- 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 5/17/25 at 12:22 pm to doubleb
Posted on 5/17/25 at 12:22 pm to doubleb
quote:
You said you were leaving, but now it seems you are working with JB and the Russian chamber of commerce.
John doesn't seem to be liked in PT board, so I don't know if we have too much crossover on views beyond this conflict.
Here's another good vid by Mark. He's one of the most interesting historian on WW2, an encyclopedia of well made video narrations.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB_Gs-0dhOo
This post was edited on 5/17/25 at 12:24 pm
1
Posted on 5/17/25 at 12:33 pm to VolSquatch
quote:
No, it hasn't
Any chance of anyone taking you seriously has gone out the window after this exchange
Year 3 of the 3 day war.
“The outcome hasn’t changed”
Posted on 5/17/25 at 12:35 pm to Hateradedrink
quote:
Any chance of anyone taking you seriously has gone out the window after this exchange
Year 3 of the 3 day war.
“The outcome hasn’t changed”
It makes you wonder doesn’t it?
Posted on 5/17/25 at 12:38 pm to Hateradedrink
quote:
Year 3 of the 3 day war.
That's just a silly shite nafo's repeat.
Ironically, Ukraine would have been far better off if they were invaded in 3 days and not 3 years. They're done after this demographically, economically and culturally.
Posted on 5/17/25 at 12:42 pm to PoppedRiser
quote:
That's just a silly shite nafo's repeat. Ironically, Ukraine would have been far better off if they were invaded in 3 days and not 3 years. They're done after this demographically, economically and culturally.
Get out the dictionary they gave you when you were hired. This doesn’t make sense.
Posted on 5/17/25 at 12:49 pm to VolSquatch
quote:
They have been getting arms from the west since 2014. The idea that it just started after the war is not factual.
Read what I wrote. I said support has not been unconditional from the start. That is the fact I'm referring to, not the fact that Ukraine has been getting arms and training since 2014.
quote:
Sure, but you related that to the perception in 2022, which isnt particularly relevant at all in 2025
In terms of what we would call 'modern warfare,' they are not excelling. They do have the ability to dictate the terms of the engagement to the Ukrainians, but that was a development related to the slow pace of the war. Their ability to do combined arms assaults has to be called into question. And the question I'm asking is that if the result is so assured that the original poster is sure that the Russians are going to get more than the four regions they are asking for, then why have we not seen that relative domination on the battlefield itself?
Posted on 5/17/25 at 12:52 pm to doubleb
quote:
Get out the dictionary they gave you when you were hired. This doesn’t make sense.
Considering you're happily illiterate in history and geopolitics it's not really surprising it doesn't make sense to you.
Posted on 5/17/25 at 12:53 pm to PoppedRiser
quote:
As soon as US stops
Russia is truly an ascendant power if their entire strategy relies on the US stopping support. The amount the US has given is paltry with respect to the US itself.
Russia is also having serious demographic problems, much more severe than Ukraine. They've been having them since the 90's at the minimum.
Posted on 5/17/25 at 12:59 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
Their ability to do combined arms assaults has to be called into question.
I'd like to see someone else flawless "combine arms" assault in the age of satellites, AA systems, remote mining, DJI Mavic 3's and 4s, and an FPV that has an RPG charge zip tied to it which can kill a tank or wreck an APC. Because conventional warfare tactics had to changed both improvised to high speed low number infantry infiltration assaults often on bikes, quads.
No modern European or US army fought in a peer to peer conflict.
quote:
Russia is also having serious demographic problems, much more severe than Ukraine.
You're either a complete hack or a total idiot for even suggesting that. Ukraine lost nearly half it's population since the war started. What the hell are you talking about?
This post was edited on 5/17/25 at 1:02 pm
Posted on 5/17/25 at 1:02 pm to PoppedRiser
quote:
Considering you're happily illiterate in history and geopolitics it's not really surprising it doesn't make sense to you.
You are right. I’m illiterate, so explain this please so a 5th grader would understand.
quote:
Ukraine would have been far better off if they were invaded in 3 days and not 3 years
Posted on 5/17/25 at 1:05 pm to PoppedRiser
quote:
I'd like to see someone else flawless "combine arms" assault in the age of satellites, AA systems, remote mining, DJI Mavic 3's and 4s, and an FPV that has an RPG charge zip tied to it which can kill a tank or wreck an APC
You realize I'm talking in the first days of the war, right? Review that footage and tell me that you are impressed. It was a daring operation but it wasn't impressively executed to say the least.
The only armed forces who could conceivably to combined arms against a near peer is likely the US but we don't know for sure. At the minimum, that is the type of war the US wants to fight.
Posted on 5/17/25 at 1:06 pm to doubleb
quote:
It makes you wonder doesn’t it?
Personally, I’m not wondering at all. I know exactly what’s happening
Posted on 5/17/25 at 1:29 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
You realize I'm talking in the first days of the war, right? Review that footage and tell me that you are impressed. It was a daring operation but it wasn't impressively executed to say the least.
I agree for early in the war, their blitz was daring but planning and logistics were insufficient. Then again, similar type of operation and land scale while dealing with modern surveillance and opponent having vast supply of AT and AA weapons has never been replicated in modern times. Ukraine wasn't toothless by 2022, they were preparing for the war with Russia according to many top officials for at least 6-7 years.
I think Russia's reluctance to hit Ukrainians much harder in the beginning is what bogged them down. If they knew what they know now, they'd go shock and awe on them, hit infrastructure and decision making centers causing panic, and it would have been a completely different outcome.
Posted on 5/17/25 at 1:29 pm to PoppedRiser
quote:
Ukraine would have been far better off if they were invaded in 3 days and not 3 years
They would have become Belarus.
They're fighting because they want to be western. They want to be sovereign. They want to develop their economy. They want to avoid the demographic collapse of eastern bloc countries. They want to be European, not Soviet.
They saw what happened to Belarus. And even Belarus doesn't want to be Belarus anymore.
So. No. They are choosing to fight for their future rather than being relegated to a puppet show in someone else's failed empire.
Posted on 5/17/25 at 1:34 pm to cypher
Posted on 5/17/25 at 1:37 pm to PoppedRiser
quote:
I'd like to see someone else flawless "combine arms" assault in the age of satellites, AA systems, remote mining, DJI Mavic 3's and 4s, and an FPV that has an RPG charge zip tied to it which can kill a tank or wreck an APC. Because conventional warfare tactics had to changed both improvised to high speed low number infantry infiltration assaults often on bikes, quads.
The US ALWAYS obtains air dominance, which Russia barely achieved air superiority. Russia has neither the satellite recon nor the AWACs style ability the US has.
Heck Russia's oil and gas industry wouldn't have regained its supply without the help of the USA with MONEY and technology.
Posted on 5/17/25 at 1:40 pm to doubleb
quote:
You are right. I’m illiterate, so explain this please so a 5th grader would understand.
Why do you want to be patronized? I'll explain it to you like you're an adult.
An invasion and short blitz would mean half a million to a million of Ukrainian men would be alive, another million wouldn't be handicapped, towns would be spared in the east, they'd still have their grid. Humanitarian aid from EU and US would still come. People wouldn't be kidnapped into vans while walking with their kids. Nationalists would probably flee abroad or lay low which would reduce the risk of internal 2014 like rent-a-revolutions. And there would be no massive exhodus of people. Russia would install a friendly government, keep Donbas, and allow Ukraine to live as a neutral state instead of leaving it in a steaming pile of rubble. 15-20 years Putin won't be here, but Ukraine would be and they'd be on a much better footing than they are today. Instead, they whorred themselves out to NATO to be a battering ram against Russian army. They played a short stupid game instead of playing the long game, like Poland did post WW2.
Saying it like that, probably a 5th grader can understand that.
Posted on 5/17/25 at 1:47 pm to CitizenK
quote:
The US ALWAYS obtains air dominance
Against Serbia or Iraq/Afghanistan, which were joint operations? Sure. But that's not saying much.
Your hate of Russia and Russians cloud your assessment. You never underestimate your opponent, although I don't think Russia should be US' opponent. Even with their post soviet brain drain, they still have great minds there in the military-industrial sector.
Posted on 5/17/25 at 1:50 pm to PoppedRiser
quote:
I agree for early in the war, their blitz was daring but planning and logistics were insufficient. Then again, similar type of operation and land scale while dealing with modern surveillance and opponent having vast supply of AT and AA weapons has never been replicated in modern times. Ukraine wasn't toothless by 2022, they were preparing for the war with Russia according to many top officials for at least 6-7 years
They weren't toothless by any means, but they were caught off-guard.
quote:
I think Russia's reluctance to hit Ukrainians much harder in the beginning is what bogged them down. If they knew what they know now, they'd go shock and awe on them, hit infrastructure and decision making centers causing panic, and it would have been a completely different outcome
I mean, that's an entirely different approach. I don't have the belief that Russia can achieve the air superiority needed to do combined arms at the level of the US, and if anything, that is what allows for freedom of maneuver in order to strike decisive blows. I don't think there is any other armed forces who could achieve any semblance of air superiority other than the US.
Posted on 5/17/25 at 1:53 pm to doubleb
Traditional Chinese territories in Russia's hands?
Page 4855 of 5046
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News