Europe stopped fighting itself not because they evolved or got smarter, but because everyone with a testosterone count was KIA on 1,000 different battlefields
Ukraine war Bullshit.
- Thread starter JAS-SH
- Start date
Europe stopped fighting itself not because they evolved or got smarter, but because everyone with a testosterone count was KIA on 1,000 different battlefields
He and Haney share the same brain. when one is up the ass, the other one holds the brain so it doesn't suffocate.
a river is not the solid def line it was in years past what with drones and the new war fighting. but,it is still a major obstacle and slow an advance up feature. i would think staging strong forces pointed at the base of the bulg would be a thing. would make going west across the river harder but i don't believe Putin wants or needs to go farther to get what he wants. going that far would be a prob permanent win.
Moldava,Romania,Hungary,Slovakia,Poland prob all want a piece. not sure if that would be good or make more long standing problems like Alsace has in the past. Belarus is already safe for Putin NATO ain't going there.
French recently sent them some Mirage jets.
Igor was recently Jailed and charged with murder and other things.
As of 13 February 2025, he and many other were charged with treason in assisting a terrorist organization.
Sounds like Z has turned on his buddy. BTW they also seized a bunch of his assets.
Look how wide that river is. I’d hate to be the Engineer BDE & MEB tasked with the wet gap crossing. Do they even make bridging assets to get across a river like that?
lol, and it is kind of funny...he used our money (stolen from privatbank) to fund the azov nazi battalion (and others) and it was they that attacked the separatist donbas areas and started the "war" back in 2014 to begin with. mostly dead probably by now.
Germans crossed it in '41 and Russians crossed it in '44 i think. don't know the details. read a lot about that war but my memory is marginal on details. could look it up. but you are right. even today still a major challenge. maybe worse than 40s was because of modern drone warfare?
If the existing government is removed from power. Has that happened? I really fail to understand the insistence here to redefine a word. Bizarre.
No you fucking moron.
Ukraine is, has and will be a puppet state. Its actions are not sovereign, it relies on outsiders calling the shots, and has been that way for fucking centuries.
Holy fuck you are stupid.
No wondered your are a pro Ukraine ass poofter.
Brilliant retort, professor
Your childish remarks belie your obvious intellectual prowess. "No wondered your are" such a prolific poster...
Last edited:
In light of recent Z's attacks on Trump arguing on how "we almost beat Commies" and how "we still might" sounds really delusional. But one has to be delusional from the start to even start this endeavor. What these paid or unpaid trolls represent is all that you need to understand about Russian intent to denazify. Its simply "Nazi" mind virus that infected these people to extent they would/will/did butcher anyone their rotten brain designates as enemy. This is something running in the genes of Slavs and to some extent did run through blood of Western Europeans (while they still had some forefathers DNA in them lately they are just weak pussies -> infected by other type of virus called "liberalism" or in more appropriate name "an desunt vertebris" but i digress) where certain part of population due to poor selfimage decides to better themselves by denigrating/attacking someone close by (much like husband would hit his wife one second, then "love" her next second all the while ass licking his boss, neighbors and pretending its all good and being a general pussy to outsiders). Basically Ukrops in 2014 needed diagnosis not funds or arms but what they got is carte blanche for their twisted mindfuckery to manifest itself in real world. The level of their vile delusions can be seen in how fast they turn sides and bite the literal hand that has been feeding them as without US funding there is no "sovereign state of ukraine" as some idiots here claim there is.
Now they will reap what they have sown.
Now they will reap what they have sown.
Modern river was much wider with the dams that are now blown up, like we're not taking about minimum distance being nearly a KM any more. The Russians successful crossed the Densa River near Chernihiv at the start of the war, which looked to be around ~150m wide crossing, the Dnieper at the Kherson Oblast is maybe about that wide now.
Important misconception about WW2, the Germans never really contested Soviet crossing of most major rivers very well as they had very little foresight, look at the complete cluster fuck that was the Korsun pocket and why it came about.
Infact at the time Germany, or more likely Hitler, was more interested in maintaining a bridgehead on the eastern bank of the river so they could more easily counter attack and to also try and hold the minorly important mines at Nikopol as they were one of the few sources of manganese, an important element for making armour steel.
While text conveys that it was a particularly wet winter, the issue for the Soviets seemed to be more so the general nuisance of river crossing, not Germans contesting the opposite bank once they had gotten over the Dnieper.
Last edited:
You talk like a reddithomo.Brilliant retort, professor
Your childish remarks belie your obvious intellectual prowess. "No wondered your are" such a prolific poster...
Are you mentally retarded or just trolling?
Ukraine doesn't have self determination, and hasn't had that for quite a while, they are therefore, by definition NOT sovereign.
You can't convey your thoughts effectively in a post, and/or type well, but I am slow. Understood. And the post now effectively describes Ukraine. Thanks for proving my point. Eventually.
I am sure someone here can help you with the really big words.
Calling someone retarded, and in the same sentence accuse THEM of trolling. Classic. This should go in a dictionary.
Please list all the countries that do not recognize the government of Ukraine as sovereign. And then list all the ones that do.
Last edited:
So someone else said that they were and facts don't matter. Thanks for clarifying that.Please list all the countries that do not recognize the government of Ukraine as sovereign. And then list all the ones that do.
Actually, they and about everyone but the country that attacked them. You have not posted a fact in the entire time you have been posting here.
Did Joe Biden threaten to withhold money for the firing of a Ukraine official?
Considering the recent revelations on USAID, the DOD and other money being used for propaganda your sources are a bit suspect.
It's your fantasy enjoy it however you like.
Again, your comprehension skills are coming up lacking. But you are certainly free to make up anything, and believe anything you like. Just create your own definition(s) for anything and everything. Must be a very comfy world you live in.
50+ former Intel leaders, the media, the FBI and a majority of Congress said that the Hunter laptop was Russia misinformation. Is it Russia misinformation?
You have an issue with your arguments.Please list all the countries that do not recognize the government of Ukraine as sovereign. And then list all the ones that do.
If Ukraine is truly sovereign, then their defense is their responsibility. This is evidenced by the fact that there are no legal requirements placed upon the US to assist Ukraine. Now, this does not mean that there can't be bilateral agreements with Ukraine to assist them, and there are - Biden signed it in July of 2024. But there is one small problem with it, per the US Whitehouse:
Since there is no legal requirement to support Ukraine and they are sovereign, the US can stop support at any time as determined by the elected officials. This means support can be used as a negotiating tool between two individual countries that are independent of each other. IOW, there is zero obligation to continue supporting Ukraine since they have the right of self-determination.
If, on the other hand, they are NOT sovereign and are instead a vassal state of the US, the US has the choice to continue to support Ukraine or discontinue said support at any time in favor of other situations that favor the US. This would include allowing certain parts to be annexed by other countries by virtue of not providing enough support to prevent the annexation.
Both situations lead to the same conclusion: the US is under no legal or moral obligation to continue supporting Ukraine, especially if that support endangers the US, its citizens or its overall goals on the world stage. If Ukraine is sovereign then they should make their own decisions about the conflict instead of being pushed via NATO to cease negotiations (as it did in the initial phases of the conflict), and make their own way through this mess. If they are not sovereign then they are at the mercy of the US and NATO's decisions. However, it is noteworthy that Ukraine is in no position financially or otherwise to exert any power to upon Russia or NATO, the exception being calling up Russia and negotiating themselves outside of NATO desires, but they are not doing that. Instead they are feebly trying to do what NATO wants while NATO does very little and waits upon the US to supply leadership and resources, which is being reduced in favor of negotiations. IOW, we are now using our support as form of sanctions to push Ukraine to the negotiation table as Ukraine fully understands that without US support they will have zero chance at anything that looks like a decent outcome. Additionally, accepting aid from any country or the IMF comes with concessions regarding governmental directions and commerce - and those hooks set in deeply (i.e., Blackrock, rare earth minerals, etc) and last generations.
While it can be argued that Ukraine is a sovereign nation, the actions that are occurring are providing evidence that in practice it is very much a vassal state with ultimately little say in how events transpire from here on out. NATO is unable to assist them meaningfully and Ukraine is unable to exist effectively under the current conditions, even to the point of being unable to pay the government employees to ensure Ukraine can function as an actual country - it is closer to a failed state at this moment than it is to an actual country.
Ukraine has fallen in every aspect except legal status. Its over. There is no position of strength to be had, and while there is much talk, there is no appetite to fully support Ukraine by anyone in the world as they have their own economic headwinds to deal with (which are severe), and they don't want to open up a major conflict with Russia targeting them directly. So Ukraine will give up land, resources and autonomy in critical areas that define a country as being sovereign. This whole thing from 2014 to present day has been a folly of tragic proportions.
Last edited:
Too many facts. He'll shake his head and just like an etch a sketch the slate will be clear to start over.
But some will read it and understand the issue Ukraine and the rest of the world finds itself in. Remember when this whole thing got going many here and everywhere else was in favor of it, listening to the MSM narrative and were running with emotion and not facts. Now there are few because of fatigue and waking up to what's really going on.
"Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one." ~ Charles Mackay.
Are these the actions of a sovereign country?
brownstone.org
How USAID Assisted the Corporate Takeover of Ukrainian Agriculture ⋆ Brownstone Institute
USAID assisted in the dismantling of protections in the name of “land reforms,”, and rescuing the Ukrainian people.
brownstone.org
That is a good read. Well, articulated points in the prior post.Are these the actions of a sovereign country?
How USAID Assisted the Corporate Takeover of Ukrainian Agriculture ⋆ Brownstone Institute
USAID assisted in the dismantling of protections in the name of “land reforms,”, and rescuing the Ukrainian people.
Mirage jets are fine but to have a viable air capability they will need the ability to command, control, and synchronize with ground/maritime assets to exploit “Windows of Opportunity” in a timely manner. The time to train aircrews to do that was years ago and likely didn’t happen.
If the Russians want to seize considerable ground they have to find a way to break the stalemate created by small form UAS. Best way to do that is find a way to suppress Ukrainian AD over an area that has the largest concentration of Ukrainian combat power and hit them with high altitude high volume strategic level air power (Bear & Blackjack etc).
But to do that requires capabilities that I’m beginning to doubt the Russians have.
On the crew training that is one issue. Having limited numbers of unfamiliar airframes is a definite issue but its all they can muster. Maybe they can hire merc pilots?? Dont know but would get around that.
I wonder if Ukraine has been able to push Russia’s airfields back far enough giving their limited forces time to react. Making it enough of a deterrence that Russia is not willing to risk strategic assets. They are not selling aircraft like the USSR did during the cold war, they have had to consolidate all their manufacturing under one conglomerate. Basically they dont have the ability to replace them if lost.
Russia has had success with their fab style glide bombs, but thats about as much as I see them doing. I don’t see any Tu-95’s or Tu-160’s being risked over ukraines airspace
But thats just my arm chair opinion.
Nope.
It is, it is not an opinion.
As with any sovereign country.
There are none, but that has absolutely nothing to do with their sovereignty. You are making up your own definition. We are bound by legal agreements to defend NATO countries, but this has no effect on their sovereignty. Everything that follows is totally irrelevant as to the definition of, and status of, the sovereignty of ANY nation...including Ukraine.
So if we can stop support, they are sovereign...according to you.
So, if we can stop support, they are not sovereign...according to you.
Again, none of this has anything to do with the definition of sovereignty, and whether Ukraine or any other nation on earth meets that definition. You are making up your own. It is in the dictionary. Your opinions, beliefs, wants, needs, desires, are irrelevant.
Last edited:
The thing about the Bear & Blackjack is they have pretty good range. But to use them effectively requires suppression of Ukraine’s high altitude AD layer. And to suppress the Russians need to be able to target & track in real time. I’m beginning to think they are incapable of doing that at scale.
Those glide bombs have indeed been successful against close targets. But what is needed is the ability to deploy them in a timely manner against targets in UKR’s SA. And so far Russia either lacks a robust ISR capability that can see deep. Or there is some other deficiency (staff related maybe) in their target prosecution methodology. Maybe something in between the last two “D”s of D3A?
Last edited:
Why risk pilots and expensive airframes so that some USA "advisors" can have fun trying to shoot them down with USA supplied and operated missiles?
You are thinking about how the USA fought the sand people for decades when there was no actual advanced opposition.
Same costly lesson the Russians learned about big armoured vehicles at the beginning and middle of the war.
You'll notice the Ukrainians haven't exactly done much work with the glorious fighters the west sent them either.
They get blowed up too easily.
There was this great hubbub about how the Ukrainians getting the F16s would be totally turning the battle and defeating the Russians...
Then you know a few "crashes" and "Incidents" happened and suddenly nobody is talking about those anymore...
Much like how big fancy tanks from the USA and UK and Germany were going to be totally game changers...
Then they got blowed up by drones and everybody quietly stopped talking about them...
I believe the few vipers they originally received have been destroyed. Definitely not game changer, more slap hands political theater.
But Europe has been buying Fat Amys like hot cakes as they get rid of old stock 4th gen stuff, maybe, just maybe that was always part of the intention.
I see Russian Air Force in a comparable light as to the Kuznetzov aircraft carrier… a lot more show than go.
A contributing factor to the Ukrainian lack of usage of air assets at scale might be the lack of an in house C5 capability.
Your reading comprehension is way off or you are reading into my statements what you want me to say. I wasn't arguing about whether or not they were legally sovereign, and actually agreed with you on that singular aspect. I was laying out the functional aspects and real world considerations of whether or not they were a functional sovereign entity or a defacto vassal state via their actions and the interactions of other countries relative to them, namely the US and NATO.
And yes, you are not seeing the implications of you definition diatribe, and you have yet to state fully why it so important to you that they be regarded as sovereign. I am making the point that you are merely fighting windmills - it doesn't matter as it doesn't legally or morally impede the decision to decrease or cease altogether US support for this stupidity. Ukraine doesn't get a vote in that decision regardless of their status.
Whether or not they are sovereign has little to do with the situation as the end result is the same. The real issue is WHO they bow down to and WHY, as it is patently apparent that they cannot provide for themselves at this point. Without financial assistance Ukraine would collapse as a country. And if they are bowing they are not in control - that's the immediate point that everyone recognizes.
You are stuck on a definition and not looking at the derivative facts that arise from the definition you are holding onto and the resulting consequences as they relate to Ukraine and international relations. I expect that it is because you have nothing left to retort against the facts that have been presented by many here, even if the sovereign question is not included. What I did was take your previous arguments and applied them to the sovereignty angle to show that the legal status of Ukraine is of zero consequence to the events moving forward, and is thus a moot point.
Ukraine has become the beggar of Europe, and when you beg you get what you are given. Or to put it another way: even a hooker has individual sovereignty, but when she willingly gives it up to her pimp for "protection" is she really sovereign or a indentured slave who is there because of her own poor choices?
Last edited:
random thoughts
Ukraine hasn't really been a "country" very long or very often. areas have been part of Lithuania,Poland,Russia some others over the 1K years or so. in that way it is somewhat like Syria. historically an "area"not a distinct sovereign nation.
their army has done a remarkable job against Russia-prob far better than any NATO country alone or with NATO in total. they smacked the Russians pretty well early on.
the Russians got clue,withdrew and came back with different leadership and ideas. it has worked per their intentions for the most part. it seems that their concern for casualties is real.
Ukrainian army has been equipped and trained up over a long time. since 2014? massively supplied by US mostly. without that long term training and supply,they wouldn't have lasted a year even with the Russian's initial wrong headed tactics. their intel and space based targeting by us has been keeping them in the game. again,without our "covert" support,they wouldn't have lasted very long.
their political,economic and bureaucratic situation is a world leader in corruption. Ukraine is essentially a foil for NWO elites in America and Europe that saw Russia competition so it had to be damaged.
yes,anyone that can read knows that Russia has been our (often active) enemy since 1917. pretty much has had us on the run in LA,Africa and Asia most of the time. we managed to avoid a nuclear war with them. keeping that up seems like a good idea. whether they could or can be part of a less combative,cooperative world in past,present or future is a big question.
for those foaming at the mouth "patriots" that we have on here (most likely paid NWO trolls),the reason many in America look positively at Russia and Putin: Ukraine is the,or a,major source of Biden,Obama,Clinton,congressional corruption of huge proportions. long ago Putin has made statements and speeches that Russia is for Russians and if you want to be there you will be a Russian,not some hyphenated foreigner. yea,i know he was a major player in a lot of past corruption. yea,i know he is a corrupt,brutal dictator. who gives a shit? the list of those we have installed and helped maintain is a long one.
the billions we have wasted there instead of using here is a crime that should,but prob won't,get fixed or punished.
Ukraine hasn't really been a "country" very long or very often. areas have been part of Lithuania,Poland,Russia some others over the 1K years or so. in that way it is somewhat like Syria. historically an "area"not a distinct sovereign nation.
their army has done a remarkable job against Russia-prob far better than any NATO country alone or with NATO in total. they smacked the Russians pretty well early on.
the Russians got clue,withdrew and came back with different leadership and ideas. it has worked per their intentions for the most part. it seems that their concern for casualties is real.
Ukrainian army has been equipped and trained up over a long time. since 2014? massively supplied by US mostly. without that long term training and supply,they wouldn't have lasted a year even with the Russian's initial wrong headed tactics. their intel and space based targeting by us has been keeping them in the game. again,without our "covert" support,they wouldn't have lasted very long.
their political,economic and bureaucratic situation is a world leader in corruption. Ukraine is essentially a foil for NWO elites in America and Europe that saw Russia competition so it had to be damaged.
yes,anyone that can read knows that Russia has been our (often active) enemy since 1917. pretty much has had us on the run in LA,Africa and Asia most of the time. we managed to avoid a nuclear war with them. keeping that up seems like a good idea. whether they could or can be part of a less combative,cooperative world in past,present or future is a big question.
for those foaming at the mouth "patriots" that we have on here (most likely paid NWO trolls),the reason many in America look positively at Russia and Putin: Ukraine is the,or a,major source of Biden,Obama,Clinton,congressional corruption of huge proportions. long ago Putin has made statements and speeches that Russia is for Russians and if you want to be there you will be a Russian,not some hyphenated foreigner. yea,i know he was a major player in a lot of past corruption. yea,i know he is a corrupt,brutal dictator. who gives a shit? the list of those we have installed and helped maintain is a long one.
the billions we have wasted there instead of using here is a crime that should,but prob won't,get fixed or punished.
Similar threads
