Ukraine, Losing In Donbass...


FkgqxflXoAArjfp
 
Eastern 3rd of Ukraine is heavily populated by ethnic Russians that speak Russian and would like to be a part of Russia.
The rest of Ukraine is mainly populated by ethnic Ukrainian people that speak the Ukrainian language,.

In my opinion, I think Putin will draw a new border line and annex eastern Ukraine into part if Russia.

Also, Putin has no desire to invade and occupy the rest of Ukraine.
And will stop the war when he can negotiate a deal with the western powers that Ukraine will never be a member of NATO and never have their nuclear weapons staged on Ukrainian land.
 
But Western Media tells us that the Ukes are totally dominating the Russians. Meanwhile back in reality...
Screenshot_20230113_185533_Gallery.jpg


And Ukraine needs more money, more aid, and even more sophisticated equipment just to hold on...
 
Muscovy is manufacturing something ? you surprised me ...



Ok so is Russia adjusting, otherwise reverting away from the disaster that is global trade in which has the ability to dictate to nation's their health and their economies, otherwise all due to their newly found dependency that has been given over to the global state to somehow run ??
 
Fair points.. The problem is that Ukraine will be a burning skeleton by the time cooler calmer heads prevail.
One of the tragic aspects of modern Ukrainian nationalism (and its support by the West) — at least from the point of view of Russian-speaking Ukrainians — is the destruction culturally and now physically of “Russian Ukraine.”

While all of Ukraine is paying a high price for its “national independence” struggle, the historically Russian-speaking Donbas and Eastern sections are being systematically devastated by both sides in this war. It is a huge tragedy that the two sides could not live together, and the fault does not fall only on any one side.

I myself warned of the danger of all-out war and long opposed Western CIA support for liberal and rightwing ultra-nationalist forces there who allied themselves against Russia. Crude Russian policies often encouraged opposition. U.S. errors began in the post WWII period, but gradually became more obvious after the Soviet collapse, and especially after 2008 when the Bush administration declared “Ukraine will join NATO.” I also opposed the Maidan overthrow of the corrupt (but elected) government in 2014.

Unfortunately, long before Maidan a civil war was perhaps already almost inevitable, given that Russia never could establish a functioning democratic state and Western strategists long saw “Greater Russia” as an unstable, dangerous and much-too-large geo-political empire that opposed its own desire to dominate the globe.

Of course most Ukrainians did not imagine in 2014 that the loss of Crimea and eventually a full-scale war with Russia would be the end result of Maidan. None of this, imo, excuses Putin’s Russian imperial chauvinism and bloody invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
 
Last edited:
So how does this qualify as not being a puppet?
The Vietnamese desperately needed the military and logistical assistance of China to fight off U.S. imperialism in the 1960s and 1970s… Were they “puppets” of China?

American revolutionaries desperately needed and received assistance from France and its navy in their fight against the British in the U.S. War of Independence… Did this make them “puppets” of the French King?
 
The Vietnamese desperately needed the military and logistical assistance of China to fight off U.S. imperialism in the 1960s and 1970s… Were they “puppets” of China?

American revolutionaries desperately needed and received assistance from France and its navy in their fight against the British in the U.S. War of Independence… Did this make them “puppets” of the French King?
Funny, it was a common term back then, which you reference. So tell, US and NATO funding the 'war' , primarily funded by the US isn't a puppet thing?
 
Funny, it was a common term back then, which you reference. So tell, US and NATO funding the 'war' , primarily funded by the US isn't a puppet thing?
I assume you mean my reference to “U.S. imperialism” in Vietnam. I think that is a fair term for the U.S. sending a half million occupation troops to fight there, continuing the French Indochina War after they were forced to withdraw their colonial troops. Of course that was also part of our Cold War campaign against “international communism” — but whatever our intent it put us squarely on the wrong side of the Vietnamese struggle for “national liberation” … in the eyes of most Vietnamese anyway.

There is a useful term — “proxy war” — that can be used in cases like the Ukraine Conflict where powerful nations use smaller nations or regional combatants against competing / opponent big nations. But while U.S. / NATO support for Ukraine is certainly in part a proxy war, for Ukrainians suffering a bloody invasion from Russia it is also a national liberation fight to maintain their national survival.

That is why I emphasize that Ukrainian nationalists are both using and being used by the West. The Ukrainians have learned, like the Zionists did before them, that to succeed in creating a serious state of their own they need to fight wars against their nearest and most immediate threat, but they also absolutely initially need support of some great powers.

If Ukraine is truly victorious in this war, in future it may well prove a rather troublesome (and authoritarian) ally that follows its own distinct national interests, like Turkey or Hungary. Indeed, it may even develop its own “imperial” ambitions in the Black Sea area or towards a future disintegrating Russia. On the other hand, if it is frustrated in reclaiming all its claimed “sovereign Ukrainian lands,” and partially defeated by Russia, it can come to fester and even hate the West for “abandoning” it. It is certainly too early to do any more than merely guess at such possibilities.
 
Last edited:
Eastern 3rd of Ukraine is heavily populated by ethnic Russians that speak Russian and would like to be a part of Russia.
The rest of Ukraine is mainly populated by ethnic Ukrainian people that speak the Ukrainian language,.

In my opinion, I think Putin will draw a new border line and annex eastern Ukraine into part if Russia.

Also, Putin has no desire to invade and occupy the rest of Ukraine.
And will stop the war when he can negotiate a deal with the western powers that Ukraine will never be a member of NATO and never have their nuclear weapons staged on Ukrainian land.
I agree with everything you say here with a query about the first line. While that may very well be true now it was not at the time of Maidan., certainly as far as they answered on polls. Russian speakers in the East wanted to be part of Ukraine. However it is very difficult to think of any other way they could be safe now. Ukraine through Azov and Right Sector not Zelensky refused to allow them some ability to make decisions for themselves while also being part of Ukraine. For Ukraine itself that seems to have been the problem - the inability to integrate and accept all of its citizens.
 
Last edited:
I assume you mean my reference to “U.S. imperialism” in Vietnam. I think that is a fair term for the U.S. sending a half million occupation troops to fight there, continuing the French Indochina War after they were forced to withdraw their colonial troops. Of course that was also part of our Cold War campaign against “international communism” — but whatever our intent it put us squarely on the wrong side of the Vietnamese struggle for “national liberation” … in the eyes of most Vietnamese anyway.

There is a useful term — “proxy war” — that can be used in cases like the Ukraine Conflict where powerful nations use smaller nations or regional combatants against competing / opponent big nations. But while U.S. / NATO support for Ukraine is certainly in part a proxy war, for Ukrainians suffering a bloody invasion from Russia it is also a national liberation fight to maintain their national survival.

That is why I emphasize that Ukrainian nationalists are both using and being used by the West. The Ukrainians have learned, like the Zionists did before them, that to succeed in creating a serious state of their own they need to fight wars against their nearest and most immediate threat, but they also absolutely initially need support of some great powers.

If Ukraine is truly victorious in this war, in future it may well prove a rather troublesome (and authoritarian) ally that follows its own distinct national interests, like Turkey or Hungary. Indeed, it may even develop its own “imperial” ambitions in the Black Sea area or towards a future disintegrating Russia. On the other hand, if it is frustrated in reclaiming all its claimed “sovereign Ukrainian lands,” and partially defeated by Russia, it can come to fester and even hate the West for “abandoning” it. It is certainly too early to do any more than merely guess at such possibilities.
Is it inevitable that we may see a Russian nuclear weapon used in Ukraine, otherwise if Russia is now in a losing situation, and sees it's border security, it's national security interest, and it's future Russian homeland security ultimately slipping away because of how far it has all gone now ???

Would Russia feel highly threatened in the future after going all in on it's bid to over take Ukraine in a hot war, but loses that war just across it's border ???

Will Russia be terrified of a future empowered Ukraine on it's border if it loses, otherwise that it feels would then continue a long drawn out war or war of attrition for the purposes of weakening the Russian federation internally or externally due to what has happened now ???

How deep do the implications of this entire thing go now one wonder's ??

Will Ukraine peacefully send a message to Russia that Ukraine has no need in further escalation of this war even though it was attacked, and the message is that Ukraine should never be taken over by it's Russian neighbor, and that peace should be restored after both sides step back to lick and heal their wounds in which they have both received in the foolish war ?? Will both sides have learned a very important lesson here, and can it be resolved peacefully and with dignity for both somehow ??

If Ukraine were somehow to win in Ukraine, and a truce is cemented between the two because of that win or maybe a stalemate happens, then it should mark the end of the war forever, and hopefully without any further escalation, so will both sides stop the madness of War then or not ??

Both sides need to be mediated by powerful neutral peace promoting forces that somehow both would still have great respect for still, and all in hopes of stopping the madness before it goes nuclear.

Not seeking peace talks constantly with the aggressor is a huge mistake in my opinion. Feeding the lust for war is a huge mistake in my opinion.
 
Russian army is using brilliant tactics against the amateur Ukrainian forces.
First the Russians attack and then quickly withdraw to defensive artillery positions they have already set up.
Then the Ukrainian follow them, thinking the Russians have been routed and are fleeing the battlefield.
That's when the Russian artillery releases a massive barrage and annihilates the Ukrainians because they already had the entire area zero'd in.
While the Russians have very few casualties.
The Ukrainians keep falling of this ruse because most all of their experienced Officers and NCO's have been killed and they are basically leaderless.
Cool story, Putinboy. Is that what Carlson or Ritter are telling you? And now let me present you a real story.

The Russian invasion in Ukraine can be divided on several distinct phases.

1. Massive offensive from four different directions when they expected with fast and sweeping movements to reach and take main Ukrainian cities with little or no resistance from Ukrainian forces. As a whole, this phase went unsuccessfully for Russia. The Russians were unprepared for fierce resistance from Ukrainian forces, did have enough ammunition, fuel and manpower. They failed to reach Kyiv, Odesa, Dnepr, Zaporizhzhia; didn't take Kharkiv under siege. Though, they got a land bridge to Crimea.

2. The battle for Donbas. After withdrawal from the North and partially from the South (when they understood that Odesa is unreachable), they concentrated main forces on the Donbas direction. The main goal was to encircle the main UAF forces there and seize the Donbas area completely. It is then they began to use a firewall tactic. Their main goal wasn't achieved.

3. Ukrainian counter-offensives in Kharkiv and Kherson. As a result the Russians lost almost all occupied part of Kharkiv oblast, northern part of Donetsk oblast, and a foothold on the Dnieper western bank.

4. Relative stalemate on the frontline as a whole. Massive strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure. The Wagner Group on the rise.

If to put a long story short. You are welcome.
 
Cool story, Putinboy. Is that what Carlson or Ritter are telling you? And now let me present you a real story.
Incorrect Bidenboy
The whole problem with your assessment of the Ukraine battlefield situation is that you don't have a clue about Russian army tactics and overall strategy of how to win a war.
What you conclude to be Russian army failures in Ukraine, is actually their applying battlefield doctrine they perfected during WWll while fighting the German army.
 
Last edited:
Incorrect Bidenboy
The whole problem with your assessment of the Ukraine battlefield situation is that you don't have a clue about Russian army tactics and overall strategy of how to win a war.
What you conclude to be Russian army failures in Ukraine, is actually their applying battlefield doctrine they perfected during WWll while fighting the German army.
Battlefield doctrine during WWII? You mean mass frontal attacks against fortified positions of the enemy? (irony).

Okay, tell me, great strategist, what the Russians' actions will be in the coming months?

Take your time to think it through, otherwise your prognosis will be as reliable as it was a couple of months ago when you waited Russian counter-offensive in Kharkiv region in October.
 
In my opinion, I think Putin will draw a new border line and annex eastern Ukraine into part if Russia
Actually, he already did it.


Also, Putin has no desire to invade and occupy the rest of Ukraine.
And will stop the war when he can negotiate a deal with the western powers that Ukraine will never be a member of NATO and never have their nuclear weapons staged on Ukrainian land
That deal won't mean anything. After a while, he can break it to widen his influence. Without certain security guarantees this struggle is meaningless from Ukrainian part.
 
What a bunch of ignorant crap from our Putin lovers, who now go out of their way to praise the mercenary Wagner Group of criminals above the Russian Army. Tomorrow who will they praise? The salt mines have little value except as a hiding place from artillery and accurate missile strikes.

This horrible war, launched by Putin, who arrogantly and disastrously overestimated his own military’s strength and underestimated the Ukrainians willingness to fight in defense of their independence, may indeed go on for a long while. The West will not stop aiding Ukraine anytime soon, and Russia will suffer and bleed almost as much as Ukraine if the war continues.

A bloody Russian “victory” is in nobody’s interests, except maybe Putin’s and his security apparatus. But Russia probably will only doom itself by digging in and continuing or expanding this war.

How could it now — after antagonizing even most native Russian-speaking Ukrainians — ever occupy all of Ukraine? At best it may be able to freeze borders along more or less the 2014 lines, or keep present lines and hold on to Crimea — which falls into a separate category. Before February 24, 2022 Crimea was more solidly and stably “Russian,” and more unlikely ever to be “taken back” by Ukraine, than it is now, when Russians are selling their vacation homes there and the economy is cratering.

The Russian state may even collapse altogether and break into pieces under the pressure. I do not predict this or even favor it, but it is possible. Putin may or may not be ousted in the next period. But if nothing changes Russia will just become more and more backward, a mafia-fascist petro state everyone avoids.
You looking in the wrong direction. America's on its way to hell and you're worrying about us breaking? Sheesh! What an idiot!
 
Incorrect Bidenboy
The whole problem with your assessment of the Ukraine battlefield situation is that you don't have a clue about Russian army tactics and overall strategy of how to win a war.
What you conclude to be Russian army failures in Ukraine, is actually their applying battlefield doctrine they perfected during WWll while fighting the German army.
Well this definitely ain't world war two time's, and the old strategies of that war are long since past. This is a modern war, and it has many new tactics and strategies deployed. Precision weapon's and ammunition are far more devastating than the weapons of yesteryear's.

Russia can't be so stupid as to think it's fighting a world war two war can it ???
 
Battlefield doctrine during WWII? You mean mass frontal attacks against fortified positions of the enemy? (irony).

Okay, tell me, great strategist, what the Russians' actions will be in the coming months?

Take your time to think it through, otherwise your prognosis will be as reliable as it was a couple of months ago when you waited Russian counter-offensive in Kharkiv region in October.
If keeps losing , I don't think me or you really want to ponder the next moves by Russia in this war.
 
Well this definitely ain't world war two time's, and the old strategies of that war are long since past. This is a modern war, and it has many new tactics and strategies deployed. Precision weapon's and ammunition are far more devastating than the weapons of yesteryear's.
Russia can't be so stupid as to think it's fighting a world war two war can it ???
The war in Ukraine is still very much an old style Tank vs Tank classic battle but using upgraded weapons and ammunitions.
 

Forum List

Back
Top