- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted on 12/27/23 at 9:33 am to tigeraddict
Posted on 12/27/23 at 9:33 am to tigeraddict
I just love it because it’s not just commentary on their pro-Russia, anti-US bias but also factually incorrect. Perfect example.
1
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:18 am to StormyMcMan
quote:
Russia's likely capture of Marinka in Donetsk Oblast represents a limited Russian tactical gain and does not portend any operationally significant advance unless Russian forces have dramatically improved their ability to conduct rapid mechanized forward movement, which they show no signs of having done.
Oh dang, that's pretty harsh. It remains true, however: Russia is proving in capable of large-scale, fast-moving land capture.
Ukraine needs to stay the course, difficult as it seems: play defense, utilize long-strike capabilities to destroy Russian logistics and starve the Russians of provisions.
I think the United States will finally authorize giving Ukraine the $300b of Russian assets to purchase long-term contracts on ammo, which will boost ammo production tremendously throughout 2024.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:31 am to Scuttle But
quote:
Well I'm not European. America should've left NATO 30 years ago
The US created NATO to prevent a 3rd world war started in Europe. It has been much cheaper for 80 years of NATO vs being drawn into a 3rd world war……
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:35 am to tigeraddict
quote:
The US created NATO to prevent a 3rd world war started in Europe. It has been much cheaper for 80 years of NATO vs being drawn into a 3rd world war……
The US created NATO because Europe was destroyed and couldn't defend itself from the Soviets. Now they can afford to do so. We have bigger fish to fry. And frankly, I don't think the Europeans deserve our help.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:47 am to Scuttle But
quote:
The US created NATO because Europe was destroyed and couldn't defend itself from the Soviets.
Half truth right there. The other half is that they are not allowed to go to war with another member of NATO. Europe is a very major trading partner. The simple fact is that the US foreign policy has ALWAYS been about business above all.
FWIW you are not going to get $1 gasoline if we stop exporting refined products and crude oil to Europe. Drilling will stop and companies will go bankrupt all across the nation.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:52 am to Hateradedrink
This is the summary from Wikipedia on current casualty counts from different sources.
Interesting to see the US and UK different on Russian KIA by more than 50,000
Not sure why this didn't make the table but here is some Russian sourced data:
And just an interesting note:
Wikipedia
And I went down the rabbit hole a little bit and came across this article:
Six Nepalis serving in Russian army killed in war
Interesting to see the US and UK different on Russian KIA by more than 50,000
Not sure why this didn't make the table but here is some Russian sourced data:
quote:
In September 2022, Russia's Ministry of Defence confirmed that 5,937 Russian soldiers had been killed in combat.[65] It also claimed 61,207 Ukrainian soldiers had been killed and 49,368 wounded by this point.[66] In December 2023, the Ministry updated its claim of Ukrainian military casualties to 383,000 killed and wounded
And just an interesting note:
quote:
In terms of confirmed deaths of officers (both military and paramilitary) of both parties of war, the number, according to groups collecting that information, is very similar, with 2,914 Russian officers killed as of 14 December 2023[92] and 2,914 Ukrainian officers killed as of 24 December 2023
Wikipedia
And I went down the rabbit hole a little bit and came across this article:
Six Nepalis serving in Russian army killed in war
quote:
At least six Nepali nationals serving in the Russian army have been killed while fighting Ukrainian forces, Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said on Monday.
quote:
During an interaction with some editors on Monday, Prime Minister Dahal said that some more Nepalis are still serving in the Russian army. The prime minister also stated that the government has information that some Nepali nationals are serving in the Ukrainian Army also. But the government does not have data on how many Nepali citizens are currently serving in Russian and Ukrainian armies since the war started on February 24, 2022.
It is estimated that as many as 150-200 Nepali nationals have been serving in the Russian army as mercenaries, said Milan Raj Tuladhar, Nepali ambassador to Russia. “We are sending those who come to our contact back to Nepal, telling them about the high risks associated with joining the Russian army,” Tuladhar said.
The ambassador added that Nepali nationals were being lured with promises of big money and were mostly smuggled into Russia, with each individual paying up to Rs1 million (~$12,000 USD) to ‘agents’. “We have been sending back at least one Nepali national a day. They were all brought to Russia to serve in the army,” he said. “If the individual does not possess a Nepali passport, we issue a travel document and send him back to Nepal.”
quote:
According to a foreign ministry official, the Russians have already buried the bodies of Rupak Karki and Thapaliya, both of whom were killed around mid-July this year.
“The Russians have buried the bodies of Karki and Thapaliya with state honours,” the official said, adding, “now we are communicating with their families through the Consular Department and asking them whether they want the bodies of Karki and Thapaliya, even if the bodies have to be unearthed. Also, the government of Nepal has already requested Russia to repatriate all the dead bodies at the earliest and provide compensation to the bereaved families.”
With the help of human traffickers, many Nepalis have reached Russia on student and tourist visas and joined its army.
Earlier in May, Russia paved the way for recruiting foreign nationals in its army following a decree by President Vladimir Putin. According to an internal report Nepali Embassy in Moscow sent to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, there has been a big surge of Nepali population in Russia and many among them have joined the armed forces following the presidential decree.
Even Nepali nationals who are living in Russia are involved in trafficking of fellow Nepalis, prompting the Nepali Embassy in Moscow to request the Russian government to discourage nonessential visits of Nepali nationals, the foreign ministry official added.
While the bodies of Karki and Thapaliya have already been buried, those of four other Nepali nationals are in a mortuary. Following Kathmandu’s request, the Nepali Embassy in Moscow has asked the Russian side to provide the photos of those bodies for examination to determine whether they are in a condition to be repatriated, according to the official.
quote:
The government has also asked the Russian government to repatriate Nepalis currently serving in Russian forces as soon as possible, according to the statement issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Meanwhile, the ministry stated that diplomatic efforts are on to rescue and repatriate Bibek Khatri, who was fighting for Russia and has been captured by the Ukrainian army.
The ministry has also urged the public not to make non-essential travel to Russia, except in the case of individuals with government-related tasks, recipients of Russian government scholarships, and those engaged in business or work in Russia.
If there is a need to travel to Russia, the ministry has urged individuals to obtain a no objection certificate (NOC) from its Tripureshwar-based Consular Department.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:58 am to CitizenK
quote:
Half truth right there. The other half is that they are not allowed to go to war with another member of NATO. Europe is a very major trading partner. The simple fact is that the US foreign policy has ALWAYS been about business above all.
FWIW you are not going to get $1 gasoline if we stop exporting refined products and crude oil to Europe. Drilling will stop and companies will go bankrupt all across the nation.
There's absolutely zero reason to think trade with Europe would stop if we left NATO. I have no idea where people get that idea. It's so fricking stupid.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 11:00 am to Scuttle But
quote:
The US created NATO because Europe was destroyed and couldn't defend itself from the Soviets. Now they can afford to do so. We have bigger fish to fry. And frankly, I don't think the Europeans deserve our help.
Many of you are overlooking the nuclear equation. Europe can not defend itself without the threat we present to Russia with our nukes.
Plus you also have to consider that if Europe didn’t have us as a big brother then each European nation would have looked at their own situation and possibly many would have invested in nukes of their own. Look at the complications that presents.
Like it or not NATO helped stabilize Europe. It helped it to rebuild. It gained us a stable trading partner. NATO all in all is much better than what we had in the first half of the twentieth century.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 11:07 am to doubleb
quote:
Many of you are overlooking the nuclear equation. Europe can not defend itself without the threat we present to Russia with our nukes.
Plus you also have to consider that if Europe didn’t have us as a big brother then each European nation would have looked at their own situation and possibly many would have invested in nukes of their own. Look at the complications that presents.
Maybe they should have nukes. I mean France and the UK do anyways. But you know who doesn't have nukes? Ukraine. And now they're losing hundreds of thousands of young men, losing their land and their economy is getting fricked in the arse.
Europe can build nukes if they want. I don't give a shite one way or the other.
quote:
Like it or not NATO helped stabilize Europe. It helped it to rebuild. It gained us a stable trading partner. NATO all in all is much better than what we had in the first half of the twentieth century.
Great. We stabilized. Rebuilt their economy and their entire society. It's time for Europe to move out of daddy's house and act like adults. I reject the notion that Europe wouldn't be a trading partner without NATO. That's just a ridiculous claim. We are trading partners with them because with the biggest and the bestest. Everyone has to trade with us. Hell, fricking China is a bigger trading partner than most of Europe combined and they're our biggest enemy.
The whole "peace dividend" argument is tired and worn out if it ever even was a valid theory in the first place.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 11:11 am to Scuttle But
quote:
I don't think the Europeans deserve our help.
The US (and any country) doesn't do things geopolitically because other countries deserve help they do it to increase influence. There is a reason the US was able to whip together a coalition of over 40 countries to invade Iraq in 1991. You don't think we need to be in NATO but your thinking that Europe is a long way away and their problems are not our problems is just the sort of thinking that makes it imperative we stay in NATO. When the great Eastern dragon you fear comes slinking toward the US it would be easy for European people like yourself to say that is their problem and it is a long way away from us. China has been busy building its own coalition of rag-tag countries and you want to throw away a 74 year coalition that we built and defacto control right when the opposing side is building up. That is how you get isolated, drained and beat up.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 11:15 am to Obtuse1
quote:
The US (and any country) doesn't do things geopolitically because other countries deserve help they do it to increase influence. There is a reason the US was able to whip together a coalition of over 40 countries to invade Iraq in 1991. You don't think we need to be in NATO but your thinking that Europe is a long way away and their problems are not our problems is just the sort of thinking that makes it imperative we stay in NATO. When the great Eastern dragon you fear comes slinking toward the US it would be easy for European people like yourself to say that is their problem and it is a long way away from us. China has been busy building its own coalition of rag-tag countries and you want to throw away a 74 year coalition that we built and defacto control right when the opposing side is building up. That is how you get isolated, drained and beat up.
What are NATO countries even going to do if there's a war in the Pacific? You think those backwater retards can move ships and soldiers to the other side of the world? Man they couldn't even take on Gaddafi without our help.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 11:19 am to Scuttle But
I don't think this is true, but:
LINK
LINK
quote:
A U.S. source told Newsweek on Wednesday that it was likely Ukraine had indeed received the first of the promised F-16s.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 11:25 am to Scuttle But
quote:
You think those backwater retards can move ships and soldiers to the other side of the world?
how do you think France, Germany, England, etc. maintain(ed) world wide empires? You understand France still has a ton of protectorates in the Pacific right? The UK still has territory it defends in the Indian Ocean. If Northern Mariana Islands are attacked (just for an example) NATO has non US Pacific assets to assist the US in its defense
Posted on 12/27/23 at 11:36 am to StormyMcMan
quote:
how do you think France, Germany, England, etc. maintain(ed) world wide empires? You understand France still has a ton of protectorates in the Pacific right? The UK still has territory it defends in the Indian Ocean.
If Northern Mariana Islands are attacked (just for an example) NATO has non US Pacific assets to assist the US in its defense
The Europeans do not any serious expeditionary capabilities. They'd probably come fight with us in a war with China but we'd have fly all of their troops and gas up all their boats and planes to get any kind of measurable help from them.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 11:45 am to Obtuse1
quote:
The US (and any country) doesn't do things geopolitically because other countries deserve help they do it to increase influence. There is a reason the US was able to whip together a coalition of over 40 countries to invade Iraq in 1991. You don't think we need to be in NATO but your thinking that Europe is a long way away and their problems are not our problems is just the sort of thinking that makes it imperative we stay in NATO. When the great Eastern dragon you fear comes slinking toward the US it would be easy for European people like yourself to say that is their problem
Protecting the USA and our interests is a perfect reason to stay in NATO. If the USA left NATO then Europe would not be obligated to join the war or stop trading with China. If the USA is in NATO and gets attacked by China then Europe would be required to join the war and stop trading with China. That would deprive China of its second largest trading partner (the EU) and double the population base that the USA has to draw troops from.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 11:48 am to WeeWee
quote:
Protecting the USA and our interests is a perfect reason to stay in NATO. If the USA left NATO then Europe would not be obligated to join the war or stop trading with China. If the USA is in NATO and gets attacked by China then Europe would be required to join the war and stop trading with China. That would deprive China of its second largest trading partner (the EU) and double the population base that the USA has to draw troops from.
And if we go to war with China over Taiwan are they going to come help?
Posted on 12/27/23 at 11:49 am to GOP_Tiger
I was actually thinking this myself. Russia lost an awful lot of air assets in a short time span and I had a hard time believing it was all from patriot batteries.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 11:51 am to Hateradedrink
Yall think the F-16's are finally in the fight?
I figured the Russians must've taken a more aggressive approach with their air force causing the higher number of downed aircraft.
I figured the Russians must've taken a more aggressive approach with their air force causing the higher number of downed aircraft.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 11:54 am to Scuttle But
I don’t know, it was just a thought that broached my mind. It’s possible it was just extra aggression
Posted on 12/27/23 at 12:01 pm to Scuttle But
quote:
And if we go to war with China over Taiwan are they going to come help?
Maybe yes and maybe no. However, it’s 100% chance they don’t if we leave NATO.
Page 3415 of 5046
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News