- 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 11/28/24 at 9:43 am to GOP_Tiger
Posted on 11/28/24 at 9:43 am to GOP_Tiger
On another note, there are lots of videos on the internet right now showing dead Russian troops in Syria today, as a result of the rebels attack on Syrian/Russian positions near Aleppo. Hezbullah/Iran/Assad now look weak, and that's bad news for Russia in the region.
UPDATE: Assad has flown to Moscow, presumably to beg for help.
UPDATE: Assad has flown to Moscow, presumably to beg for help.
This post was edited on 11/28/24 at 10:34 am
3
Posted on 11/28/24 at 9:51 am to AU86
quote:
I will add that this opportunity was there for the Ukrainian counteroffensive in 2023, but Biden wouldn't give ATACMS and cluster munitions until it was too late, and we failed to provide the number of armored vehicles that could have made it successful. The opportunity for Ukraine to retake its land by force is now gone.
100% truth and it's time people admit this.
I disagree. I don’t think Ukraine ever had the necessary trained troops, artillery, air power and resources to pull off the major offensive.
I think they would have been better served playing defense.
Posted on 11/28/24 at 10:29 am to DMAN1968
quote:
The cold hard fact is Ukraine cannot win without manpower from outside. it's always been a battle of attrition and one they cannot win.
Germany lost WWI because its economy imploded, not on the battlefield.
Posted on 11/28/24 at 10:32 am to doubleb
quote:
I disagree. I don’t think Ukraine ever had the necessary trained troops, artillery, air power and resources to pull off the major offensive.
I think they would have been better served playing defense.
Well, that's my point: that we didn't give Ukraine what they needed to succeed.
Obviously, since the offensive failed, Ukraine would've been much better off playing defense, especially since the offensive ended, they were spent, and Biden and the GOP Congress wouldn't rearm them.
Posted on 11/28/24 at 10:39 am to GOP_Tiger
quote:
Well, that's my point: that we didn't give Ukraine what they needed to succeed.
But they needed more than just missiles and armored vehicles. They needed a lot more trained troops, artillery, and a larger Air Force.
None of tgst was coming.
Posted on 11/28/24 at 11:01 am to doubleb
Again, yes, the F-16s that we eventually allowed Ukraine to have could have been allowed two years ago.
It's impossible to know what would have happened if we had given ATACMS and cluster shells at the beginning of the Ukrainian offensive, but it's obvious that Ukraine would be in a much better position today. I personally think that the "land bridge" could have been broken.
It's impossible to know what would have happened if we had given ATACMS and cluster shells at the beginning of the Ukrainian offensive, but it's obvious that Ukraine would be in a much better position today. I personally think that the "land bridge" could have been broken.
Posted on 11/28/24 at 11:04 am to GOP_Tiger
quote:
"The U.S. decision to allow Ukraine to fire American weapons deeper into Russia has not increased the risk of a nuclear attack, which is unlikely, despite Russian President Vladimir Putin's increasingly bellicose statements, five sources familiar with U.S. intelligence told Reuters."
LINK
Huh. WWIII isn't about to start, apparently. I guess all the sky-screaming, bed-wetting Politards were wrong.
This post was edited on 11/28/24 at 11:05 am
Posted on 11/28/24 at 11:12 am to GOP_Tiger
quote:
I guess all the sky-screaming, bed-wetting Politards were wrong.
I don't know about that. A couple of guys over there have lost their damn minds.
Posted on 11/28/24 at 11:21 am to GOP_Tiger
quote:
They aren't going to give up any land.
What they will do is accept temporary Russian control over land that Russia already controls. That's it.
It doesn't matter if they recognize it officially or not. The Russians will still occupy that land for the foreseeable future. And that is all that matters. Look at the territories in Georgia, Moldova, etc. The Russians are still there and in control.
There is only one.way now for Ukraine to take that land back and that is the introduction of NATO troops to do it. And that is not going to happen. Even in this thread there are only one or two that would support that.
Ukraine was.in a much better situation to negotiate in 2022 when it achieved the success in Kherson and Kharkiv. They are now possibly in danger of losing those if this doesn't get settled.
"As long as it takes" was one of the biggest lies ever told.
This post was edited on 11/28/24 at 11:26 am
Posted on 11/28/24 at 11:31 am to GOP_Tiger
quote:
They aren't going to give up any land.
Russia will now allow Ukraine to join EU or NATO. Only way this war ends and never happens again is NATO membership is included. Otherwise any “peace” will be short lived and Russia will go again in a few years once they have their military rebuilt.
So Russia will not allow a peace deal
Posted on 11/28/24 at 11:40 am to tigeraddict
No way Ukraine is getting NATO membership. Not going to happen. Any security guarantees that Ukraine gets should come from the Europeans. But the problem is they are so weak militarily for the next decade could they actually/realistically be enforced? It will take Europe (minus maybe Poland) 10 years to get their shite together, that is if they ever do. Britain and Germany are jokes. France and maybe Finland carry some punch. So who does that leave in the breach until then? I suspect the US and if that happens it is a mistake.
This post was edited on 11/28/24 at 11:44 am
Posted on 11/28/24 at 11:56 am to cypher
Maybe Zelenskyyyyyy can send Klitscko out to scold a Podcaster again
Posted on 11/28/24 at 12:17 pm to AU86
quote:
Any security guarantees that Ukraine gets should come from the Europeans. But the problem is they are so weak militarily for the next decade could they actually/realistically be enforced? It will take Europe (minus maybe Poland) 10 years to get their shite together, that is if they ever do. Britain and Germany are jokes. France and maybe Finland carry some punch. So who does that leave in the breach until then? I suspect the US and if that happens it is a mistake.
You are quite correct that Europe cannot guarantee Ukrainian security and that the United States will have to do so as part of any peace deal.
Yes, European troops can be stationed in Ukraine, but the deal will inevitably involve the US promising to fight on Ukraine's behalf if Russia breaks it and tries to take more territory. It will need to be a guarantee as good as NATO's Article 5.
That's what you should expect in the deal.
Posted on 11/28/24 at 12:20 pm to GOP_Tiger
Posted on 11/28/24 at 12:28 pm to GOP_Tiger
quote:
On another note, there are lots of videos on the internet right now showing dead Russian troops in Syria today, as a result of the rebels attack on Syrian/Russian positions near Aleppo. Hezbullah/Iran/Assad now look weak, and that's bad news for Russia in the region. UPDATE: Assad has flown to Moscow, presumably to beg for help.
Word is some Iranian general/Russian ally was killed.
Posted on 11/28/24 at 12:34 pm to AU86
quote:
Ukraine was.in a much better situation to negotiate in 2022 when it achieved the success in Kherson and Kharkiv.
You and others need to understand, even if Putin would have agreed to a cease fire, short of NATO forces staging along the “new” border there was no way to enforce the peace.
There were cease fires in 2014, and 2015 that were ignored. Heck, Putin ignored the Budapest accords. The negotiations in 2022 were not going to result in peace without NATO boots on the ground and the west wasn’t going to agree to that; nor was Putin.
Posted on 11/28/24 at 12:51 pm to AU86
quote:
Finland
24k men on active duty
Posted on 11/28/24 at 12:57 pm to doubleb
quote:
The negotiations in 2022 were not going to result in peace without NATO boots on the ground and the west wasn’t going to agree to that; nor was Putin.
If that was true as you say in 2022, then how is a permanent solution going to happen today? One that actually stops the fighting. Russia is in a much better negotiating position today than back then. What incentive does Putin have to stop now? He knows the west will not send troops unless he falls for this latest bait and does something really stupid. IMO there are some in the west that would love to see that scenario so that troops could be sent. The sanctions have not stopped the flow of oil to India or China. Nothing has stopped the technology/hardware from China and India into Russia. I can see Ukraine having to swallow a much bitter pill in the near future.
IMO the only thing that would possibly work would be a Korean style armistice with European troops in Ukraine and American guarantees for security. That might not even be possible. Putin is going to drive a hard bargain now because he has big advantages/momentum.
Ukraine was in a much stronger position in 2022.
This post was edited on 11/28/24 at 1:12 pm
Posted on 11/28/24 at 1:12 pm to texag7
quote:
Ukraine giving up land is completely acceptable as long as the war ends.
Depends what you mean. Land Russia currently occupies? Yes. An unfortunate reality. But Ukraine isn’t going to just hand over major cities it controls like the Kremlin thinks nor will the US go for that.
Posted on 11/28/24 at 1:27 pm to AU86
quote:
If that was true as you say in 2022, then how is a permanent solution going to happen today?
It’s not
.
quote:
IMO the only thing that would possibly work would be a Korean style armistice with European troops in Ukraine and American guarantees for security. That might not even be possible
That’s exactly my point. It is not possible.
quote:
Putin is going to drive a hard bargain now because he has big advantages/momentum.
Putin will keep the war going unless Trump does something to bolster Ukraine in a big way. Putin isn’t going to settle.
Page 4310 of 5046
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News