-
Putin was holding back the entire time
-
the only rational explanation for his restraint was that he wanted to minimize civilian casualties and damage to critical infrastructure
-
this desire to minimize collateral damage makes Putin a better man than all of the Western commanders who indiscriminately carpet bombed their enemies in virtually every major conflict since WW2
-
at this point, if Western media are speaking, they’re lying
-
everyone on this board who thought the Ukraine was winning this war, or that Russia was somehow outmatched, is a fucking retard
Comments (101)
sorted by:
Putin isn't good.. but at least they're isolationist though.
Frankly, the US waging profitable proxy wars on Russia (and soon China, maybe even North Korea) is worse, taken together with acting holier-than-though despite lying politicians and MSM, moving ever towards a sort of western technological and corporate authoritarianism via fake democracy.. Makes them worse.
I agree. He doesn’t have to be good in order to be better than western leaders, who are actively destroying their own nations on the orders of globalist elites.
Most people are not rootin for Putin they just don't want to be involved in their bullshit
I'm totally rootin' for Putin
At this point, whoever the US government tells me to root for, I'm rooting for the other guy.
I mean, I would place "not killing civilians en masse" as par, not "good".
Which is already ahead compared to what the CIA and other US forces already do around the world.
While I think there is no evidence of anything other than out of control troops, aggressive tactics, and a politicide campaign against loyalists, I di not think Putin is trying to massacre the Ukrainian people.
The reason why the US is able to get away with so much is because all transactions are in USD, and they take their tithe.
The countries bypassing the USD and going direct with each other will do more to destroy this ability than any carrier group. Especially in the current mentally ill genital cutting blood clotting military the US is so obsessed with.
The one thing this conflict has done is light a fire under countries that are now acutely aware they need to get off the petrodollar.
I would say "we punked ourselves" but subverting American economic dominance was always part of the plan.
Who's plan? Because there is no way this was a plan by the Russian's or the Chinese, though most definitely a fervent hope.
The plan that includes the abolishment of countries in any meaningful way and replacement with a global unelected technocracy. Think WEF and old money.
Yep. That definitely jives. We are headed back to feudal times with a Lord class that uses "elected" government as a sock puppet.
Actual feudal times would be one thing. At least they some form Christianity as compass. Our new overlords are the foot soldiers of satan.
Didn't matter. There were always value systems that came to the same thing whether Christianity existed or not.
The betters did what they wanted to do, and the lessers suffered.
Take the creation of the Protestant Church.
All that is assured, the rich will fuck our underage daughters and get our naive sons killed. We'll be considered fortunate if we reach the age of 40.
Phrasemaker! That's damn good!
The Russians will most likely make a significant push to finish the conflict in early to mid November. They're done holding back, they've had that particular hand bitten and it won't be offered again.
I can’t predict what will happen now, but at least the pro Ukraine idiots might wake the fuck up and stop mindlessly carrying water for pozzed Western regimes.
Nah. If Ukraine is "winning" (i.e., making advances), that's proof that we need to send them more to aid their offensive. If it's "losing", then we need to send them more to allow them to survive. It's a catch-22.
You’re right. But I do relish the increased cognitive dissonance thrust upon them by these events. I’m happy that their brain pain is going up. Hopefully some of them snap.
I looked at the LinkedIn thread about this, and the NPC narrative is that this is Putin's last gasp lol
Putin could level Kiev with a nuke tomorrow and there would still be lefties claiming that he’s just insecure and the “walls are closing in”.
Similarly, Putin could be assassinated tomorrow and those same lefties would be calling it a false flag to make America look bad.
All motivations are ascribed with comical bias while all real world consequences are ignored. It’s like dealing with women who constantly say they want one thing and yet desperately seek the opposite. I guess the western political tradition has been truly feminized.
Among my 20 or so telegram channels on the war, one ended up being a redditor channel. There is ZERO chance of them 'waking up'.
Like I said in another comment, the people who won’t wake up will at the very least be forced to endure additional cognitive dissonance as they integrate this new contradictory information into their unwavering programming.
The NPCs that don't think and support Ukraine will never start thinking. They are the sheep who are unworthy of, but fully secured in, the power to vote.
I think the Russians really want to drag this out over the winter to make their real enemies suffer the consequences of their sanctions.
Striking Ukraine is the easy part, it's striking every other nation that hides behind them while crying about peace without sparking a ear that is hard.
Winter will probably hot very hard with the retarded sanctions imposed on Russia so dragging this war throughout winter would be preferable if they can afford to do so.
I think Russia would prefer 1) peaceful annexation of eastern, Russian-speaking provinces of Ukraine and 2) security guarantees preventing NATO expansion towards Russian borders. Harming the peoples of Europe is not a primary goal for Putin - just an unavoidable byproduct of the strategy chosen by the west to attack Russia.
If western governments want to harm their own peoples with sanctions against the country providing enormous quantities of cheap energy, then Russia will oblige - especially if the only alternative offered by western leaders is total defeat. If you impose an existential threat to a nuclear power that is also supplying your energy, the resulting hardships on your people should be laid at your own feet.
Why, though, would western governments want to harm their own people? For “green energy” aka the great reset aka global communism aka deindustrialization and depopulation. Our leaders have been looking for any excuse to reduce our energy supply and shrink our economies. Now they can do so under the guise of fighting the Russian boogeyman that they’ve painstakingly crafted via decades of media manipulation.
I agree that if given the chance for what you describe that Putin would likely take it.
I just don't think it will happen without some sort of impetus, in this case I think Russia will try and use the winter as a way to sway foreign public opinion in such a way as to force the elites to try and dial back or risk revolts.
The harder it gets to stay warm, buy food, and just keep going on with a peaceful lifestyle the faster a population will stop caring about foreign matters and look inward.
I believe that Russia is banking on winter being enough to get a more favourable position at the negotiations table.
Because our governments have been occupied and subverted by foreigners who hate us.
WW3 is coming. NATO is going to come up with a justification to invade. We're already there fighting in Ukrainian uniforms mostly likely but that is limited to special forces. (Michael Tracy filmed US troops massing in Poland and going into Ukraine like four months ago.)
Russia can't capture all of Ukraine with the troops they currently have. Many people have pointed this out since the beginning. So it was likely never their goal. The goal was to free the eastern regions and make some kind of neutrality agreement. That's not going to happen now. The west is going to attack and Russia doesn't want them to have an easy time. No comfy beds, working electricity, easy access to food and medicine. They're going to make Ukraine a very unpleasant place to be.
Russia is going to consolidate the newly annexed provinces and build up their defenses. When the NATO attack comes, Putin will claim to be a victim of western aggression. Which will be more or less true. Then it comes down to what China does.
Not that those sanctions matter mind you because Russia simply sells/buys things through a proxy country like India.
They're completely mad if they want to 'finish' things before the effects of their own mobilization kick in.
I said they'll make a push, starting in November, with the aim to finish the conflict. Not that they expect it to be over in five weeks.
OK, but why would they make a push before the mobilization provides them with a force multiplier?
If the mobilization was aimed at creating a backline force to garrison and hold existing gains, for one.
I reiterate, I think they'll launch a major offensive before too much longer.
This aged well.
How them Leopard 2s working out for ya? Got any of them left?
You're confused. Those aren't my Leopard's, but that is your comment that you made and turned out to be blatantly wrong. Keep coping about irrelevant stuff though, I'm sure that'll make you unbraindead.
What annoys me is that our politicians are going to use these strikes as an excuse to launder another half trillion dollars of our money to themselves via Ukraine.
This is what all the fools that are complaining are glossing over.
How much of a cut goes to The Big Guy?
He probably gets nothing now that he's been anointed Resident and is completely senile.
This has been true for probably 100 years by now.
Only 100?
I think it has been that way for 200+ years. Once the commercial printing press was developed.
I agree with points #1 and #2, but I think this part is nonsense. Minimising collateral damage serves Russia's strategic interests in Ukraine; destroying a Russian ally that has been subverted by an American-backed revolution isn't much of a victory.
In fact, total war with actual carpet bombs of major civilian population centers hasn't been a major tactic since, what? Korea? Vietnam? Most countries use strategic bombing and guided missle strikes on specific targets.
America went from bombing an entire city to take out two factories to just killing an entire terrorists family to kill one guy.
Sure the latter is bad, but it's got to be put in perspective.
Anybody who thought ukraine had a chance was retarded. However, assuming the russians held back for respect for the value of human lives is a joke.
They don't value that. Nihilism is baked into the slavic outlook on life. Holding back was better for Russian long term goals until now. It allowed for the blooding of a fresh generation of their conscripts and using up old materiel.
Conquering all of Ukraine and holding it is outside the scope of their goals, because it would be a shitshow like Afghanistan.
The bombings were a smart play for two reasons
Payback for the Crimean Bridge bombing and it shows the Ukranian government that the Russians outmatch them and hitting Kiev puts pressure on the government to the table from the civilians for a peace
It is bait from Putin to NATO to give Russia pointless sanctions that barely affect Russia if at all and continues to hurt NATO especially if Russia further restricts gas
GarfieldYouAreNotImmuneToPropaganda.jpg
The reason Russia has been holding back stems back to something you'll recall when the war does started. Remember how western media was painting Putin as the next Hitler who wanted to conquer the world and reform the USSR? That was a hot narrative in the beginning. If Putin went all out, the west would have jumped on the opportunity to go to total war with Russia. By easing off, Russia has made it difficult for the west to go to total war because the people simple don't want that kind of a war. Now Russia can slowly escalate the war as retaliations for things Ukraine/USA does such as bombing the Crimea bridge.
It has nothing to do with being a good person, it's all strategy.
-Russia's initial blitz into Kiev was a gamble that failed. The airborne troops were repelled and the armor column from Belarus was isolated and destroyed.
-Russia's Special Military Operation in the east was mostly being fought by local militias. It's goal was to destroy the death squads Zelensky was arming and training to massacre the eastern regions.
-The SMO was highly successful. Zelenskys army was basically destroyed.
-Despite the tough talk, Zelensky tried to cut a deal with Putin twice. Both times we prevented him from doing so. Zelensky began building a new army with (illegal) NATO support.
-Realizing Zelensky would not be allowed to end the war and a NATO assault was going to happen eventually, Russia began a partial mobilization and formed a new plan.
-They moved to formally annex the four eastern regions and consolidate their territory.
-Karkov was not part of these four regions so Russia withdrew their troops there.
-US intel (illegally) tipped off Zelensky about the withdrawal and a hasty attack was launched.
-Russia had pulled out so there was no direct fighting, but they still had artillery covering their withdrawal so they blew the fuck out of the Ukrainians. 7000 casualties are claimed or about 10% of the new army.
-US media claims victory as Ukraine captures empty territory awash in their own corpses. Russia collapsing, Putin defeat imminent!
-Missile strikes lol.
My guess is Russia is going to try to make Ukraine a very miserable place to launch a war from, while claiming any attack on the newly annexed regions is aggression and entitles them to reprisal. We're probably already there fighting in Ukraining uniforms but if the soldiers are straight up coming from Poland or wherever then it's harder to claim we aren't involved.
#teamputin
Post Reported for: Rule 11 - Spam
Not spam, just opinions.
It's too early to draw these conclusions. The fog of war is thick and a single event isn't enough to re-contextualize an entire war.
The Russians initially wanted to minimize damage to critical infrastructure and prevent large-scale civilian casualties to forestall a PR fallout from their 'bloodless coup', which failed spectacularly. The casualties in Mariapul alone speak volumes.
Now that the tide is turning, they've resorted to bombing critical infrastructure just in time for winter, which serves no real military purpose within the purview of a 'special military operation'. Instead, it signifies that the Russians are fighting a real war with Ukraine and the latter has presented itself a significant threat to Russian objectives, aims and interests.
Everything but number 3.
The number one casualty of these strikes was the delusion that the Ukraine was capable of winning a war against an unrestrained Russia. If you don’t recognize why that’s a big change, you probably also believe Russia bombed their own pipelines and bridge. Because you’re a retard.
So only about 30% of the population? Including multiple regular posters on this board lol
People who disagree with you are not "retarded". Even some pro-Russia commentators believe that this current intensification of the offensive is only temporary - to warn the non-country off from engaging in future terrorist acts like the attack on the Crimea bridge.
I didn’t say everyone who disagrees with me is retarded. That’s an absurd straw man. I laid out a limited collection of ideas that constitute retardation in this context, and I then strongly implied that several people here promoted those ideas.
Among the people who were proven to be idiots by recent events, I fully expected most to dissemble and claim that they did not, in fact, hold any of their previously documented opinions. I was not disappointed.
Limited or not, it came down to people viewing things differently from you being retarded. Now, I mostly agree with you here, but the folks who don't are not 'retarded'. They just have different assumptions (mostly) and biases.
Only time will tell. It may be that they intensified for a day and that there'll be nothing for 3 months.
People here? Who?
Incompetence. Or perhaps not wanting to make things too bad in order to allow for a negotiated settlement.
Minimizing "civilian casualties" doesn't do anything for Putin ipso facto. Maybe they did try to prevent it to make it easier for Ukrainians to turn. It's not out of humanitarianism - that is not even a consideration for countries like Russia or the US, or its deputy Evil Empire the EU.
Russia clearly isn't outmatched, and Ukraine isn't going to "win". That said, they believed that Ukraine could inflict enough pain on Russia to make it not worth it for them, like Afghanistan was for the US. Of course, that was a shithole in the middle of nowhere, while Ukraine is a very central territory for the Russia. But they are not idiots for disagreeing with you.
I will agree with you that the HIMARS pothole-maker hyping was very cringe.
This is literally you suggesting that Putin is being more humane than most western powers have been in major military conflicts over the last 70+ years. You’ve just worded it differently. Whether he’s doing it out of cynical strategy or not is irrelevant because we cannot know that one way or the other. All that matters is that the outcome was, in fact, more humane.
Worth noting: the people who were most confused by Putin’s restraint were the same people who advocated immediate and unrepentant carpet bombing (aka shock and awe) in our own military conflicts. This tells you more about those people than it does Putin.
Effectively, perhaps. By design, no. Powers are humane or not based on whether there is any benefit to be had by pretending to be so.
He's a politician. We can know that it's a cynical strategy.
If this was restraint, then I think they mistook his restraint for weakness.
FYI Zelensky attempted to negotiate with Russia twice, both times Russia accepted, and both times NATO stopped him. Clearly Russia was open to some kind of settlement, so yeah I think it makes sense they were holding off on total war.
If you destroy the basic structure of the bridge, that keeps it holding together, no APCs, tanks, trucks or anything heavy will be able to go through without collapsing the bridge. You could, depending on the damage, maybe use a car. But it will be mostly left to pedestrians.
This is why the Kerch bridge is only allowing cars right now, despite Russia saying its damage was insignificant. Trucks will need to use the old method they used to before, by barges.
Just how much military stuff was Russia transporting over the bridge to begin with? Especially now that they have a land-bridge to Crimea. Seems like a shorter route.
The attack seems to be mostly about propaganda.
The Kerch bridge has a railway system, which is always more cost-effective than shipping goods by means of trucks. And the Russian military machine is heavily reliant on railway systems across the Russian expanse.
A lot. Because it was the beyond the range of the Ukrainian HIMARS and other precision artillery strikes and missiles. Now they will have to go through land, which will expose them even more to Ukrainian weapons. This is why people in Crimea were rushing to buy fuel.
How can you possibly low-key celebrate this indiscriminate attack against civilians? Where exactly do you see "desire to minimize collateral damage"?
Kill people in Donbas: I sleep
Kill people in Kiev: REAL STUFF
What a repulsive post. Scum like you make even the woke tumours infesting the West look human. I'd refute your moronic arguments but you have no functioning brain with which to understand them.
You're deluded if you think Russia are about to win.
Their advance is dead and the best they can hope for this year is that they don't lose any more ground. The technological superiority of NATO weapons systems has once again been demonstrated in a decisive fashion, and Russia is staring down the barrel of its eternal nightmare; A technologically superior hostile force directly on its flat, open western border - a scenario that has played out 3 times in two centuries, and resulted in great devastation for Russia each time.
Russia will have to keep the conflict going for years if it wants to win, or it will have to sign a peace treaty and try again in a decade or two.
[EDIT] lol @ downvotes. I can't wait to quote this post next year.
lol
Laugh all you want, its not even close. Ukraine isn't even being supplied with the best NATO has to offer and the Russian offense has been halted, and is now in reverse.
Russia's cruise missiles are on video, routinely landing hundreds of feet off target. NATO cruise missiles are accurate to within ten feet.
You don't understand much about weapons, do you?
These downvotes are hilarious.
People here are desperate to root for Russia just because they hate globohomo, and refuse to see what is abundantly clear, just because they don't want to see it.
Yes! It is weird how they think Russian weapons are somehow superior. I remember how these people used to have boners preaching the superiority of the Russian weapons years ago. Then peddle the excuse when these weapons failed that it was either "monkey models" or bad training of the army who employed them. Now we now that they all suck. The best evidence until 2022 was when Russia attacked Israel, and both sides fought for a brief period of time in the 70s. Russia failed miserably then. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Rimon_20
And remember that the Mirage IIIs were interceptors, not designed for dogfights(which the Israelis somehow managed to do and be very successful at it), while the MiG-21 was very agile.
I am sure that if Ukraine gets even the early Abrams model that destroyed the Iraqi T-72 brigade, they will wipe the floor with the rusted carcass of the T-72/80/90 they will destroy.
What superiority was demonstrated exactly?
How can you disconnect something that is on a LEO system? It was a geo-fencing issue, to prevent the Russians from using capture Starlink stations, presumably.
Superior accuracy, superior efficacy.
And just look at how much ammunition they had to use to do it. Watch any video of the strikes happening. Two thirds of the bombs land hundreds of feet off target.