Ukraine Watch...

[Default0ptions]

We are all well aware that the first casualty of war is truth. The second casualty, when one side is an Orwellian dystopia, is history, as evidenced by your extended and systematic attempt to rewrite it here on this thread.

Really? You don’t think there’s absolutely anything about the western narrative that can be usefully discussed?

Why bother posting at all if any dissent from your sacred official party line text is too much of a challenge to you?

Do you really need me to list everything that was dismissed as ‘disinformation’ or ‘fake news’ in the recent past that now turns out to be true?

Or would that be too unkind to you?

[Vortex2]

Also, if they are using the latest PAC-3 variant of the Patriot, my doubts are increased.

The PAC-3 is a smaller missile which is a 'hittile', unlike it he earlier versions which had fragmentation warheads.

A 'hittile' has to be extremely agile and pin-point accurate ... so if it has a 100% success rate I'm very very impressed.

[Default0ptions]

“if it has a 100% success rate I'm very very impressed.”

Hmm the phrase “pull the other one” is probably appropriate here!

Still Ralph thinks he has cornered the market in truth and so we can all go home and worry no more.

[Catweazle]

I haven't forgotten about hypersonic missiles, those small, expensive, low yield weapons so useful for taking out ships or HQ buildings. Not so useful against cities though.

Are you saying that Russia should be taking out whole cities
Instead of precision targets?

Is that what you want?

“damage to civilian areas has resulted from falling debris from intercepted missiles. Although much less destructive than allowing a missile to strike its target, debris from intercepts can still kill, maim, start fires, and etc”

That does of course mean that they think the intended target was a massacre of civilians rather than a precision strike on infrastructure.

And by the way a couple of seconds on google will show you that kinzhals can carry nukes

Which Ukrainian cities do you want to get nuked?

And just how will that solve anything about this situation?

Shame on you for once again deliberately misunderstanding. You implied that Russia could easily have destroyed Kyiv, despite their huge armoured convoy being stuck in a muddy loop of destroyed, broken, fuel starved and obsolete hardware, because they have hypersonic missiles.

I pointed out that hypersonic missiles are low yield and costly, hence suited for high value targets, not city demolition.

Your credibility was stretched already, for it has now snapped and I won't engage any more, which is a shame as I was interested in your alternative views.

[Catweazle]

Default options, this is a question I never imagined myself asking, is human your native species ?

[Default0ptions]

Default options, this is a question I never imagined myself asking, is human your native species ? I pointed out that hypersonic missiles are low yield and costly, hence suited for high value targets, not city demolition.

Look it up Catweazle. Kinzhals can carry nuke warheads. Remember it only took one nuke each for Hiroshima and Nagasaki
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kh-47M2_Kinzhal

This is however beside the point. You’ve been totally played by the 40 mile convoy of almost completely obsolete armoured vehicles.

Russia has quite sufficient conventional missiles to obliterate most Ukrainian cities - like America has done repeatedly in its wars - but Russia chose NOT to do so.

you can check the rough numbers of nukes by country here

https://www.worldatlas.com/modern-world ... apons.html

Just ask yourself this simple question: Why didn’t Russia obliterate Kiev with shock and awe like the Americans do to every country they invade?

An absolute gem that has just turned up for those who rely on the BBC for their propaganda, sorry, news is that the BBC’s anti disinformation star turns out to have lied on her CV

https://thespectator.com/topic/bbc-anti ... ng-resume/

[Default0ptions]

Catweazle “Shame on you for once again deliberately misunderstanding. You implied that Russia could easily have destroyed Kyiv, despite their huge armoured convoy being stuck in a muddy loop of destroyed, broken, fuel starved and obsolete hardware, because they have hypersonic missiles.”

Yeah that’s what I said. I’m not misunderstanding anything.

It’s you who just can’t get to grips with the fact that “their huge armoured convoy being stuck in a muddy loop of destroyed, broken, fuel starved and obsolete hardware,” was a total feint.

And if your obdurate persistence in failing to realise this after all the years since is anything to go by; they succeeded beyond their wildest expectations!

And also - how many times do I have to post this? Do try actually reading what Putin laid out as his objectives right at the start of this:

https://theprint.in/world/full-text-of- ... ne/845714/

[clv101]

Even the most 'open minded' interpretation of this conflict has to admit Russian mechanised performance has been atrocious. Poor reliability, poor training, poor tactics has inevitably delivered poorer battlefield performance than anyone expected.

The sad truth, I believe, is that the mismatch between Ukraine and Russia is so great that Russia will still dominate despite their atrocious performance and disregard for both civilians and even their own personnel.

[Default0ptions]

Even the most 'open minded' interpretation of this conflict has to admit Russian mechanised performance has been atrocious. Poor reliability, poor training, poor tactics has inevitably delivered poorer battlefield performance than anyone expected.

The sad truth, I believe, is that the mismatch between Ukraine and Russia is so great that Russia will still dominate despite their atrocious performance and disregard for both civilians and even their own personnel.

Yeah you’re right. But I think we’ll end up on the ground once the dust has cleared with Russia achieving its objectives and many many thousands having died needlessly.

[Ralphw2]

I say the first casualty in war is truth, and you say I am claiming to know the absolute truth? We have all read 1984. Most of us here remember the worlds political dialogue from long before 1984. Those of us who were paying attention know how much political narratives have changed, and history reinterpreted over the decades. We know which have changed the most and the least in 50 years. Yours do not stack up.

[Default0ptions]

I say the first casualty in war is truth, and you say I am claiming to know the absolute truth? We have all read 1984. Most of us here remember the worlds political dialogue from long before 1984. Those of us who were paying attention know how much political narratives have changed, and history reinterpreted over the decades. We know which have changed the most and the least in 50 years. Yours do not stack up.

I’m quite happy to wait for events to play out and prove me right.

The Americans are about to stop funding the Ukraine. Chaos and destruction follows as the whole thing falls apart.

You’d better pick however many Ukrainians you can put up in your house because America is about to throw all the rest of the Ukraine under a bus.

Make a note of this post and get back to me in six months if I’m wrong

Then we’ll see who’s arguments stacked up

[kenneal - lagger]

Before getting carried away condemning armchair warriors and labelling supporters of Ukraine as warmongers it's worth remembering that Putin has the power to stop the slaughter immediately by simply calling off his invasion.

Yeah. You’ve failed to take on board that Russia regards this as an existential threat. It doesn’t matter what you think. If Russia considers itself sufficiently threatened IT WILL NUKE. That’s what mutually assured destruction means.

If you believe that propaganda you are dafter than you sound. Russia, in the form of Putin and his criminal mates, is in this for personal gain. There are a couple of threats from Ukraine and that is to the power base of Putin and Co because a successful , western style democratic Ukraine would erode Putin's control over Russia. The people living in the third world of rural Russia would see how well off Ukrainians would be and would begin to ask why they didn't have the same. We are seeing this with the numbers of Russian soldiers looting everything from toilet bowls and washing machines to stereo systems and radios.

The other threat to Putin and his oligarchs is from the oil and gas reserves in eastern and southern Ukraine. If these were developed outside of Russian control they would take the European market away from Putin's and the oligarch's Russian companies costing them money.

And regarding the nuclear threat, apart from the fact that most of them, like the rest of the Russian forces, haven't been maintained in decades and probably are inoperable, those missiles are under the control of the military rather than politicians. Would that military want to fire those missiles in the knowledge that they would receive even more back in return? That military knows how badly their weapons have been maintained because they are the one's who have been pocketing much of the money that should have been spent on maintenance.

[kenneal - lagger]

I say the first casualty in war is truth, and you say I am claiming to know the absolute truth? We have all read 1984. Most of us here remember the worlds political dialogue from long before 1984. Those of us who were paying attention know how much political narratives have changed, and history reinterpreted over the decades. We know which have changed the most and the least in 50 years. Yours do not stack up.

I’m quite happy to wait for events to play out and prove me right.

The Americans are about to stop funding the Ukraine. Chaos and destruction follows as the whole thing falls apart.

You’d better pick however many Ukrainians you can put up in your house because America is about to throw all the rest of the Ukraine under a bus.

Make a note of this post and get back to me in six months if I’m wrong

Then we’ll see who’s arguments stacked up

The next US election isn't until 5th November 2024 and the new President doesn't take office until January 20th, 2025. So the Democrats, with the help of many Republicans, will be funding Ukraine for quite a while yet.

Also you are forgetting the great hatred, and I use that word deliberately, of many eastern European countries for Russia after decades or oppression and murder. If the US does pull their support for Ukraine I could quite well see Poland, at least, supporting Ukraine or even joining Ukraine in the war because they know full well that they will be next on the list of former colonies to be reconquered in Putin's effort to reinstate the Soviet Empire.

The Poles would want to kick Russia while it is down and not wait for it to regroup and come back again. And Russia is really down. They have been unable to put together an offensive for a good six months and the last success that they had was by a private military contractor despite the efforts of the Russian MOD to stifle their success. Russia has since murdered the top brass of Wagner and dispersed the best fighting group that they had. Russia is also having to go cap in hand around the despots of the world trying to find enough ammunition to conduct a defence.

Russia supposedly gathered an army of 100,000 men and 900 tanks in the north of Ukraine for an offensive around Svatove and Kremmina and towards Kupiansk but got about 20km before they were thrown back to where they came from. Since then much of that force has been redirected to the south to plug holes punched by the Ukrainians. Russia is now losing ground to the south of Bakhmut and could well be forced to pull out of the remains of that town within the next six months.

Make a note of this post and get back to me in six months if I’m wrong

Then we’ll see who’s arguments stacked up

The Ukrainians are now fighting between and along the Russian defence lines and defence lines are not designed to be fought along especially when your opponent has really accurate artillery and you don't. Because the Ukrainians are fighting a mainly infantry campaign with artillery support they will be able to carry this battle on despite the Rasputitsa. The lack of counter battery radar on the Russian side means that the Ukrainians don't have to move their artillery much so the mud won't be so much of a problem. They can site their batteries near a road and continue to destroy the ten to twenty Russian guns a day that they are managing at the moment.

The Russians really are not in a good place especially as the Himars and Storm Shadows that we supplied to Ukraine have knocked out much of the command and control structure of the Russians together with large quantities of Russian ammunition. The Ukrainians haven't wasted much ammunition at all and are rapidly developing their own drone capabilities to attack Russian bases within Russia itself. Russian aircraft are being chased further and further back into Russia. One wonders who will run out of range first: Russian planes and missiles or Ukrainian drones?

They are now even taking out Russian air defence radars and filming it with their own drones. Some defence capability that is on the Russian part!!

[Default0ptions]

I would really love to know the sources of all your opinions on Russia etc because I can assure you that anyone with the slightest passing interest or relatives in these areas regards the entire content of your last two rants as absurd

I did point out earlier that the dumbest thing one can do with one sided propaganda is to actually fall for it yourself

As for how this whole situation works out I repeat:

The west will give up supporting Ukraine,
Ukraine will then collapse,
Russia will have achieved its objectives.

Ridicule me all you like, but the situation on the ground in a few years time will be exactly how I’ve laid it out

[Default0ptions]

I lived in Poland for several years and know some of the Polish community over here pretty well.

Absolutely nothing of what you wrote is given more attention than a good laugh.

If you’re going to try to comment on international politics you really do need to do more than infantiley parrot the propaganda you get from the BBC and your newspaper of choice.

You merely demonstrate that you know nothing about the very real world out there beyond your Overton Window