What's new

Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments PART 2

.
It's very obvious by now, US is trickle feeding supplies to Ukrainians intentionally

Otherwise, they could've given them everything they've given so far without dropping a drop of sweat easily.

Instead, USA has waited for Russia to send few waves of reinforcement, preventing a quickly mobilising UA force from overwhelming the initial Russian force of 240k.

In the beginning of the summer, RU regulars were melting like an icecream, and by late summer, they were really edging on collapse. And they would've collapsed for sure if UA had more armour+air support back then, around August.

How much longer do you think Russia can sustain these levels of losses? Over 9,000 to date, over 5,000 of that is armor. At this level of intensity, I’m thinking two years tops before Russia has to wave the white flag. They have a ton of cannon fodder, but eventually your armor losses become to big to sustain operations.
 
. . . .
Hostile military take over of territory is an act of war. Crimea had Russian soldiers in Crimea before annexation.

There have been Russians in Donbas for years, Russian soldiers have been illegally in Donbas during the Donbas war, directing operations and in military command. That is not a proxy war. Added to the crime of Russians occupying annexed land in Crimea. These Russian actions constitute war. There was no peace treaty after the Crimean annexation where Ukraine gave Russia annexed territory and peace.

Experts agree. Russia has been at real war with Ukraine since 2014.

Not a proxy war, the donbas separatist senior officers directing the war were Russian military.

By September 2015, the separatist units, at the battalion level and up, were acting under direct command of officers of the Russian Armed Forces.[576]

The separatists were essentially mercenaries for the Russian armed forces under the direct command of the Russian military directing the Donbas War.

The separatists and Russia were coordinating a war against Ukraine with direct russian military involvement donbas. That is not a proxy war.

Iran was arming Russia with drones during a war between Russia and Ukraine. Ukrainians get to determine how to respond.

A proxy war is where a nation "not directly involved in the hostilities" is using another nation to fight their enemy. Russian military was directly involved in the hostilities.

This donbas war was not a proxy war. It was a war between Ukraine and Russia.

Iran was arming Russia with arms during a war. Ukraine gets to decide Iran's punishment. They are the injured party.

Iranians would say, we didn't know, we believed Russia. Ignorance is not a defense, when the truth is available. Iran sided with Russia in believing in Russia. In vomiting Russian propaganda and talking points. As Iranians trolls do today.

So yes, after Iranian trolls waste my time, my original premise of Iran supplied arms to Russia while Russia was at war with Iran stands, as do my other comments.

Oh, wow look below at Iranian trolls vomiting more statements.

Three fallacies characterize this narrative.

1) Even under the assumption that the Donbas conflict was a classical inter-state war which it wasn't, the regime in Kiev in the aggressor since its forces violated the Minsk agreements. That there was no intention on their part to honor the ceasefire was admitted to by (former) NATO officials. So Iran in this case would have sold arms to the defending party.

2) Technical nitpicking aside, experts simply are not calling the Donbas war an inter-state conflict, irregardless of whether individual Russian advisers were present on the ground. To cite an example from a rabidly anti-Russian outlet, the German regime's official mouthpiece Deutsche Welle:

I.jpg


https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-russia-falsely-blames-ukraine-for-starting-war/a-60999948

This is taken from a piece which argues Russia started the current war in Ukraine. This too will refrain from referencing the 2014-2022 Donbas conflict as an inter-state one.

So, it would seem German state-owned media are in fact "vomiting" those "statements", doesn't it.

Bottom line: Iran did not supply weapons to Russia while Russia was at war. No matter how NATO's psy-ops blowhorns might want to spin it, contradicting their own inconsistent rhetoric in the process.

3) Assuming again that Iranian arms deliveries to Moscow prior to February 2022, that is prior to the start of the ongoing war constitute a horrible mischief, it raises the question why the quoted user is never mentioning the EU regimes of France, Germany and Italy, which sold hundreds of millions worth of weaponry to Russia during the very same period? What's more, they did so in violation of the spirit if not the letter of a EU arms embargo on Russia.

France, Germany and Italy sold hundreds of millions of pounds worth of arms and military kit to Russia for years despite embargo​

  • France, Germany and Italy sold hundreds of millions worth of arms to Russia
  • They sold military kit to the Kremlin for years despite an EU embargo banning it
  • They were three of at least 10 countries to use a loophole to get past the ban
  • France alone sold €152million out of a total €350million (£293million) exported
By Chris Matthews for Mailonline
Published: 14:23 GMT, 18 March 2022 | Updated: 16:34 GMT, 18 March 2022


Where does this favoritism stem from? Why should Iran and other nations of the global south be held to different standards, and be disallowed something NATO regimes themselves have no qualms engaging into?

It's these intolerable double-standards designed to benefit the dominant powers to be, which the rest of the world can no longer be expected to bow to.
 
Last edited:
. . . . .
How much longer do you think Russia can sustain these levels of losses? Over 9,000 to date, over 5,000 of that is armor. At this level of intensity, I’m thinking two years tops before Russia has to wave the white flag. They have a ton of cannon fodder, but eventually your armor losses become to big to sustain operations.

Russia can keep sending infantry on civilian vehicles with few mortar tubes per battalion in amount of 2 regiments per month pretty much indefinitely. This is around the average common estimate.

Russian replenish rate so far been around the loss rate, to half of it. Russians lost around 200k-220k killed, wounded, deserted, but drafted, and armed 250k more.

To beat this, UA needs firepower to dispatch at least 3-4 regiments per month. Russians can of course try to increas their draft rate to 400k-500k per year, but the question is can they do that materially?

We have a good idea: LPR/DPR had a population of around 2.2m, also very aged population, also much fever men than women. They had around 900k men total, of whom 385k were in between 18-40 years old. Both of Russian proxy states have passed the point of total collapse around August, and are only saved by Russian supplies now.

The speculation is that LPR/DPR have lost from 50k to 100k men to death, and injury, which is in between 12% and 24% of young adult men, but they lost the mobilisation abilty at around 6% to 12%.

It will likely be less for Russia as Russia is simply physically larger, and their overheads must thus be bigger. 6% of Russian pre-war military age men population is 1.8 million. Now it's certainly lower than that. If Russia really lost 1 million men to immigration, most of whom were of prime military age, then let's pull the figure to 1.7 million.

That's 8 years at the current loss rate, and current mobilisation capacity. That's the optimistic scenario as no other economic damage, nor other manpower loss factor is accounted.

If Putin will chose to stop at a safe margin before the risk of spontaneous collapse rises, I will agree on the formula: 2m-3m loss, 2-3 years, $200B-$300B total expenditures.
 
Last edited:
.
It's very obvious by now, US is trickle feeding supplies to Ukrainians intentionally

Otherwise, they could've given them everything they've given so far without dropping a drop of sweat easily.

Instead, USA has waited for Russia to send few waves of reinforcement, preventing a quickly mobilising UA force from overwhelming the initial Russian force of 240k.

In the beginning of the summer, RU regulars were melting like an icecream, and by late summer, they were really edging on collapse. And they would've collapsed for sure if UA had more armour+air support back then, around August.

Some here even tried to tell me that Ukraine had less soldiers in August- November than Russia :partay:
 
.
Israel claims that it was disputed territory which is now annexed.
Any annexed territory is by definition considered Israeli territory.

Russia violated the Minsk agreement by keeping their army in Ukraine.
They have no valid reason for war, which is acknowledged by a super majority in the UNGA (was it 135 vs 5?)

It is the right of the citizens of Ukraine to follow the constitution they themselves voted for.

Russia does not have the right to start, lead and support an insurgency in Ukraine.
 
.
The Russians started their sea drones attacks by targeting the Odessa bridge..its base this time.. with their ultimate objective of destroying all the bridges on the Dniper river..hence cutting all possible supply routes to the AFU East of Dniper River..
 
Last edited:
. .

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom