Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

[4bars]

I know very well that Ukraine started to reform their army in 2014 to a more westernized doctrine and they had help from western countries to do so but to say that the only reason they where able to defend Kyiv was because of US help is in my eyes an insult on Ukraine, when the fact is it was done almost exclusively with domestic equipment, manpower and ammunition. It was not until late spring/early summer when heavy weapons and ammunition started to arrive in Ukraine and make up for all the domestic equipment that had run out of ammunition that western weapons started to make a real difference.

I read an article i this thread, where apparently the UA general in charge of the defense in Kiev, didn't accept any help from US and he refuse to give the location of the several equipement that apparently he was moving around to not be static. He didn't trust anyone not even Zelensky becase he was paranoid of filtrations. The initial defense of Kiev was solely done by ukranian strategy, intelligence and tactics with their initial armament and without help. Later on, they gain trust with US and the west and everything changed over time

 

[Bobcat]

I also believe that Putin is quite smart. So, why did he fail? How could Putin miscalculate so badly? I believe that Putin miscalculated only one thing: Biden.

I think Putin knew that the Germans would not be a factor, they would not help Ukraine. And he knew that the Germans can vastly influence the rest of the EU, so the EU would not be a factor either. Fears of "escalation", of energy dependance, of World War 3, of economy ... the 27 countries of the EU would talk and talk and talk, and do nothing. Then Britain has its problems with Brexit, and it is too weak to do anything anyway.

Putin knew that the only one who can do anything to help Ukraine is America. But America has its own problems, it is divided, Biden is old, he gave up in Afghanistan, actually Biden did not just give up but messed up badly in Afghanistan, Biden is weak, he will have no desire to get involved into another military conflict.


In summary, I believe that the German "neutrality" was the most important factor in Putin's decision to go to war. And the second most important factor was the debacle in Afghanistan. If any of these two factors were not present, we'd not have this war. And Putin's major miscalculation was that he did not expect Biden to actually support Ukraine that much.

Americas foreign policy for the last 70 or so years has been to secure and maintain their military and political influence.

Ukraine is a golden opportunity. Even though the state is spending a lot on aid it generates a tonne of financial activity for them, pretty much the whole world supports Ukraine so its a massive PR win and when they win they will not only have broken an old rival, they will gain another extremely valuable ally.

A mix of chauvinism and toxic nationalism made them believe they could stroll into Kyiv in a matter of days and win before anyone else got involved. When the Russian blitz failed they had already shit the bed.

 

[Pexbo]

Russian state TV at it again.

It’s funny how this show has the same financial backers as GBNews and how the production is also similar.

 

[Dans]

Yes, but the conservatives did help Ukraine. Huge difference between Boris and Scholz. USA had to push Germany a lot before Scholz did anything.

But as Simbo said, Brexit was all about preserving their own money. That they are more than happy to spend "OUR" money on supporting Ukraine isn't a hard choice to make for a party that will no longer be in power by the end of the war and also rather nicely deflects away from the real reason Brexit was so championed by people like Rees-Mogg doesn't it?

 

[TwoSheds]

But he included both the dead and the injured. I believe UKR numbers are much higher than what we believe. I'd be surprised if the figure isn't close to 80k.

I wasn't talking to you. I find your obsession with the Ukrainian dead odd.

 

[VorZakone]

 

[Eurotrash]

Or...they actually keep POW:s there and they hope that UAF targets it.

 

[Revan]

Ukraine had recieved some AN/TPQ-36 counter battery radars from the US but besides those, western weapons played a very small role in the early stages of the war, it was mainly 152mm and 122mm tube artillery and 122mm rocket artillery that was used to repel the Russian attacks during the first weeks of the war.

https://rusi.org/explore-our-resear...g-russias-invasion-ukraine-february-july-2022

Weren’t the javelins very important at the beginning of the war? Remember hearing this (and Lavrov bitching about the US giving them to Ukraine, even before the war started).

 

[Rajma]

Ukrainian KIA...

It’s certainly way above that, early on in Donbass Russia had an overwhelming artillery advantage costing many Ukrainian lives. I would put it around 40-50k with nothing to back it up but general feeling.

 

[the hea]

Weren’t the javelins very important at the beginning of the war? Remember hearing this (and Lavrov bitching about the US giving them to Ukraine, even before the war started).

When the invasion started they had received about 150 javelin launchers and a little over 1000 missiles. The stockpiles of domestically produced ATGM launchers and missiles like the Stugna-P and Korsar consisted of close to 1000 launchers and over 9000 missiles. The number of Javelins was just to low to have played any major part.

 

[VorZakone]

Tucker's influence is known in Ukraine. Ukrainian official addressing Tucker.

 

[VorZakone]

 

[Raoul]

Tucker's influence is known in Ukraine. Ukrainian official addressing Tucker.

He has no influence in Ukraine. He has some with a minority group of US right wingers who are weary of the seemingly bottomless supply of money and weapons to Ukraine, which is presumably where this guy is seeking to influence. It would also be a mild win against Russian propagandists who routine use Tucker’s comments on their shows.

 

[Raoul]

 

[flameinthesun]

Slightly uneasy watching this video if it is showing russian soldiers being burned alive in the truck...

 

[Raoul]

Slightly uneasy watching this video if it is showing russian soldiers being burned alive in the truck...

It is, as is the truck itself being driven (apparently) after the hit instead of its occupant getting out of the burning vehicle.

 

[The Firestarter]

It is, as is the truck itself being driven (apparently) after the hit instead of its occupant getting out of the burning vehicle.

Is it driven or just going in a straight line. Or rather following the terrain without steering input , and some throttle. Like from a dead foot.

 

[Raoul]

Is it driven or just going in a straight line. Or rather following the terrain without steering input , and some throttle. Like from a dead foot.

Its quite possible. I'm sure someone in the comments will get to the bottom of it.

 

[The United]

I wasn't talking to you. I find your obsession with the Ukrainian dead odd.

How am I obsessed with the UKR dead? I am talking about why some people like General Milley making noises about negotiations because he seemed to think that the UKR doesn't have the combat capability to push the Russians all the way. At least not in the near future.

If anything I find it odd that people believe Russians are getting killed or wounded in disproportionate amount compared to the UKR.

 

[Raoul]

Is it driven or just going in a straight line. Or rather following the terrain without steering input , and some throttle. Like from a dead foot.

One potential answer

 

[cyberman]

How am I obsessed with the UKR dead? I am talking about why some people like General Mille making noises about negotiations because he seemed to think that the UKR doesn't have the combat capability to push the Russians all the way.

If anything I find it odd that people believe Russians are getting killed or wounded in disproportionate amount compared to the UKR.

Don’t have a dog in this spat but wouldn’t it be disproportionate simply because Russia are being pushed back out of Ukraine?The fact they need 300k fresh recruits not proof enough?

 

[VorZakone]

There's also probably a huge amount of Western battlefield intel being shared with the Ukrainians so I reckon Ukrainian troops are less likely to get ambushed or surprised.

 

[Raoul]

 

[The United]

Don’t have a dog in this spat but wouldn’t it be disproportionate simply because Russia are being pushed back out of Ukraine?The fact they need 300k fresh recruits not proof enough?

How many soilders in the UKR troop?

If people believe that offensive takes more lives than defending, what was UKR doing in the last three months?

Just simple questions though to have some some common sense answers.

Even their own commentators don't believe that number.

But my point is that it is just people are a bit obsessed with saying how much Russians are suffering while dismissing that UKR troops would probably have it the same the other end. If someone points out, it is because that person is obsessed with UKR dead..

 

[Raoul]

But he included both the dead and the injured. I believe UKR numbers are much higher than what we believe. I'd be surprised if the figure isn't close to 80k.

In my experience, democratic nations tend to be far more accurate with their death counts than totalitarian police states, for obvious reasons.

 

[TwoSheds]

How am I obsessed with the UKR dead? I am talking about why some people like General Milley making noises about negotiations because he seemed to think that the UKR doesn't have the combat capability to push the Russians all the way. At least not in the near future.

If anything I find it odd that people believe Russians are getting killed or wounded in disproportionate amount compared to the UKR.

They get killed disproportionately because they are badly equipped, badly commanded, badly trained, in a largely hostile territory and mostly probably don't really want to be there. It's not that hard to understand. The Russians were self-reporting almost 1000 deaths a day not long ago. Unless you think it's some sort of genius plan to exaggerate their own death toll I don't see how you could believe the Russians aren't largely faring worse.

 

[Raoul]

 

[The United]

They get killed disproportionately because they are badly equipped, badly commanded, badly trained, in a largely hostile territory and mostly probably don't really want to be there. It's not that hard to understand. The Russians were self-reporting almost 1000 deaths a day not long ago. Unless you think it's some sort of genius plan to exaggerate their own death toll I don't see how you could believe the Russians aren't largely faring worse.

But what does it have anything to do with I'm obsessed with the UKR dead though?

I could say the same about you with the Russians because you are talking about their loss and how it could happen?

 

[the hea]

If anything I find it odd that people believe Russians are getting killed or wounded in disproportionate amount compared to the UKR.

Documented equipment losses are about 3 times higher for Russia compared to Ukraine. Is it really that odd that the losses of manpower would follow a similar ratio?

 

[The United]

Documented equipment losses are about 3 times higher for Russia compared to Ukraine. Is it really that odd that the losses of manpower would follow a similar ratio?

If all of these are true, the Russians deaths are about 60k at most?

 

[Raoul]

But what does it have anything to do with I'm obsessed with the UKR dead though?

I could say the same about you with the Russians because you are talking about their loss and how it could happen?

No doubt the Ukrainians have needlessly lost a lot of troops in this war, but given the stark disparities in warfighting techniques where the Ukrainans are fighting smartly while the Russians have been clumsy and haphazard, it would appear the Russians have lost far more.

 

[The United]

No doubt the Ukrainians have needlessly lost a lot of troops in this war, but given the stark disparities in warfighting techniques where the Ukrainans are fighting smartly while the Russians have been clumsy and haphazard, it would appear the Russians have lost far more.

Not denying that.

 

[the hea]

If all of these are true, the Russians deaths are about 60k at most?

I have no idea how many have died on either side, neither am I in any position to make a qualified guess about it. All I was saying was that it would not be odd if the losses of manpower and equipment would follow a similar trend for both sides.

 

[Raoul]

An interesting thought experiment as to where this conflict would've gone without significant outside support

 

[harms]

The Russians were self-reporting almost 1000 deaths a day not long ago.

When was that?

 

[Raoul]

Wow

 

[The United]

I have no idea how many have died on either side, neither am I in any position to make a qualified guess about it. All I was saying was that it would not be odd if the losses of manpower and equipment would follow a similar trend for both sides.

I get what you meant.

But I think Russians seem to lose more of their equipment because they have more.

That doesn't exactly translate that manpower will follow the same ratio.

 

[the hea]

An interesting thought experiment as to where this conflict would've gone without significant outside support

This is no surprise. Theres only a few of the smaller countries in Europe who have maintained or built up a trustworthy military during the last 30 years. Bigger nations like Germany, France, Italy and even the UK to some extent have completly neglected the security of Europe despite Russia building up it's armed forces during this time.

 

[Raoul]

This is no surprise. Theres only a few of the smaller countries in Europe who have maintained or built up a trustworthy military during the last 30 years. Bigger nations like Germany, France, Italy and even the UK to some extent have completly neglected the security of Europe despite Russia building up it's armed forces during this time.

I think part of it was post-cold war fatigue coupled with a misguided idea that Putin was an honest broker who could be "brought into the fold" 20 years ago helped create this mentality that completely neglected to prepare for what Putin was planning all along. Europe and the US are equally at fault in this.

 

[Oly Francis]

This is no surprise. Theres only a few of the smaller countries in Europe who have maintained or built up a trustworthy military during the last 30 years. Bigger nations like Germany, France, Italy and even the UK to some extent have completly neglected the security of Europe despite Russia building up it's armed forces during this time.

Is someone under the assumption that a war fought on the ground is possible in Europe? Any country that would attack a Nato member, even if you were to remove the USA, would be bombed and nuked. Then the agressor would bomb and nuke back if he has the technology and that's it, full blown nuclear war. large European armies are only useful is a war is fought outside of Nato.

So yeah, Europe isn't strong enough without the USA to provide weapons to a conflict occuring outside of europe, is it really europe's role though to be armed for foreign operations?