Hate to have to defend Impy, but he said compromise, not surrender.
Ironically, it has already surrendered and fully prostituted itself to the EU and the US though. When you make yourself an instrument for the Americans "to fight Russia over there so we don't have to fight them here", it is not surprising at all that the Russians are not going to be happy with that.
And that's not just the mobilization and deployment of forces, and digging trenches (and tunnels!) and placing mines, and dispersing of ammunition storages, and evacuating civilians. It's also just arming themselves properly.
Like, for example, I talked you about the upgraded Stugna missile system being great (it's literally awesome, supposed to be just anti-tank but even shot down a fast moving helicopter). It was produced as an export product, they now use Arabic text interface because they didn't even have a Cyryllic version for they didn't think they would use it in a long frozen conflict of occasional sniper fire and mortar exchanges. They didn't rush the production of the Neptune missiles too (scheduled to start in April), had only the prototypes they used to destroy Moscow (the warship).
With more of these "American weapons" of theirs, the so sadly "all not happy" Russians would be even more unhappy, also dead.
Poland in 1939 at least had a somewhat-successful secret mobilization prior to the invasion (https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=160494). Ukraine did fuck all, like the USSR in 1941 despite obvious German movements and all the warnings.
And that's not just the mobilization and deployment of forces, and digging trenches (and tunnels!) and placing mines, and dispersing of ammunition storages, and evacuating civilians. It's also just arming themselves properly.
I find it hard to believe that they would be that stupid. At least Stalin had a legitimate reason for his nonsense, trying not to provoke the Germans into invading before 1942. I'm sure you know that Stalin knew full well that the Germans would invade, he just did not expect it to land in 1941.
With more of these "American weapons" of theirs, the so sadly "all not happy" Russians would be even more unhappy, also dead.
Well yeah. Murdering Russians is the point of those American weapons. I also saw Russian accounts claiming that they found munitions in civilian areas in Donetsk supplied by NATO. So not just soldiers. Anything the Kiev regime does is a-OK with the West.
For the record, it's the West and its state religion of hypocrisy that's the problem. The Ukrainians are not acting any more vilely than the Russians, as far as anyone can demonstrate.
Poland in 1939 at least had a somewhat-successful secret mobilization prior to the invasion (https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=160494). Ukraine did fuck all, like the USSR in 1941 despite obvious German movements and all the warnings.
It is puzzling. Apart from the facile "Zelensky is a clown" explanations, the only semi-decent explanation that I have seen is that the Russian forces were so poorly arrayed, prepared and equipped for an invasion that the Ukrainians did not take seriously that they would be used for an invasion. I don't know if reports that it was a last-minute decision by VVP are accurate, but if so, that would be consistent with this.
And frankly, 170,000 soldiers for a full-scale invasion of a heavily militarized, heavily fortified country with 800,000 men who had military experience always sounded pretty stupid to me.
They were so peaceful they didn't even act on the American warnings, and publicly disbelieved them.
Not sure how much that counts in favor of your "peacefulness". Stalin wasn't the most peaceful man either.
They ("Nazi puppets") would have won the damn war already if they have been prepared just like they were told to.
Then Russia would simply mobilize and crush them with superior numbers, and have Belarus stage diversionary operations to prevent troops in the West from doing anything. There is no winning for Ukraine. A loss would be fatal for Putin, so there is no way he will allow that to happen.
Didn't you reject all compromise with Russia and attack France and Italy for creating a plan to end this war?
Yah, why doesn't Ukraine just surrender? That would stop the fighting right quick.
Hate to have to defend Impy, but he said compromise, not surrender.
Ironically, it has already surrendered and fully prostituted itself to the EU and the US though. When you make yourself an instrument for the Americans "to fight Russia over there so we don't have to fight them here", it is not surprising at all that the Russians are not going to be happy with that.
And that's not just the mobilization and deployment of forces, and digging trenches (and tunnels!) and placing mines, and dispersing of ammunition storages, and evacuating civilians. It's also just arming themselves properly.
Like, for example, I talked you about the upgraded Stugna missile system being great (it's literally awesome, supposed to be just anti-tank but even shot down a fast moving helicopter). It was produced as an export product, they now use Arabic text interface because they didn't even have a Cyryllic version for they didn't think they would use it in a long frozen conflict of occasional sniper fire and mortar exchanges. They didn't rush the production of the Neptune missiles too (scheduled to start in April), had only the prototypes they used to destroy Moscow (the warship).
With more of these "American weapons" of theirs, the so sadly "all not happy" Russians would be even more unhappy, also dead.
Poland in 1939 at least had a somewhat-successful secret mobilization prior to the invasion (https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=160494). Ukraine did fuck all, like the USSR in 1941 despite obvious German movements and all the warnings.
I find it hard to believe that they would be that stupid. At least Stalin had a legitimate reason for his nonsense, trying not to provoke the Germans into invading before 1942. I'm sure you know that Stalin knew full well that the Germans would invade, he just did not expect it to land in 1941.
Well yeah. Murdering Russians is the point of those American weapons. I also saw Russian accounts claiming that they found munitions in civilian areas in Donetsk supplied by NATO. So not just soldiers. Anything the Kiev regime does is a-OK with the West.
For the record, it's the West and its state religion of hypocrisy that's the problem. The Ukrainians are not acting any more vilely than the Russians, as far as anyone can demonstrate.
It is puzzling. Apart from the facile "Zelensky is a clown" explanations, the only semi-decent explanation that I have seen is that the Russian forces were so poorly arrayed, prepared and equipped for an invasion that the Ukrainians did not take seriously that they would be used for an invasion. I don't know if reports that it was a last-minute decision by VVP are accurate, but if so, that would be consistent with this.
And frankly, 170,000 soldiers for a full-scale invasion of a heavily militarized, heavily fortified country with 800,000 men who had military experience always sounded pretty stupid to me.
They were so peaceful they didn't even act on the American warnings, and publicly disbelieved them.
They ("Nazi puppets") would have won the damn war already if they have been prepared just like they were told to.
Not sure how much that counts in favor of your "peacefulness". Stalin wasn't the most peaceful man either.
Then Russia would simply mobilize and crush them with superior numbers, and have Belarus stage diversionary operations to prevent troops in the West from doing anything. There is no winning for Ukraine. A loss would be fatal for Putin, so there is no way he will allow that to happen.