- 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 2/25/26 at 11:35 am to VolSquatch
Posted on 2/25/26 at 11:35 am to VolSquatch
quote:
That point also (I assume intentionally) ignores the Biden admin at times slow playing deliveries to Ukraine for no real reason.
I honestly have come around to the idea what Biden didn't want Ukraine to win too quickly. It would have been a stinging rebuke to Putin. But one he could have probably survived, and learned from.
I honestly think Biden wanted to boil the frog. Keep Putin thinking he was close to victory if he just threw in more assets. And then Biden would give just enough to stop him. But not enough to let the Ukrainians counter attack.
And to me Trump seems content to let this thing go on long enough to watch Russia collapse from the inside. Seizing the shadow tankers is ballsy as hell. And something Trump hasn't gotten enough credit for. He has gone against a big portion of his MAGA base by tightening the screws on Russia. Not as much as many moderates and democrats would like, but way more than his MAGA supporters expected.
I think even the next big step is something that Trump has calculated as to our advantage. If Russia collapses and gets thrown into turmoil, China would have to move into Siberia and keep itself busy making sure breakaway republics around the Stans don't flame regional tensions. That might buy Taiwan another decade of Chinese distraction.
It's not a bad scenario if Trump can pull it off.
2
Posted on 2/25/26 at 11:41 am to cypher
Posted on 2/25/26 at 11:46 am to cypher
They may have imagined it but didn't want to avoid windows for the duration if they voiced it out loud
Posted on 2/25/26 at 11:47 am to No Colors
quote:
I think even the next big step is something that Trump has calculated as to our advantage. If Russia collapses and gets thrown into turmoil, China would have to move into Siberia and keep itself busy making sure breakaway republics around the Stans don't flame regional tensions. That might buy Taiwan another decade of Chinese distraction.
It's not a bad scenario if Trump can pull it off.
My concern is what becomes of the nukes if Russia were to collapse.
If NATO has a plan to seize and/or dismantle every single one of them immediately upon the collapse of the Russian government I could get behind it.
Posted on 2/25/26 at 12:03 pm to VolSquatch
quote:
That is what I assumed you were alluding to. Which specific events? I want to know what you think has happened recently that is notable enough for him to potentially change his mind
No one event just the way things have played out over the past two years.
Russia’s failure to breakthrough
Enormous Russian casualties
Ukraine’s ability to snipe at the Russia means of production and their infrastructure
European support given to Ukraine
Trump’s war on the price of oil
Things like that impacting Russia
Posted on 2/25/26 at 12:07 pm to No Colors
He’s a very good poster who explained his position in detail. He wasn’t a flanker or even a Russian backer.
He posts in a lot of history threads I believe.
FWIW, I am not trying to minimize his contributions to these discussions. He really added a lot and he was not disrespectful or argumentative.
He posts in a lot of history threads I believe.
FWIW, I am not trying to minimize his contributions to these discussions. He really added a lot and he was not disrespectful or argumentative.
Posted on 2/25/26 at 12:08 pm to GreatPumpkin
quote:
I wonder what would happen if Russia started sailing under their own flag and dropped the shadow fleet ruse.
If the Russians attempted this our Europeans and NATO allies that have allowed them to sail under different flags would be forced to seize them instead of knowingly letting them to sail on to their destination while said Europeans and others made money off of the them. If the Russian navy, which is a complete mess, attempted to stop the seizure not only would they be sunk it would very likely be the cause of WW III.
Posted on 2/25/26 at 12:17 pm to VolSquatch
quote:
My concern is what becomes of the nukes if Russia were to collapse.
I think the overriding assumption is that they are not operational.
Certainly the missiles have not been maintained, fueled, upgraded, etc.
As for the warheads, I would guess we know that the control boards are corroded, corrupted, obsolete, missing, etc. And probably do not communicate with their fire control systems any longer.
The trick is the fissile material itself. The assumption here is that stuff is still there and could be sold, transferred, stolen, etc. We defintely would have to literally parachute guys with pallets full of cash to make sure everyone was properly paid and secured.
It woud be an enormous pain in the arse and a high stakes game for sure.
But Russia collapsed in the early 90s without this becoming a problem. And they will collapse again. It's part of their identity.
Posted on 2/25/26 at 12:24 pm to No Colors
quote:
I think even the next big step is something that Trump has calculated as to our advantage. If Russia collapses and gets thrown into turmoil, China would have to move into Siberia and keep itself busy making sure breakaway republics around the Stans don't flame regional tensions. That might buy Taiwan another decade of Chinese distraction.
Trump has no such plan. Trump's plan is to get in tight with the Russians and make tens of billions of dollars off of this situation and you can't do that when your partner and one of your primary financial backers, not to mention the nation they run, is collapsing.
When I state I'm tired of Russian apologists and those giving the Russians way too much credit, Trump is #1 on that list. Trump still believes the Russians are going to win, at least to some extent - he's not going to back a loser.
Biden, for his part, was concerned about the Nuclear aspect, and I understand that even if I thought then and think now he still could have been more aggressive about arming the Ukrainians. As a result, yeah, the American approach under his administration was to bleed the Russians, and while it wasn't a stupid policy, and in some ways has been, yes, spectacularly successful, it was still the wrong one.
But, no, there is no way Trump wants Russia to collapse if he's trying to make multi-billion dollar deals with them.
Posted on 2/25/26 at 12:35 pm to VolSquatch
quote:
I'll dig up the assessment that concluded Russia would've been mostly driven out of Ukraine by now IF Trump and Musk had not engineered a series of setbacks for Ukraine whenever Ukraine gained the upper hand.
Is this funny to you? Is it because you think it's a farcical idea, or maybe just political rhetoric? I'll post again the 3* General I quoted last night:
Go to the 16:15 point of the video, where he says:
"If it had not been for the failure of the United States, UK, Germany and others to immediately provide everything that Ukraine needed, and also to declare that it was our strategic objective to defeat Russia then this war would have ended two years ago, probably."
This is not only on Trump and Elon, but also many others, but, yes, when the Ukrainians invaded Russia and took Kursk and then Trump withheld arms and intelligence thus allowing the Russians to retake it, or when it took the leader of Poland to get Elon to stop allowing the Russian military to use his junk commo system, yeah, absolutely, we've allowed them to stay in the game, and Trump and Musk, specifically, have had key roles in it, many, many time.
Posted on 2/25/26 at 1:31 pm to Leopold
This runt Slovakian wet spot "may take additional steps toward Ukraine"... He addresses a country that has been in an existential war with Russia for four years and decides that croaking out some hollow threats will somehow make him look like a man. Big fail.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 2/25/26 at 1:36 pm to Coeur du Tigre
This war has made the modern Norwegian legacy. No one will ever accuse them of being too rich or too distant. A truly great people.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 2/25/26 at 1:39 pm to doubleb
quote:
Russia’s failure to breakthrough
Enormous Russian casualties
Ukraine’s ability to snipe at the Russia means of production and their infrastructure
European support given to Ukraine
Trump’s war on the price of oil
Things like that impacting Russia
All of those things were factors when he was making those claims.
Posted on 2/25/26 at 1:42 pm to Leopold
I think its funny that he pins it on Trump and Elon.
I also don't believe Ukraine would have pushed them out.
And "the war ending 2 years ago" does not necessarily mean that Russia would have been pushed out. That could also mean Russia stops wherever they are at the time and agrees to whatever deal they can get that freezes the lines.
I also don't believe Ukraine would have pushed them out.
And "the war ending 2 years ago" does not necessarily mean that Russia would have been pushed out. That could also mean Russia stops wherever they are at the time and agrees to whatever deal they can get that freezes the lines.
Posted on 2/25/26 at 1:47 pm to No Colors
quote:
I think the overriding assumption is that they are not operational.
Certainly the missiles have not been maintained, fueled, upgraded, etc.
As for the warheads, I would guess we know that the control boards are corroded, corrupted, obsolete, missing, etc. And probably do not communicate with their fire control systems any longer.
The trick is the fissile material itself. The assumption here is that stuff is still there and could be sold, transferred, stolen, etc. We defintely would have to literally parachute guys with pallets full of cash to make sure everyone was properly paid and secured.
It woud be an enormous pain in the arse and a high stakes game for sure.
But Russia collapsed in the early 90s without this becoming a problem. And they will collapse again. It's part of their identity.
I operate under the assumption that if Russian nuclear capability was as you describe it, we would have been treating them very differently for the past few years.
Why are we ok striking Iran but not Russia or North Korea?
I think it's pretty easy to tell why.
Posted on 2/25/26 at 2:02 pm to Coeur du Tigre
Girkin dropping more truth bombs. His chances at parole ain't looking too good...
The tribe in the FSB to which Girkin belongs enjoys using him to criticize Putin anonymously. But Putin knows they're there. That's what keeps Girkin breathing.
The tribe in the FSB to which Girkin belongs enjoys using him to criticize Putin anonymously. But Putin knows they're there. That's what keeps Girkin breathing.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. quote:
Igor 'Strelkov' Girkin is marking the fourth anniversary of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine – after eight years of war in Donbas, which he did much to start – but he isn't celebrating. He sees a "bleak" outlook of mutual exhaustion, caused by poor leadership.
quote:
"Just the day before, the enemy hit one of the workshops of the Votkinsk Mechanical Plant, which produces our missiles, with a Flamingo missile. The enemy launched a massive attack on the Krasnodar Territory. About five days ago, there was a massive attack on Crimea.
quote:
"In fact, the enemy is shelling our territory with British [sic] missiles under their own name, and we pretend that everything is as it should be.
On the front, our "rapid advance" is, as I already mentioned, approximately 19.5 metres per day in the Zaporizhzhia direction.
quote:
"And in other directions, too, things can't be said to be going well. Kupyansk has been taken and surrendered for the second time (or almost).
In short, we've reached a situation that's significantly worse than it was four years ago, in terms of our prospects for victory.
quote:
"Today, I happened to catch a glimpse of our leader's speech on television at an FSB board meeting, and if you ignore the numerous "uh," "mm," and "uh"s that took up a significant portion of his speech, not from a written document, I remember hearing again, if I'm not mistaken, the phrase "slow down the peace process."
quote:
"From this, I conclude that even 4 years after the start of the Special Military Operation, after Istanbul-1, after Istanbul-2, after the "spirit of Anchorage," there's no understanding in Moscow that a war of annihilation is being waged against us. They refuse to accept it.
quote:
"In reality, Russia and Ukraine are being mutually exhausted at the expense of Russian lives on both sides, at the expense of the industries of both Ukraine and Russia. Meanwhile, the main warring parties on the other side have not yet entered the fray.
quote:
"At one time, the meme "Russia didn't show up for the war" was popular; this applied to Crimea and Donbas. Now, the same can be said with much greater justification about the United States, Britain, France, and all NATO countries.
quote:
"They haven't yet shown up for war, but they are actively preparing for it. Actively, but unhurriedly, because we are giving them time to calmly prepare for war, to build up their military industry, to stockpile weapons and ammunition, and to train their armies, which are in a very dire state. We are giving them all this time. It's all very bad; that much is already clear.
quote:
"But the main thanks, of course, go to our Supreme Commander-in-Chief, who demonstrated a remarkable leadership style: "one step forward, two steps back, a jump in place, and then one step forward, two steps back." That's not how you fight—that's how you lose wars.
This post was edited on 2/25/26 at 2:17 pm
Posted on 2/25/26 at 2:18 pm to Coeur du Tigre
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. If Hungary attacks Ukraine and Ukraine responds. Will Hungary try to invoke Article 5?
Posted on 2/25/26 at 2:18 pm to VolSquatch
quote:
Why are we ok striking Iran but not Russia or North Korea?
Because Russia would retaliate by rolling into the Baltics. And Latvia's 8,000 man standing army would last about 7 hours in the face of even a few marginal Russian divisions.
Then how do you get them out?
I think the specter of nuclear war has always been overblown. But it's always easier to pick on a country that doesn't have them.
Posted on 2/25/26 at 2:22 pm to No Colors
quote:
Because Russia would retaliate by rolling into the Baltics.
Well we know this isn't true currently
Donkey cavalry charge?
Posted on 2/25/26 at 2:36 pm to VolSquatch
quote:
Donkey cavalry charge?
Actually Russia is being smart about this.
They're building a pretty badass rear echelon army filled with veterans who survived a tour in Ukraine. And all the latest weapons.
The newest tanks rolling off the assembly line aren't going to Ukraine. They're going to a new strike army that's taking all the lessons from the Ukraine debacle and turning them into the future Russian army.
They're building one army in the East to respond to China and one in the West to take the Baltics and use them as a bargaining chip to forestall being overrun in the event of a systemic defeat.
Throwing more men and material won't effect the outcome in Ukraine. That war is already lost. It's just a killing ground for new recruits and a means to keep pressure on and occupy the masses. Putin is already worried about -- and planning for -- the next war.
Page 557 of 651
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News