Global Events & Politics Überthread
- Thread starter Hawk
- Start date
striker42
Well-known member
I've read this a couple times but I've not seen it from any official source that would have access to the actual intel of what's been committed and what's still waiting on the sidelines. From what I've seen it's mostly coming from people analyzing the burned out husks of tanks and seeing a lot of older equipment. There are a couple schools of thought of this.
First, it could be that Putin simply doesn't have enough of the newer tech to sustain an invasion of this size. There have been pictures of new Russian tanks in Ukraine so it's not been exclusively old tanks. Russia has about 60% of their combat forces in and around Ukraine. So if it's mostly obsolete equipment there then a large portion of their military is obsolete equipment. I think this is most likely.
Second, it could be Putin is spearheading things with his worst troops and equipment hoping the best Ukrainian forces spend themselves taking out his worst. This has a logic but there's also a reason you don't see countries doing this. First, war is crazy expensive. Sending in the least effectual troops first means wasting massive amounts of resources. Second, large numbers of casualties affects morale. If your best troops sit there seeing massive numbers of injured returning from the front lines and have to drive past a lot of destruction on their way in, it's a problem.
Third, it could be that there are smaller numbers of old tech mixed in with the Russian forces but that it's used by the worst soldiers and is the most vulnerable. This would be why we're seeing it burned out so much.
Ultimately I think Russia's problems are more than can be explained by old tech. Their command and control hasn't been great and more importantly they've had a logistics nightmare. They've had vehicles running out of diesel which has nothing to do with old tech and more to do with one of the most difficult parts of war, logistics.
Election Wizard ����
@ElectionWizard
·
28s
Pedro L. Gonzalez: "Ukraine-Russia has done to a lot of American conservatives what BLM narratives did to liberals: anything less than being actively anti-Russia (with libs it was "anti-racist") is complicity. You aren't allowed to be critical or insist on staying out because silence is violence.
Conservatives managed to more or less avoid this with covid, BLM, and Jan. 6, but Ukraine-Russia got them good"
______
This is why the West is wagging the dog. They knew this would have a galvanizing impact in the face of their falling poll numbers.
@ElectionWizard
·
28s
Pedro L. Gonzalez: "Ukraine-Russia has done to a lot of American conservatives what BLM narratives did to liberals: anything less than being actively anti-Russia (with libs it was "anti-racist") is complicity. You aren't allowed to be critical or insist on staying out because silence is violence.
Conservatives managed to more or less avoid this with covid, BLM, and Jan. 6, but Ukraine-Russia got them good"
______
This is why the West is wagging the dog. They knew this would have a galvanizing impact in the face of their falling poll numbers.
Last edited:
I must admit it's kind of surprising how much Putin overplayed this and underestimated the world's response.
Dude is so afraid of COVID on top of that. It's hilarious to see pictures of him sitting allnthe way across the table from people he's meeting with.
That neo-nazi and drug addicts speech was hilarious.
Putin's story doesn't add up. There are 2 NATO (3 if you count Lithuania) countries that borders Russia but yet goes after Ukraine because he's afraid of them also joining NATO? Ukraine is rich in untapped oil and natural gas. This is a land grab.
He wants a land bridge to Moldova. Putin is a bad guy.
Those other EU Nations are of small significance from a geostrategic perspective. And now you have Zelensky asking for immediate acceptance into the EU.
Almost as if this was working out to some form of playbook.
striker42
Well-known member
I have zero problem with this at this point. As long as Russia is still selling us oil then there's still some level of common ground on which to de-escalate tensions.
I’m a bit confused. First, who is getting rock hard over sanctions and providing some arms to Ukraine? Second, if the West is trying to use the crisis to rev up the base, they must be really thankful for the gift Putin gave them by provoking the war, starting it and thus far flailing about through it. This wouldn’t be the tail wagging the dog so much as a sharp wind blowing the dog and tail over.
The sanctions are doing nothing but hurting the Russian people. THe oligarchs are still doing fine if we are buying oil.
I agree with your premise but it speaks to how we got here and why Russia is as emboldened as they are...
What is your perception of the conflict? I’m aware of the longer history around segments of Ukraine in the pre-Soviet world, but it’s very hard to look at the history and not see Putin as the primary aggressor here.
Putin is an awful tyrant that we should welcome losing power.
That doesn't change the fact that the EU/Western Elites are provoking Russia by sending massive armaments to the Ukraine for the past decade. They knew this would happen eventually and many people said this in real time not just after the fact.
Ukraine is an absolute ****hole that was created by the West and they use it as their money pot. Go look where the Clintons get their donations from. Look at the European elites get their money from. This is way beyond the first level "Putin is a bad guy" argument.
Its a shame that people don't understand what the Western Elites are doing despite being lied to constantly on a daily basis.