Bitch slaps them with what? Russia's entire military is tied up trying and failing to bully Ukraine, when Russia's GDP started out 10 times higher.
Russia is in a state of utter and abject weakness right now. It can't pull out of Ukraine because the Ukrainians would just counter-attack. It can't fight anyone else because the weak Russian military is stretched to its limit just dealing with Ukraine.
Russia is reportedly the second-largest gold mining country in the world and exported roughly $15 billion worth of gold in 2021.
Chump change.
You also can't stop the export of fungible goods unless you get EVERYONE to agree to embargo them. Russia is just selling more oil to India and China, for example, instead of to the EU.
Russia's entire military is tied up trying and failing to bully Ukraine,
It's just 170,000. Basically nothing. Ukraine has fully mobilized (even tens of thousands of women), and is being propped up by the GAE. 800,000 Ukrainians have military experience due to fighting in Donbas and shelling the civilians there.
Russia is now making advances despite being at a numerical disadvantage - not even mobilized.
when Russia's GDP started out 10 times higher.
Despite its population being only 3x greater. What a monumental failure the Ukrainian state is. That is why I do not mind it being extinguished, unlike say Taiwan, which actually does relatively well by its people.
It can't pull out of Ukraine because the Ukrainians would just counter-attack.
What's a tactical nuke?
I will remind you that somewhere in March (or April, not sure), you told me that if Russia did not break through within the month, the GAE puppet would start driving them back. Nothing of the sort happened though, and the Russians are making steady advances. Now, hundreds of Ukrainians are dying every day for the profits of Raytheon and American geopolitics.
It was 190k for the initial invasion, and many more reinforcements since after the invasion began. Plus the Russian military has a lot of non-combat troops like logistics troops that are supporting the actual combat forces. So Russia deployed pretty much everything it had, which is why even though there was a rule against using conscripts in Ukraine, they were sent in anyway in large numbers.
The fact that Russia is manpower-poor despite having loads and loads of equipment, has been a defining feature of how the war has played out.
Ukraine has fully mobilized (even tens of thousands of women)
Nah. It started a mobilization, but it's been a slow and ongoing process. Most of the "mobilized" people are just civil defense militia sitting outside the combat areas. War requires a lot of training & equipment to make useful units, and Ukraine has had its outnumbered experienced units stretched thin blocking the slow Russian advances 1st around Izyum, then Popasna, then Severodonetsk.
Russia is now making advances despite being at a numerical disadvantage - not even mobilized.
Russia is not at a numerical disadvantage in the areas in which it is attacking, and Russia has overwhelmingly numerical superiority in those areas in terms of fires: artillery & air strikes. Ukraine can't keep aircraft out of the Severodonetsk area because its in a salient getting hit from artillery on all sides, so they can't keep a SAM presence there.
Ukraine's strategy is to just dig in and make Russia pay a heavy price for every piece of land it slowly takes, in order to wear down the Russian forces and burn through Russia's ammunition supply, available equipment, and manpower, until Russia "runs out of steam" and has to stop.
What a monumental failure the Ukrainian state is.
Yes, because of Soviet and later Russian influence. Had Ukraine been allowed to incorporate into the EU, for example, its economy would have rapidly grown. I expect that 10 years from now, Ukraine will be in the EU and its economy will be growing rapidly. Look here at this chart of various european countries in GDP per capita. The standout poors are all former soviet states & puppets. Poland has had massive economic growth. Estonia and Slovenia, too. Ukraine, being one of the core parts of the Soviet Union, has a lot more catching up to do, but if it emulates Western standards, it will blow past Russia just as nations like Poland have.
What's a tactical nuke?
Something Russia would never use because it would just get nuked back harder, and sanctions? You've never even seen sanctions until Russia tries to pop off a nuke. The "sanctions" on Russia right now are so limp dick it's laughable. Only a few banks got cut off from SWIFT. Most of Russia's exports are unaffected, and most affected exports are only inconvenienced. If Russia pops off a nuke, the whole world, including India and China, would be forced to completely cut Russia off North Korea style.
Also tactical nukes aren't even the "wonder weapons" you think they are. They only kill in a relatively small area. You need a LOT of them to actually stop an offensive. The biggest danger of tactical nukes is the fact that they cause nuclear escalation until you're dealing with serious city killers.
Russia will never use a nuclear weapon, just as it never has in the past throughout the last 75 years. It knows the costs grossly outweigh the benefits.
I will remind you that somewhere in March (or April, not sure), you told me that if Russia did not break through within the month, the GAE puppet would start driving them back. Nothing of the sort happened though
I will remind you that my prediction was 100% correct.
My post/comments were talking about the Northern Front specifically, in March, and I said within 3 weeks. Well guess what happened about 2.5 weeks later? The Russians, apparently having read my post and realized what a military genius I am, completely bugged out of the whole Northern sector in order to avoid getting pocketed, which is absolutely what would have happened had they not run away.
Basically, with a super wide front, Ukraine had the advantage in that it could build up more light infantry and spread them around everywhere and end up paralyzing the Russians and then hitting them at critical points with experienced units (conscripts can do ok on defense but can't attack). So the Russians pulled back and narrowed the war to very small fronts in order to leverage their big advantage in tanks and artillery. The Ukrainians have refused to try to go on the offensive on other fronts, and instead have chosen to shift their experienced units into blocking positions to slow the Russians down in attrition warfare.
BOTH sides have chosen to adopt the "low risk attrition warfare" approach, instead of risking maneuver warfare. This changed the character of the war to an entirely different phase where neither side can win decisive battles. Instead, it's going to just be an artillery grind, which is what I predicted early on in April once Russia pulled out of the North. Ukraine kept saying "send us fighters" and I kept saying "fuck the fighters, send them artillery" because I knew we had an artillery war now, and that's exactly what we've had since April.
In the long run, Ukraine wins any war of attrition for the simple fact that it has more people to reinforce with, and more fresh equipment periodically coming in from EU/NATO countries to replace its losses. It's just a matter of time until Russia gets worn down enough. It seems rather obvious to me that Russia's game plan is to simply conquer everything it can in Donbas until it runs out of steam, and then once it runs out of steam, declare victory and start giving terms. It remains to be seen whether Ukraine has the capability to meaningfully counter-attack defended Russian areas. I am not sure that it can.
It was 190k for the initial invasion, and many more reinforcements since after the invasion began.
It was like 40k for the initial invasion, which really is not a serious invasion - and if you recall, the Muricans were saying stuff like "Russia has now deployed 75% of its border forces".
Nah. It started a mobilization, but it's been a slow and ongoing process. Most of the "mobilized" people are just civil defense militia sitting outside the combat areas.
That's what they thought! And then some at least were sent to the front to serve as cannon fodder.
War requires a lot of training & equipment to make useful units, and Ukraine has had its outnumbered experienced units stretched thin blocking the slow Russian advances 1st around Izyum, then Popasna, then Severodonetsk.
That would mean that it's losing its experienced units to cheap Russian artillery barrages. Not a very good prospect. I suspect that Ukraine may simply collapse at some point, and Russia will take the entire South as well as Kiev - as parts of historic Russia.
A more limited objective is taking the south of Ukraine as well as the Soviet capital Kharkov.
Ukraine's strategy is to just dig in and make Russia pay a heavy price for every piece of land it slowly takes, in order to wear down the Russian forces and burn through Russia's ammunition supply, available equipment, and manpower, until Russia "runs out of steam" and has to stop.
I mean, it's not really burning thoruhg Russian manpower to shell the Ukrainians 24/7. I think that's why they're doing it Russian style rather than sending in forces.
The standout poors are all former soviet states & puppets.
Basically every country in Eastern Europe was one of the two. Except for Yugoslavia and to a lesser extent Romania. Not exactly great examples of success.
Ukraine, being one of the core parts of the Soviet Union
It seems to me that the longer you have been part of the USSR, the worse you will do. Not sure if causation or just correlation. But the Baltics were only incorporated in 1940. OTOH, Moldova is the worst country and it was also incorporated late.
Something Russia would never use because it would just get nuked back harder, and sanctions? You've never even seen sanctions until Russia tries to pop off a nuke. The "sanctions" on Russia right now are so limp dick it's laughable
Literally the most sanctioned country in the world. Biden bragged about crashing the Russian economy and reducing the value of the ruble by 50% to rubble.
Also tactical nukes aren't even the "wonder weapons" you think they are. They only kill in a relatively small area. You need a LOT of them to actually stop an offensive. The biggest danger of tactical nukes is the fact that they cause nuclear escalation until you're dealing with serious city killers.
No one's going to walk into an area where you're getting nukes on your ass. That simply is not going to happen. The threat ought to be sufficient, but if not, then one low-yield device will probably suffice.
Russia will never use a nuclear weapon, just as it never has in the past throughout the last 75 years. It knows the costs grossly outweigh the benefits.
Russian territory has never been attacked since it got nukes.
My post/comments were talking about the Northern Front specifically
Was it? But even if it was, you were saying that the Russians would 'collapse'. Turns out, they just gracefully withdrew.
The Russians, apparently having read my post and realized what a military genius I am
LOL!
The Ukrainians have refused to try to go on the offensive on other fronts
Are you sure? They have done a few offensives which quickly petered out with massive losses. Kharkov for example. They took a small strip of land at the cost of many lives, which the Russians then easily retook. Doesn't seem to be great military leadership in Kiev. They're better at firing their pistols at little kids.
In the long run, Ukraine wins any war of attrition for the simple fact that it has more people to reinforce with
Explain. Russia has more people. If it's losing, it'll simply order a general mobilization and vastly outnumber Ukraine. Ukraine has also lost 20% of its pre-2014 land, and many millions of people (though mostly women). An actual loss in Ukraine would threaten the regime in Russia, so that will never happen. Nuclear weapons will be used before that occurs.
and more fresh equipment periodically coming in from EU/NATO countries to replace its losses
Yeah, no. As colder seasons approach again, the EU is going to have to give, or Russia will cut off our gas and we freeze to death. Though I don't doubt that our political leadership is willing to let us freeze to death for its geopolitical ambitions.
And you really think the GAE can send enough artillery to dwarf Russia's enormous advantage in that area?
That would mean that it's losing its experienced units to cheap Russian artillery barrages. Not a very good prospect. I suspect that Ukraine may simply collapse at some point, and Russia will take the entire South as well as Kiev - as parts of historic Russia.
Collapse? When light infantry have already proved more than capable of stopping Russian advances throughout the whole war? Ukraine can't "collapse" when a babushka with an NLAW can stop a Russian tank column. Wars of attrition don't result in collapse. They grind both sides until one side's political leadership realizes continuing isn't worth it. Since the war is an existential threat for Ukraine, that means Russia either has to mass mobilize or eventually fold or accept a stalemate.
I mean, it's not really burning thoruhg Russian manpower to shell the Ukrainians 24/7. I think that's why they're doing it Russian style rather than sending in forces.
The Russians are still pushing troops and taking losses. They're trying to conserve their manpower because they're running low, but it's impossible to kill everyone with artillery. Defenders will just dig in and hide and you won't even know they're there until they start shooting. Also, Russia is taking plenty of losses to things like artillery duels and counter-battery fire, too. It's a war of attrition, and both sides are taking losses.
Literally the most sanctioned country in the world.
The sanctions on Russia are very weak. Nothing like what is on Iran, let alone North Korea.
Biden bragged about crashing the Russian economy and reducing the value of the ruble by 50% to rubble.
Biden is an idiot and senile. All the western leaders talked big and lied to exaggerate the sanctions as a PR thing, while in substance, the steps they took were super weak. The market, being immune to bullshit, immediately caused to ruble to rebound BECAUSE the market has decided that the sanctions were a joke.
Russian territory has never been attacked since it got nukes.
you were saying that the Russians would 'collapse'. Turns out, they just gracefully withdrew.
I said they'd collapse if they kept on doing what they were doing and trying to push. Obviously you can't "collapse" if you run away instead of fighting. The Russian leaders obviously agreed with me and pulled out since they realized the same thing I did.
Are you sure? They have done a few offensives which quickly petered out with massive losses. Kharkov for example. They took a small strip of land at the cost of many lives, which the Russians then easily retook.
None of that happened. Maybe Russian sources are claiming that. Ukraine has only done really small scale attacks in very limited areas to take a few villages here and there. Ukraine has successfully pushed the Russians back quite a distance north and east of Kharkiv but they only do small attacks against areas that Russians only lightly defend. Ukraine does not try to do any big offensives, and does not try to attack into areas that Russia has stocked a lot of troops.
Explain. Russia has more people. If it's losing, it'll simply order a general mobilization and vastly outnumber Ukraine.
If Putin could order a mobilization, he already would have. Since he hasn't, that's proof he can't. Putin isn't Stalin. He can't do whatever he wants. He has to worry about being overthrown or balcony diving or internal revolt. Ukraine doesn't pose a threat to Russia. Russians aren't worried that Ukraine is going to march on Moscow. All "losing" means for Russia is that Russia has to leave Ukraine alone and suffer a loss of pride. That's not enough for the Russian people to tolerate a mass mobilization.
An actual loss in Ukraine would threaten the regime in Russia, so that will never happen. Nuclear weapons will be used before that occurs.
LOL no. Russia and Putin will threaten nukes because they think the calculus favors it, but will never use nukes because they know the calculus strongly punishes it. Putin would be more threatened by mobilization than defeat. Putin would be more threatened by using nukes than defeat. If Russia is defeated or concedes, it is far more likely most countries would lift sanctions after a while.
Yeah, no. As colder seasons approach again, the EU is going to have to give, or Russia will cut off our gas and we freeze to death.
The EU is in no danger of freezing to death. If Russia cut off 100% of oil supplies, the EU would just have to pay more for alternative sources, and in some cases (like Germany) would be forced to resort to coal to cover shortfalls, which would make environmentalists seethe, but tough shit.
Also Ukraine doesn't NEED more EU stuff longer term. The US already has enough of a credit line to give Ukraine $1 billion in military supplies per month pretty much indefinitely. The $40 billion credit line Congress gave Biden will cover the current aid rate for over a year. There's no way Russia has the logistical capacity to keep doing what it has been doing these past 2 months, for a whole year. It's burning through its manpower, ammo, and equipment reserves faster than it can replace them. Russia is going to have to stop and settle into a stalemate situation soon enough, probably in 2-3 months.
And you really think the GAE can send enough artillery to dwarf Russia's enormous advantage in that area?
The US is sending Ukraine superior quality artillery, combined with integrated counter battery radars and shit that completely outclasses what Russia uses. The US artillery is all automated with computers and shit. A drone can see a target 25km away, data link that to the command unit for an arty battery, the command unit then sends the fire solution to the arty digitally with a few clicks, and the arty can immediately fire, all this in a matter of seconds. Russia has no capability anything like that. The only reason that Russia isn't getting BTFO in artillery duels, is that Ukrainian troop quality is very inconsistent (NATO pros would BTFO the Russians) and it will take time to develop the doctrine and integration and numbers of units in order to actually use the US systems to their full potential. That said, US reports are that Ukraine has already used SIGINT systems and HIMARS to successfully hit Russian HQs, which is something that has been happening an embarrassing amount throughout the war because Russian troops use cheap chinese radios that are easy to track.
So OVERALL, I see Ukraine getting stronger as it develops the experience and skills to better use superior US equipment, while Russia gets weaker as it runs down its supply of ammunition + can't replace its vehicles and equipment as fast as it is losing it. Bear in mind Russia loses a lot of equipment just to wear and tear and breakdowns, not just to Ukraine hitting it with weapons. Russian logistics & maintenance have been pretty bad. It's also really difficult for them to sustain once they get away from the railroads they rely heavily on for supply.
Russia has been using their shit military, not their good weapons.
You mean all 3 of their new fighters and all 5 of their new tanks? Yeah, I'm SURE they would make a difference and not just get blown up with Russia humiliated like it did when its best ship got blown up by old Ukrainian missiles.
Shut the fuck up. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Russia has been holding back the larger weapons because once they are unleashed, the escalation cannot be undone. This has been a pissing match so far.
Russia has been holding back the larger weapons because once they are unleashed, the escalation cannot be undone.
Russia has no "larger weapons". Russia has no "good weapons". Russia is not some anime character who is like "Ukraine, you cannot comprehend my true power level!!!"
Russia has already used all its best weapons, to no effect.
The T-14 Armata tank is a joke, and despite being designed in 2014, still has not gone into production.
The Sukhoi Su-57 is also a joke, and Russia only has 6. ONLY SIX, actual production fighters. Russia won't use them against Ukraine because they'd only get shot down, and if one got shot down, Russia would suffer a huge propaganda defeat, just like when its entire navy was reduced to a JOKE by the fact that it's best ship got sunk by an old Ukrainian missile.
Bitch slaps them with what? Russia's entire military is tied up trying and failing to bully Ukraine, when Russia's GDP started out 10 times higher.
Russia is in a state of utter and abject weakness right now. It can't pull out of Ukraine because the Ukrainians would just counter-attack. It can't fight anyone else because the weak Russian military is stretched to its limit just dealing with Ukraine.
Chump change.
You also can't stop the export of fungible goods unless you get EVERYONE to agree to embargo them. Russia is just selling more oil to India and China, for example, instead of to the EU.
Now, who let this motherfucker out of the chocolate factory?
It's just 170,000. Basically nothing. Ukraine has fully mobilized (even tens of thousands of women), and is being propped up by the GAE. 800,000 Ukrainians have military experience due to fighting in Donbas and shelling the civilians there.
Russia is now making advances despite being at a numerical disadvantage - not even mobilized.
Despite its population being only 3x greater. What a monumental failure the Ukrainian state is. That is why I do not mind it being extinguished, unlike say Taiwan, which actually does relatively well by its people.
What's a tactical nuke?
I will remind you that somewhere in March (or April, not sure), you told me that if Russia did not break through within the month, the GAE puppet would start driving them back. Nothing of the sort happened though, and the Russians are making steady advances. Now, hundreds of Ukrainians are dying every day for the profits of Raytheon and American geopolitics.
It was 190k for the initial invasion, and many more reinforcements since after the invasion began. Plus the Russian military has a lot of non-combat troops like logistics troops that are supporting the actual combat forces. So Russia deployed pretty much everything it had, which is why even though there was a rule against using conscripts in Ukraine, they were sent in anyway in large numbers.
The fact that Russia is manpower-poor despite having loads and loads of equipment, has been a defining feature of how the war has played out.
Nah. It started a mobilization, but it's been a slow and ongoing process. Most of the "mobilized" people are just civil defense militia sitting outside the combat areas. War requires a lot of training & equipment to make useful units, and Ukraine has had its outnumbered experienced units stretched thin blocking the slow Russian advances 1st around Izyum, then Popasna, then Severodonetsk.
Russia is not at a numerical disadvantage in the areas in which it is attacking, and Russia has overwhelmingly numerical superiority in those areas in terms of fires: artillery & air strikes. Ukraine can't keep aircraft out of the Severodonetsk area because its in a salient getting hit from artillery on all sides, so they can't keep a SAM presence there.
Ukraine's strategy is to just dig in and make Russia pay a heavy price for every piece of land it slowly takes, in order to wear down the Russian forces and burn through Russia's ammunition supply, available equipment, and manpower, until Russia "runs out of steam" and has to stop.
Yes, because of Soviet and later Russian influence. Had Ukraine been allowed to incorporate into the EU, for example, its economy would have rapidly grown. I expect that 10 years from now, Ukraine will be in the EU and its economy will be growing rapidly. Look here at this chart of various european countries in GDP per capita. The standout poors are all former soviet states & puppets. Poland has had massive economic growth. Estonia and Slovenia, too. Ukraine, being one of the core parts of the Soviet Union, has a lot more catching up to do, but if it emulates Western standards, it will blow past Russia just as nations like Poland have.
Something Russia would never use because it would just get nuked back harder, and sanctions? You've never even seen sanctions until Russia tries to pop off a nuke. The "sanctions" on Russia right now are so limp dick it's laughable. Only a few banks got cut off from SWIFT. Most of Russia's exports are unaffected, and most affected exports are only inconvenienced. If Russia pops off a nuke, the whole world, including India and China, would be forced to completely cut Russia off North Korea style.
Also tactical nukes aren't even the "wonder weapons" you think they are. They only kill in a relatively small area. You need a LOT of them to actually stop an offensive. The biggest danger of tactical nukes is the fact that they cause nuclear escalation until you're dealing with serious city killers.
Russia will never use a nuclear weapon, just as it never has in the past throughout the last 75 years. It knows the costs grossly outweigh the benefits.
I will remind you that my prediction was 100% correct.
My post/comments were talking about the Northern Front specifically, in March, and I said within 3 weeks. Well guess what happened about 2.5 weeks later? The Russians, apparently having read my post and realized what a military genius I am, completely bugged out of the whole Northern sector in order to avoid getting pocketed, which is absolutely what would have happened had they not run away.
Basically, with a super wide front, Ukraine had the advantage in that it could build up more light infantry and spread them around everywhere and end up paralyzing the Russians and then hitting them at critical points with experienced units (conscripts can do ok on defense but can't attack). So the Russians pulled back and narrowed the war to very small fronts in order to leverage their big advantage in tanks and artillery. The Ukrainians have refused to try to go on the offensive on other fronts, and instead have chosen to shift their experienced units into blocking positions to slow the Russians down in attrition warfare.
BOTH sides have chosen to adopt the "low risk attrition warfare" approach, instead of risking maneuver warfare. This changed the character of the war to an entirely different phase where neither side can win decisive battles. Instead, it's going to just be an artillery grind, which is what I predicted early on in April once Russia pulled out of the North. Ukraine kept saying "send us fighters" and I kept saying "fuck the fighters, send them artillery" because I knew we had an artillery war now, and that's exactly what we've had since April.
In the long run, Ukraine wins any war of attrition for the simple fact that it has more people to reinforce with, and more fresh equipment periodically coming in from EU/NATO countries to replace its losses. It's just a matter of time until Russia gets worn down enough. It seems rather obvious to me that Russia's game plan is to simply conquer everything it can in Donbas until it runs out of steam, and then once it runs out of steam, declare victory and start giving terms. It remains to be seen whether Ukraine has the capability to meaningfully counter-attack defended Russian areas. I am not sure that it can.
It was like 40k for the initial invasion, which really is not a serious invasion - and if you recall, the Muricans were saying stuff like "Russia has now deployed 75% of its border forces".
That's what they thought! And then some at least were sent to the front to serve as cannon fodder.
That would mean that it's losing its experienced units to cheap Russian artillery barrages. Not a very good prospect. I suspect that Ukraine may simply collapse at some point, and Russia will take the entire South as well as Kiev - as parts of historic Russia.
A more limited objective is taking the south of Ukraine as well as the Soviet capital Kharkov.
I mean, it's not really burning thoruhg Russian manpower to shell the Ukrainians 24/7. I think that's why they're doing it Russian style rather than sending in forces.
Basically every country in Eastern Europe was one of the two. Except for Yugoslavia and to a lesser extent Romania. Not exactly great examples of success.
It seems to me that the longer you have been part of the USSR, the worse you will do. Not sure if causation or just correlation. But the Baltics were only incorporated in 1940. OTOH, Moldova is the worst country and it was also incorporated late.
Literally the most sanctioned country in the world. Biden bragged about crashing the Russian economy and reducing the value of the ruble by 50% to rubble.
No one's going to walk into an area where you're getting nukes on your ass. That simply is not going to happen. The threat ought to be sufficient, but if not, then one low-yield device will probably suffice.
Russian territory has never been attacked since it got nukes.
Was it? But even if it was, you were saying that the Russians would 'collapse'. Turns out, they just gracefully withdrew.
LOL!
Are you sure? They have done a few offensives which quickly petered out with massive losses. Kharkov for example. They took a small strip of land at the cost of many lives, which the Russians then easily retook. Doesn't seem to be great military leadership in Kiev. They're better at firing their pistols at little kids.
Explain. Russia has more people. If it's losing, it'll simply order a general mobilization and vastly outnumber Ukraine. Ukraine has also lost 20% of its pre-2014 land, and many millions of people (though mostly women). An actual loss in Ukraine would threaten the regime in Russia, so that will never happen. Nuclear weapons will be used before that occurs.
Yeah, no. As colder seasons approach again, the EU is going to have to give, or Russia will cut off our gas and we freeze to death. Though I don't doubt that our political leadership is willing to let us freeze to death for its geopolitical ambitions.
And you really think the GAE can send enough artillery to dwarf Russia's enormous advantage in that area?
Collapse? When light infantry have already proved more than capable of stopping Russian advances throughout the whole war? Ukraine can't "collapse" when a babushka with an NLAW can stop a Russian tank column. Wars of attrition don't result in collapse. They grind both sides until one side's political leadership realizes continuing isn't worth it. Since the war is an existential threat for Ukraine, that means Russia either has to mass mobilize or eventually fold or accept a stalemate.
The Russians are still pushing troops and taking losses. They're trying to conserve their manpower because they're running low, but it's impossible to kill everyone with artillery. Defenders will just dig in and hide and you won't even know they're there until they start shooting. Also, Russia is taking plenty of losses to things like artillery duels and counter-battery fire, too. It's a war of attrition, and both sides are taking losses.
The sanctions on Russia are very weak. Nothing like what is on Iran, let alone North Korea.
Biden is an idiot and senile. All the western leaders talked big and lied to exaggerate the sanctions as a PR thing, while in substance, the steps they took were super weak. The market, being immune to bullshit, immediately caused to ruble to rebound BECAUSE the market has decided that the sanctions were a joke.
[Technically it has](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict#Battle_of_Zhenbao_(Damansky)_Island) but the nukes didn't matter. Nobody was in a position to attack Russia anyway. It subjugated all of its neighbors. Nukes have never been used since WW2 because they cancel each other out through MAD.
I said they'd collapse if they kept on doing what they were doing and trying to push. Obviously you can't "collapse" if you run away instead of fighting. The Russian leaders obviously agreed with me and pulled out since they realized the same thing I did.
None of that happened. Maybe Russian sources are claiming that. Ukraine has only done really small scale attacks in very limited areas to take a few villages here and there. Ukraine has successfully pushed the Russians back quite a distance north and east of Kharkiv but they only do small attacks against areas that Russians only lightly defend. Ukraine does not try to do any big offensives, and does not try to attack into areas that Russia has stocked a lot of troops.
If Putin could order a mobilization, he already would have. Since he hasn't, that's proof he can't. Putin isn't Stalin. He can't do whatever he wants. He has to worry about being overthrown or balcony diving or internal revolt. Ukraine doesn't pose a threat to Russia. Russians aren't worried that Ukraine is going to march on Moscow. All "losing" means for Russia is that Russia has to leave Ukraine alone and suffer a loss of pride. That's not enough for the Russian people to tolerate a mass mobilization.
LOL no. Russia and Putin will threaten nukes because they think the calculus favors it, but will never use nukes because they know the calculus strongly punishes it. Putin would be more threatened by mobilization than defeat. Putin would be more threatened by using nukes than defeat. If Russia is defeated or concedes, it is far more likely most countries would lift sanctions after a while.
The EU is in no danger of freezing to death. If Russia cut off 100% of oil supplies, the EU would just have to pay more for alternative sources, and in some cases (like Germany) would be forced to resort to coal to cover shortfalls, which would make environmentalists seethe, but tough shit.
Also Ukraine doesn't NEED more EU stuff longer term. The US already has enough of a credit line to give Ukraine $1 billion in military supplies per month pretty much indefinitely. The $40 billion credit line Congress gave Biden will cover the current aid rate for over a year. There's no way Russia has the logistical capacity to keep doing what it has been doing these past 2 months, for a whole year. It's burning through its manpower, ammo, and equipment reserves faster than it can replace them. Russia is going to have to stop and settle into a stalemate situation soon enough, probably in 2-3 months.
The US is sending Ukraine superior quality artillery, combined with integrated counter battery radars and shit that completely outclasses what Russia uses. The US artillery is all automated with computers and shit. A drone can see a target 25km away, data link that to the command unit for an arty battery, the command unit then sends the fire solution to the arty digitally with a few clicks, and the arty can immediately fire, all this in a matter of seconds. Russia has no capability anything like that. The only reason that Russia isn't getting BTFO in artillery duels, is that Ukrainian troop quality is very inconsistent (NATO pros would BTFO the Russians) and it will take time to develop the doctrine and integration and numbers of units in order to actually use the US systems to their full potential. That said, US reports are that Ukraine has already used SIGINT systems and HIMARS to successfully hit Russian HQs, which is something that has been happening an embarrassing amount throughout the war because Russian troops use cheap chinese radios that are easy to track.
So OVERALL, I see Ukraine getting stronger as it develops the experience and skills to better use superior US equipment, while Russia gets weaker as it runs down its supply of ammunition + can't replace its vehicles and equipment as fast as it is losing it. Bear in mind Russia loses a lot of equipment just to wear and tear and breakdowns, not just to Ukraine hitting it with weapons. Russian logistics & maintenance have been pretty bad. It's also really difficult for them to sustain once they get away from the railroads they rely heavily on for supply.
Russia has been using their shit military, not their good weapons.
You mean all 3 of their new fighters and all 5 of their new tanks? Yeah, I'm SURE they would make a difference and not just get blown up with Russia humiliated like it did when its best ship got blown up by old Ukrainian missiles.
Shut the fuck up. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Russia has been holding back the larger weapons because once they are unleashed, the escalation cannot be undone. This has been a pissing match so far.
Hahah, seethe, retard.
Russia has no "larger weapons". Russia has no "good weapons". Russia is not some anime character who is like "Ukraine, you cannot comprehend my true power level!!!"
Russia has already used all its best weapons, to no effect.
The T-14 Armata tank is a joke, and despite being designed in 2014, still has not gone into production.
The Sukhoi Su-57 is also a joke, and Russia only has 6. ONLY SIX, actual production fighters. Russia won't use them against Ukraine because they'd only get shot down, and if one got shot down, Russia would suffer a huge propaganda defeat, just like when its entire navy was reduced to a JOKE by the fact that it's best ship got sunk by an old Ukrainian missile.