- 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 12/28/25 at 9:21 pm to Leopold
Posted on 12/28/25 at 9:21 pm to Leopold
quote:
We didn't manipulate anything.
We manipulated the values of goods, essentially making some of them worth nothing..like I said, it's an accounting thing. Depreciation + cost of maintaining the asset + other factors.
quote:
Ya sure did, didn't you! Called it 'smart,' too, didn't
In some cases it can be. I think it's both true that needing to use donkeys is a bad sign, and a donkey is a lot cheaper than a vehicle if you can do the same job with either. Yet another display of your total lack of nuance or really understanding of anything beyond the binary of it either being "bad" or "good".
quote:
No, you did when I have to explain to you why the Russians only took 1% of a country and still think that taking a town of about 26k is somehow tactically significant. But again, I made a statemen
I don't know which discussion you're referring to here, but places can be tactically significant without having a large pre-war population based on a lot of varying factors. Again, lack of any nuance or critical thinking skills.
quote:
But I provided the sources, however inconvenient you found them, you just don't like them or agree with them.
I am not a fan of sources with ties to the Ukranian government. I think it's a given that Russian sources are almost entirely BS, but I feel like I have to point it out or some 50-IQ midwit will ask why I didn't also call them out. So yeah I will occasionally make fun of ISW since they get caught with their pants down occasionally, though they have some solid info.
If you're not questioning sources in a war when both sides have huge incentives to propagandize, you're a fool. I almost exclusively cite pro-Ukraine sources not affiliated directly with Ukraine because despite the bias you can trust them more than you can Russian sources.
2
Posted on 12/28/25 at 9:29 pm to doubleb
I think this map lays bare Russia's incompetence in this war
Most of the land controlled by Russia today, was captured within the opening weeks of the war.
Russia has only gone backwards, as evidenced by the blue shaded area that used to be controlled by Russia but is now controlled by Ukraine. Granted that rollback was in the 1st year of the war, and Ukraine's anticipated spring offensive fizzled out without any real impact other than the loss of a bunch of Western equipment.
This war has been a stalemate for almost three years. Neither side can field the combat power to impact the front in any meaningful way.
Today's map
December 2022
There hasn't been a whole lot of movement in those lines in three years.
This is where the lines were on April 30th 2022, two months after the start of the war. This validates my point that most of what Russia controls today, they controlled from early in the war. They have taken very little in the last 3 years.
Most of the land controlled by Russia today, was captured within the opening weeks of the war.
Russia has only gone backwards, as evidenced by the blue shaded area that used to be controlled by Russia but is now controlled by Ukraine. Granted that rollback was in the 1st year of the war, and Ukraine's anticipated spring offensive fizzled out without any real impact other than the loss of a bunch of Western equipment.
This war has been a stalemate for almost three years. Neither side can field the combat power to impact the front in any meaningful way.
Today's map
December 2022
There hasn't been a whole lot of movement in those lines in three years.
This is where the lines were on April 30th 2022, two months after the start of the war. This validates my point that most of what Russia controls today, they controlled from early in the war. They have taken very little in the last 3 years.
This post was edited on 12/28/25 at 9:37 pm
Posted on 12/28/25 at 9:29 pm to GOP_Tiger
quote:
because support for Ukraine remains extremely strong with voters, even in GOP primaries. Republican members of Congress and candidates will spout more and more pro-Ukraine rhetoric the closer that we get to November. Especially if GOP prospects appear poor, President Trump will feel increasing pressure to act decisively in support of Ukraine
It's not a needle mover in an election. Democrats will talk about it some, but Republicans in most districts will steer clear because it's much more divisive. People want to hear about immigration, prices, housing prices, hell probably even wtf is going on with Venezuela right now vs Ukraine.
There was some polling released in December that said overall bipartisan support for Ukraine is just at 62%. So Dems are probably sitting in the 70's and Republicans in the 50's.
Support for sending weapons was actually 2 points higher than support overall. It showed about 75% of Americans don't trust Russia to honor a peace agreement and see them as an adversary, but even before 2014 most Americans saw them as an adversary per a 2013 Gallup poll so that is kind of a baked-in mindset.
Posted on 12/28/25 at 9:53 pm to Leopold
quote:
No, you did when I have to explain to you why the Russians only took 1% of a country and still think that taking a town of about 26k is somehow tactically significant.
Just to note, Putin believes he can bleed Ukraine until their moral cracks, like the French almost had at Verdun.
Both the Russian "victories", and Ukrainian claims about "stopping" the Russians are their propaganda.
Its a blood and moral war, not an inch of ground war.
I do hope Ukraine holds out, but no one should believe that these attacks are meant to succeed tactically any more than Verdun was.
Posted on 12/28/25 at 10:21 pm to Narax
quote:
Both the Russian "victories", and Ukrainian claims about "stopping" the Russians are their propaganda.
Its a blood and moral war, not an inch of ground war.
Russia is bleeding Ukraine of men and Ukraine is bleeding Russia's economy.
Frontline gains (or lack thereof) and the pace of those gains can give us hints as to which side is more successful, but unless someone cries Uncle there will be a moment where one side or the other is told what the conditions are instead of negotiating them.
Posted on 12/28/25 at 11:52 pm to GOP_Tiger
quote:
Republican members of Congress and candidates will spout more and more pro-Ukraine rhetoric the closer that we get to November. Especially if GOP prospects appear poor, President Trump will feel increasing pressure to act decisively in support of Ukraine.
Yes, as we approach the mid-terms, more pro-Ukrainian rhetoric will appear from GOP candidates but that won't get Ukraine what it needs to end this war. Only Trump can do that and he is so compromised with the Epstein file that we can believe he won't do anything to upset Putin.
In order for this war to end and real peace to be established in Ukraine, we will have to wait on one of two things to happen - either a new US President in 2028 or for some latter-day Daniel Ellsberg to step up bigly and drop an unredacted copy of the Epstein files. Then Putin will no longer be in control of the White House and this war can end.
Posted on 12/28/25 at 11:56 pm to Coeur du Tigre
quote:
100% Played. Like. A. Fiddle.
And he wants to be in control of the peace process... The whole world now sees Trump as a complete and total Russian asset. Who says Epstein is dead?
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. quote:
Trump: “If no breakthrough is made, they keep fighting and they keep dying. Zelensky doesn’t want that, and neither does Putin. But that’s what happens.” On his call with Putin, Trump said they discussed rebuilding Ukraine: “He wants Ukraine to succeed. He was very generous, especially about energy exports at low prices. Still in the works.”
quote:
Trump: “In a few weeks we’ll know. It could go well or poorly, and if it goes really poorly, it won’t happen at all, which would be a shame. One item could break it up. It’s all very detailed. I’ve settled 8 wars, some going on for decades. We’ll get it done. I saw an interesting Putin today, he told me strongly, ‘I want this done as well.’”
A complete and total Russian asset.
This post was edited on 12/29/25 at 12:01 am
Posted on 12/29/25 at 4:46 am to Coeur du Tigre
what the going Eurocrat rate for publishing crap
Posted on 12/29/25 at 4:54 am to VolSquatch
quote:
I don't know which discussion you're referring to here, but places can be tactically significant without having a large pre-war population based on a lot of varying factors. Again, lack of any nuance or critical thinking skills.
Strategical and tactical are separate things. Places like Sloviansk, Kramatorsk, Siversk and Pokrovsk were strategic in the Spring of 2022 when Russia tried to take them in pincer movements from the North and South, but failed. This would have been no different than the Germans encircling the French and British with the attack through the Ardennes in 1940, cutting off entire armies.
Now because the Russians have moved the front westward, the bulk of Ukrainian troops will not be cut off if places like Siversk and Pokrovsk are taken. their strategic importance is no longer valid. Taking territory is not the issue.
Ask Germany about that in 1942 when Operation Barbarosa failed after taking way the frick more than Russia has in Ukraine.
Russia is finally near the belt of Fortress Cities, established in 2014/5. Russia took Sloviansk but was beaten back. It is still held by Ukraine to this day.
This post was edited on 12/29/25 at 5:14 am
Posted on 12/29/25 at 5:34 am to CitizenK
As far as Russia's economy being wrecked that did happen in 2022 with the fundamentals being massive amounts of capital for investment fled Russia. That doesn't mean that Russia was about to collapse but when capital is not available then new investments do not occur. To an extent that has happened in the US with all the money, both public and private being lost in the failed Green New Deal during Obama. This was on the heels of the housing investment crisis of 2008. Most recently the Infrastructure and Inflation Reduction Act failed miserably. None of those projects worked just like Obama's failed measures. That is capital lost forever, both grant and subsidies as well as private investment to get both of those.
Lack of available capital has stalled the US industrial expansion thus far this year, mostly small company expansion.
As far as R&D goes a lot of it begins with a grant for the government, then private companies put up more money which enables research to be conducted by researchers beyond PhD post doc studies. A friend lost his job as a result of the oil crash in 2014. He produced the first ever single wall carbon nanotube wire, after designing the process and the first reactor to make it. Oil companies had to cut back on such R&D. He had previously invented a fiberglass blanket with a carbon nanotube reinforced polyester "epoxy" to patch oil and gas pipelines in place without the need to gas free them and cut out the section. It was stronger than the steel.
Russia has no money for R&D to benefit the private sector. For military uses, it has just reintroduced things from the 1990's and further back, some dropped by the US in the 1960's. Russia just gives these a new name and acts like it is a new development.
BTW, has anyone ever seen anything other than nesting dolls or vodka, made in Russia and exported?
Lack of available capital has stalled the US industrial expansion thus far this year, mostly small company expansion.
As far as R&D goes a lot of it begins with a grant for the government, then private companies put up more money which enables research to be conducted by researchers beyond PhD post doc studies. A friend lost his job as a result of the oil crash in 2014. He produced the first ever single wall carbon nanotube wire, after designing the process and the first reactor to make it. Oil companies had to cut back on such R&D. He had previously invented a fiberglass blanket with a carbon nanotube reinforced polyester "epoxy" to patch oil and gas pipelines in place without the need to gas free them and cut out the section. It was stronger than the steel.
Russia has no money for R&D to benefit the private sector. For military uses, it has just reintroduced things from the 1990's and further back, some dropped by the US in the 1960's. Russia just gives these a new name and acts like it is a new development.
BTW, has anyone ever seen anything other than nesting dolls or vodka, made in Russia and exported?
Posted on 12/29/25 at 7:04 am to CitizenK
quote:
their strategic importance is no longer valid
They obviously have some importance or Ukraine wouldn't bother defending them.
Pokrovsk was at least important enough to Ukraine to try counter attacking to take it back. So you can't really use the "they were just tying Russians up in those areas" excuse for it at least.
The real significance of taking cities in 2025 during a conflict with mostly static, almost WW1 style lines (though WW1 isn't a perfect comparison by any means, it's just the closest we have) is that you can set up meaningful defenses in them to allow you to hold them with fewer men (like Ukraine has been doing). That's why Ukraine is bothering to counterattack at all... If they lose a city and Russia is able to hunker down, Ukraine likely wont get it back.
We talk about Ukraine's personnel issues, but Russia doesn't have unlimited men either. When they focus on certain areas, others suffer. So taking areas they can hold more easily with fewer people is actually pretty significant in terms of resource allocation than anything else right now... It frees up troops to go elsewhere and push.
But by the time Russia takes these cities they might be too destroyed to even give you much of a defensive boost. Some of them like Pokrovsk is mostly defensible because access points to the city are limited and you can create a shooting gallery (or just hammer drones) at those specific areas.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 8:23 am to VolSquatch
quote:
They obviously have some importance or Ukraine wouldn't bother defending them. Pokrovsk was at least important enough to Ukraine to try counter attacking to take it back. So you can't really use the "they were just tying Russians up in those areas" excuse for it at least. The real significance of taking cities in 2025 during a conflict with mostly static, almost WW1 style lines (though WW1 isn't a perfect comparison by any means, it's just the closest we have) is that you can set up meaningful defenses in them to allow you to hold them with fewer men (like Ukraine has been doing). That's why Ukraine is bothering to counterattack at all... If they lose a city and Russia is able to hunker down, Ukraine likely wont get it back. We talk about Ukraine's personnel issues, but Russia doesn't have unlimited men either. When they focus on certain areas, others suffer. So taking areas they can hold more easily with fewer people is actually pretty significant in terms of resource allocation than anything else right now... It frees up troops to go elsewhere and push. But by the time Russia takes these cities they might be too destroyed to even give you much of a defensive boost. Some of them like Pokrovsk is mostly defensible because access points to the city are limited and you can create a shooting gallery (or just hammer drones) at those specific areas.
Someone needs to do a health check at Vol’s house. Someone had broken in and stolen his computer.
This post was edited on 12/29/25 at 9:23 am
Posted on 12/29/25 at 8:28 am to Coeur du Tigre
quote:
And he wants to be in control of the peace process... The whole world now sees Trump as a complete and total Russian asset. Who says Epstein is dead?
Cope is Epstein posting again
Posted on 12/29/25 at 8:30 am to doubleb
I didn't say anything I haven't been saying for years at this point, I just expanded on the thought more than I usually do 
Posted on 12/29/25 at 9:15 am to Coeur du Tigre
Ukraine must withdraw from Donbas for ceasefire, Kremlin says
STANISLAV POHORILOV — 29 December, 13:14
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said that the Kremlin's condition for halting hostilities is Ukraine's complete withdrawal of its armed forces beyond Donbas.
Source: Russian state-owned media Interfax; TASS, a Kremlin-aligned Russian news agency
Details: Peskov said that the "responsible" decision by Ukraine on Donbas, mentioned a day earlier by Yuri Ushakov, aide to Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin, meant a full pull-out of Ukraine's forces beyond Donbas.
Quote: "Of course. It is the withdrawal of the regime's armed forces from Donbas beyond the administrative borders."
More details: Peskov was also asked whether this applied only to Donbas or to Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts.
Quote: "Here I have already said that we will not comment in full and will not go into a public discussion of individual provisions.
Russia is thinking about ending the military conflict in the context of achieving its goals."
Ukrainska Pravda
STANISLAV POHORILOV — 29 December, 13:14
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said that the Kremlin's condition for halting hostilities is Ukraine's complete withdrawal of its armed forces beyond Donbas.
Source: Russian state-owned media Interfax; TASS, a Kremlin-aligned Russian news agency
Details: Peskov said that the "responsible" decision by Ukraine on Donbas, mentioned a day earlier by Yuri Ushakov, aide to Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin, meant a full pull-out of Ukraine's forces beyond Donbas.
Quote: "Of course. It is the withdrawal of the regime's armed forces from Donbas beyond the administrative borders."
More details: Peskov was also asked whether this applied only to Donbas or to Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts.
Quote: "Here I have already said that we will not comment in full and will not go into a public discussion of individual provisions.
Russia is thinking about ending the military conflict in the context of achieving its goals."
Ukrainska Pravda
Posted on 12/29/25 at 9:22 am to VolSquatch
quote:
I didn't say anything I haven't been saying for years at this point, I just expanded on the thought more than I usually do
You need to expand more often.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 9:47 am to VolSquatch
Baited fields kill more game. Russia committed to taking certain towns with hundreds of thousands of troops then pour reinforcements in when they don't make progress. This has been Russia's way of war for a few years now.
Posted on 12/29/25 at 10:22 am to CitizenK
Damn. Someone didn't want those cores in North Korea. And it wasn't Ukraine this time.
quote:
Spanish investigators say the Russian shadow fleet vessel Ursa Major, which sank off Cartagena on Dec. 23, 2024, was carrying secret strategic cargo, two VM-4SG nuclear reactor cores reportedly bound for North Korea. Hull damage showed signs of an external strike consistent with a [link=(supercavitating torpedo.)]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercavitation[/link].
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 12/29/25 at 10:25 am to Coeur du Tigre
Posted on 12/29/25 at 10:30 am to Coeur du Tigre
Putin remains the master strategist.
quote:
The goals of "SVO" have been achieved:
Revive NATO
Double the length of the border with NATO
Lose all allies
Give the US and EU over $300 billion in gold and foreign exchange reserves
Give the US and OPEC the oil and gas markets
Create a budget crisis
Sell oil to China at a third of the price
Become a vassal of China.
Job done. Now let’s start another war to keep me in power.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. 
Page 446 of 653
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News