immeasurable

Please. If NATO proper went to all out war with Russia, there would be 100:1 casualty ratios all across the board.

[Forogil]

TBF, that's an issue with regular shells too, though I see why it could be a bigger issue on lots of small shells.

It also that they are submunitions and collide with each other that make them fail to explode.
However, war is messy.

And hopefully they will not be as bad the Russian ones that reportedly have a 40% failure rate.

[Gaidax]

Please. If NATO proper went to all out war with Russia, there would be 100:1 casualty ratios all across the board.

Russia can handle 22 millions dead, can NATO handle 220k?

I hope it will never comes to that, because everyone will lose.

[Benggaul]

Russia can handle 22 millions dead, can NATO handle 220k?

I hope it will never comes to that, because everyone will lose.

Russia does not have 22 million soldiers and if they are just throwing raw recruits with minimal/no training into the mix then that casualty ratio skyrockets further. Would NATO like to suffer 220k dead? No, of course not. Can it? Yes, absolutely and with much more to spare against pressganged troops. It wouldn't, though, because I repeat: Russia does not have 22 million to throw into a fight. They are already scraping through the bottom of the barrel in the war against Ukraine.

[Makabreska]

Russia can handle 22 millions dead, can NATO handle 220k?

No, I don't think Russia can. This is not Soviet era any more, where they can completely strong-arm their citizens into service and just deal with economic/demographic outcome of the loss in a totalitarian style. Loosing 1/7 of it's population is really hard to deal with.

You went kinda overboard with that number.

[Gorsameth]

But the rest of the world do not have the CIA and all the other intelligence agencies. Maybe its other of the direct consequences of having a democratic system were people love to have an "enemy" and politicians have to force a narrative to win elections

Now we are certain that the US can beat Russia if nukes are not involved.

I think in large it was because Russia didn't know either.

The top level general thinks he has 10k tanks. The guy under him knows he has 8k. The guy below that is pretty sure he has 5k. The actual engineer in the vehicle yard knows of the 2k tanks stationed there only a quarter can actually drive ever again.

Unless you have a spy in the actual stockpile counting operational equipment your intelligence is going to be off, because thanks to corruption and middle management covering their asses only those people actually handling the equipment know what is real and what only exists on paper.

[zealo]

Russia might be able to handle throwing millions of men of working age into the grinder in the short term, but what that would do their demographic prospects for their country beyond that would be nothing less than catastrophic for them.

[Vonazak]

I think in large it was because Russia didn't know either.

The top level general thinks he has 10k tanks. The guy under him knows he has 8k. The guy below that is pretty sure he has 5k. The actual engineer in the vehicle yard knows of the 2k tanks stationed there only a quarter can actually drive ever again.

Unless you have a spy in the actual stockpile counting operational equipment your intelligence is going to be off, because thanks to corruption and middle management covering their asses only those people actually handling the equipment know what is real and what only exists on paper.

American intelligence agencies know about the corruption of the Russian institutions. I can only hope that the American Empire focuses on the Pacific and let the Russians bled themselves to death in the Ukrainian front.

China is the real threat to the west, Russia can be contained by the Europeans, China is almost unstoppable and they are expanding their sphere of influence too fast.

[Elder Millennial]

Please. If NATO proper went to all out war with Russia, there would be 100:1 casualty ratios all across the board.

I truly question whether the Russians would even bother putting up a fight.

It's like....If we lose...we might get a functional democracy, a less corrupt police force, functioning government services, better wages, more access to consumer goods.

Why bother?

- - - Updated - - -

No, I don't think Russia can. This is not Soviet era any more, where they can completely strong-arm their citizens into service and just deal with economic/demographic outcome of the loss in a totalitarian style. Loosing 1/7 of it's population is really hard to deal with.

You went kinda overboard with that number.

It's easy to convince people to fight to death against an enemy that literally wants to genocide 9/10 of your population and keep the rest as slaves.

Aka, the fucking Nazis.

Much harder to convince people that they need to die against an enemy that...won't take anything from you, won't harm you and starts fixing shit for you the micro second it won a fight.

Unironically the best thing that would have happened to the Russian people in the last 800 years would be a NATO occupation.