Armchair General's DonbAss Derailed Discussion Thread (Topics Include History, Traps, and the Ongoing Slavic Civil War plus much much more)

The Original Sixth said:
Okay, a reasonable position.

My position is that we shouldn't and won't get involved. Not enough for a direct confrontation.

I am neither for nor against Ukraine. Russia is not exactly clean for how they've handled this mess with Ukraine from the start, but the West made the situation worse. If they did not consider the ramifications for trying to draw Ukraine into our orbit, then they're fools. If they did, but did this anyway, they're bastards.

I consider Ukraine's leadership to be both corrupt and delusional. I think Kiev is drunk on the possibilities of what Ukraine might have were it to join the EU and is willing to wage a war to gain access to it and NATO weapons. That is after all, what this war is about. I think the way Zelensky has handled the peace before it came to war is absolutely disgusting and delusional. I think Zelensky and his admin are (by necessity) outright lying about the damage they're inflicting upon the Russians and the willingness of Ukrainians to fight against Russia. A million and a half people fleeing the country does not paint strong resolution in my mind.

As for the West, we have only made the problem worse. We could have forestalled or removed the threat of Russian invasion had we only agreed to not allow Ukraine into NATO. There would be no real loss actual strategic cooperation, only face. It's no secret that the US and China are scaling up for a cold war. It's no secret that we cannot contain both Russia and China at once, nor can we fight both. Nor is it a secret that Russia is a declining power and this move is to simply preserve its survival, not grow its strength.

I think that Russia is making the right move for strategic reasons. Allowing Ukraine to fall into the hands of the West is a threat to Russia itself. All that remains is to see if Moscow and the Russians conduct themselves well in war. And thus far, the Russians have not wholly abandoned the rules of war and I'd dare say that Ukraine is more guilty of it than they (again, that being out of necessity). We'll see what happens later.
Click to expand...
There's a major problem with your line of thought...

There was no actual threat to Russia from Ukraine joining NATO or the EU.
 
Zachowon said:
This was going to happen if the government of Ukraine is not a puppet of Russia.
Look at Belarus. Puppet state that is inept... look at Kazakhstan...
Ukraine didn't want that and the coup in 14 was just that. Russia wasn't happy and made it obvious they were willing to conquer Ukraine
Once Trump got in office though it stalled because he wasn't going to back down. Once he was out he tested Biden, and then this happend.

This whole thing is because if russia...
Click to expand...

No, I don't think so. Russia would obviously have preferred a puppet state like Belarus, but they could have accepted a neutral Ukraine. One that was reliant upon its gas and unable to defend itself if it decided to switch sides.

Vaermina said:
There's a major problem with your line of thought...

There was no actual threat to Russia from Ukraine joining NATO or the EU.
Click to expand...

It actually is, though the threat is not immediate--it is long term and very serious. Russia is a declining power. It's shrinking demographic is actually worse than it looks in their official figures, because that includes non-ethnic Russians who don't necessarily care for Moscow itself. On top of this, the really skilled engineers and scientists in Russia are in their late 50s and most Russian men die in their mid 60s. The Russian army is both going to continue to shrink AND it is going to become less sophisticated and operable.

Now let's look to Ukraine. They have, since Crimea, begun to arm themselves and militarize. They've upgraded their old Soviet equipment, they've begun to buy NATO hardware, and they're forming a capable military. To Ukraine's credit, that is in reaction to Russia's annexation and supporting rebel groups within Ukraine, but it's an escalation that is dangerous to Moscow in the future. Because Ukraine will still be getting advanced weapon systems from the West and will have a large enough, ethnically & nationally coherent demographic that they could pose a threat to Russia.
 
The Original Sixth said:
No, I don't think so. Russia would obviously have preferred a puppet state like Belarus, but they could have accepted a neutral Ukraine. One that was reliant upon its gas and unable to defend itself if it decided to switch sides.



It actually is, though the threat is not immediate--it is long term and very serious. Russia is a declining power. It's shrinking demographic is actually worse than it looks in their official figures, because that includes non-ethnic Russians who don't necessarily care for Moscow itself. On top of this, the really skilled engineers and scientists in Russia are in their late 50s and most Russian men die in their mid 60s. The Russian army is both going to continue to shrink AND it is going to become less sophisticated and operable.

Now let's look to Ukraine. They have, since Crimea, begun to arm themselves and militarize. They've upgraded their old Soviet equipment, they've begun to buy NATO hardware, and they're forming a capable military. To Ukraine's credit, that is in reaction to Russia's annexation and supporting rebel groups within Ukraine, but it's an escalation that is dangerous to Moscow in the future. Because Ukraine will still be getting advanced weapon systems from the West and will have a large enough, ethnically & nationally coherent demographic that they could pose a threat to Russia.
Click to expand...
Why would Ukraine wanna be Nuetral? Russia can't have a Ukraine that can think for itself.
Either the Russian way...or the Russian way...
Countries like Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania would be targets if it wasn't for them being NATO.
They just want it for the protection. We don't have nukes or any thing that can harm Russia there.
Same with Latvia.
Why does Ukraine make it any diffrent
 
Zachowon said:
So they should just let the Russians take thier country?
Like the Poles should have let the Germans? The Fins should have let the Soviets?
Click to expand...

They should taken their initial bitchslaps in 2014 as a lesson to stay neutral and below Putin's radar just like Georgia did after 2008.

Putin gave them every single chance to stay neutral. They didn't take the hint and now Putin is going to de bellatio them and send a clearer message to everyone, don't fuck with me, don't cross my red lines, or else.
 
Russia is like an abusive ex-boyfriend who not only can't get over the break-up, but also won't stand for someone else moving in on "his girl." Yet the entire problem was that they were an abusive asshole to begin with, and this has continued to be the cause of problems for them.
 
Chiron said:
They should taken their initial bitchslaps in 2014 as a lesson to stay neutral and below Putin's radar just like Georgia did after 2008.

Putin gave them every single chance to stay neutral. They didn't take the hint and now Putin is going to de bellatio them and send a clearer message to everyone, don't fuck with me, don't cross my red lines, or else.
Click to expand...
Oh? Why did he comtuine to support Donbass? Why did he not try to instill another puppet?
Almost like the people don't want the Ruskies anymore.

Again, this sounds like apology.
You talk of red lines. Those that are constantly changing....
Did the Soviets warning the fins stop anything? How many countries did Hitler take before Poland?

Don't forget that GA is now trying to be apart of EU.... but that would mean invasion by Russia since ethey didn't stay down....
 
The Original Sixth said:
It actually is, though the threat is not immediate--it is long term and very serious. Russia is a declining power. It's shrinking demographic is actually worse than it looks in their official figures, because that includes non-ethnic Russians who don't necessarily care for Moscow itself. On top of this, the really skilled engineers and scientists in Russia are in their late 50s and most Russian men die in their mid 60s. The Russian army is both going to continue to shrink AND it is going to become less sophisticated and operable.

Now let's look to Ukraine. They have, since Crimea, begun to arm themselves and militarize. They've upgraded their old Soviet equipment, they've begun to buy NATO hardware, and they're forming a capable military. To Ukraine's credit, that is in reaction to Russia's annexation and supporting rebel groups within Ukraine, but it's an escalation that is dangerous to Moscow in the future. Because Ukraine will still be getting advanced weapon systems from the West and will have a large enough, ethnically & nationally coherent demographic that they could pose a threat to Russia.
Click to expand...
None of which matters because the EU and NATO had no plans to ever try and invade Russia.
 
Zachowon said:
Why would Ukraine wanna be Nuetral? Russia can't have a Ukraine that can think for itself.
Either the Russian way...or the Russian way...
Countries like Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania would be targets if it wasn't for them being NATO.
They just want it for the protection. We don't have nukes or any thing that can harm Russia there.
Same with Latvia.
Why does Ukraine make it any diffrent
Click to expand...

It's not about what Ukraine wants. It's what Ukraine needs to do to survive. It's what Ukraine needs to do to assure its own existence. And instead of following that imperative, Ukraine bought into the sweet self-delusions of the West. Who thought that Russia wouldn't or couldn't stop them. And because of that, the Ukrainians have drastically miscalculated.

The Ukrainians thought the Russians weren't going to respond to a pivot towards the EU. The Ukrainians thought that the Russians wouldn't invade them. The Ukrainians thought that NATO would come to their rescue if the Russians did invade. And because of that, their leadership gravely miscalculated. They persisted in pulling away from Russia and that was simply not acceptable to Moscow. So Moscow is forcing the issue with military strength.

It's not fair, it's not kind. But that's the reality of the world we live in. And the West and Ukraine should have known better.

And as for why Ukraine got a different response than Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania? Russia can crush those states at any time. Belarus and the Russian Enclave are so close, it's child's play to cut those states off and rush in from the East. Especially due to their small size. Unless NATO deploys lots and lots of troops, they aren't worth worrying about at the moment.

Ukraine is another matter. It's home to 45 million people. It is twice the size of Texas, leads directly into Russia's wheat belt, commands the Black Sea, and is south of Moscow with no geographical barriers between them. For Ukraine to host NATO weapon systems and troops is putting a dagger at the heart and throat of Russia itself. It is simply unacceptable to Russia's security that Ukraine be NATO-aligned.
 
Vaermina said:
None of which matters because the EU and NATO had no plans to ever try and invade Russia.
Click to expand...

Tell that to Libya. The US had no real plans on going after them either. And yet, when the Arab Spring came--they were more than happy to enforce a no-fly zone over a country with outdated technology. When Russia's power does decline (and it will), do you think Russia wants Moscow to be within range of a joint NATO no-fly zone, when Russia's ethnic minorities rebel against the government? Or do you think they'd rather have them far, far away?

Libya and the Arab Spring was an eye opener for the world. At least before, the US had the excuse of a major terrorist attack on its soil to justify removing previous heads of states. The Arab Spring had nothing to do with NATO, but we still got involved. It wasn't about national security or even interests--Obama and other Western leaders treated it like a fucking hobby. That one act actually made the world more dangerous, because it showed the US to be very unpredictable in how it acted.

No shit Russia and North Korea became more aggressive.
 
The Original Sixth said:
It's not about what Ukraine wants. It's what Ukraine needs to do to survive. It's what Ukraine needs to do to assure its own existence. And instead of following that imperative, Ukraine bought into the sweet self-delusions of the West. Who thought that Russia wouldn't or couldn't stop them. And because of that, the Ukrainians have drastically miscalculated.

The Ukrainians thought the Russians weren't going to respond to a pivot towards the EU. The Ukrainians thought that the Russians wouldn't invade them. The Ukrainians thought that NATO would come to their rescue if the Russians did invade. And because of that, their leadership gravely miscalculated. They persisted in pulling away from Russia and that was simply not acceptable to Moscow. So Moscow is forcing the issue with military strength.

It's not fair, it's not kind. But that's the reality of the world we live in. And the West and Ukraine should have known better.

And as for why Ukraine got a different response than Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania? Russia can crush those states at any time. Belarus and the Russian Enclave are so close, it's child's play to cut those states off and rush in from the East. Especially due to their small size. Unless NATO deploys lots and lots of troops, they aren't worth worrying about at the moment.

Ukraine is another matter. It's home to 45 million people. It is twice the size of Texas, leads directly into Russia's wheat belt, commands the Black Sea, and is south of Moscow with no geographical barriers between them. For Ukraine to host NATO weapon systems and troops is putting a dagger at the heart and throat of Russia itself. It is simply unacceptable to Russia's security that Ukraine be NATO-aligned.
Click to expand...
And there is a NATO country that controls the black Sea...
Russia invading Ukraine and uniting NATO against it was the stupidest idea they could have done.
Russia basically lost any and all trade through Turkey is it so wants to cut them off...

Huh...why srnt there these missles amd the like in the rest of the Balkans? Almost like the uS is using NATO as purely defensive alliance..

The Original Sixth said:
Tell that to Libya. The US had no real plans on going after them either. And yet, when the Arab Spring came--they were more than happy to enforce a no-fly zone over a country with outdated technology. When Russia's power does decline (and it will), do you think Russia wants Moscow to be within range of a joint NATO no-fly zone, when Russia's ethnic minorities rebel against the government? Or do you think they'd rather have them far, far away?
Click to expand...
You mean how NATO can control complete trade in West Russia? They can enforce all of Northern Russia no fly zone. They can force a no fly zone over the black sea..Sea...
Ukraine offers nothing else besides one more land border.
 
Agent23 said:
Dude, I know you Poles have a thing for shenanigans with strawpeople, but I for one don't care about them and prefer spinning doges, remember!

I am saying, that your country's military and political nomenklatura has probably done a cost-benefit analysis and they think that doing this will harm them more than it will help them.

But since they do not want to listen to Zelenski and his fanclub reeing on Twatter they just stall.

In any case, at this stage of the conflict I doubt 20 MiG-29s can be of much real help, although the Romanians and Donbass will probably be glad to get some extra airpower.



Oh, I don't know, a few Ukrainian neonazis with NLAWS blowing up a few of your LNG terminals, that pipeline you are trying to build to Norway getting destroyed, cuts to Gas, oil and wheat imports into the EU equivalent to 2x your consumption.
The Russian airforce going full shock and awe in western Ukraine and driving a minotherllion or two into Poland.

And probably a dozen other dirty tricks the Russians can pull.
Click to expand...

Dear intelectually challenged friend,use your brain.KGBstan could not counter-escalate,becouse they started war,which mean escalated.
Now,NATO could counter escalate to that.Or not.

Counter escalate could only those who get attacked,since KGBstan is agressor,they could not counter escalate,becouse they started it.
Who teached you logic?

About 20 polish Mig 29 - if NATO pay for it and deliver 20 F16 for us,why not? but not for free - Ukraine is not friend,but enemy of our enemy.

And war would end,when KGBstan start attacking seriously - if they used their 500 planes and best in the world hackers,they would be arleady in Kiev.
But Your Putin is not last hope of white man,but Biden handlers secret friend,thus it not happened.
 
Captain X said:
Russia is like an abusive ex-boyfriend who not only can't get over the break-up, but also won't stand for someone else moving in on "his girl." Yet the entire problem was that they were an abusive asshole to begin with, and this has continued to be the cause of problems for them.
Click to expand...

That.And they always liberate people they attacked.I read memories of pole who survived Magadan/out of 12 in his group,3 including him survived/
When they come to gulag,another prisoners said: "ah,liberated poles,as quickly as our army liberated Poland we waited for liberated poles here"
 
The Original Sixth said:
Tell that to Libya. The US had no real plans on going after them either. And yet, when the Arab Spring came--they were more than happy to enforce a no-fly zone over a country with outdated technology. When Russia's power does decline (and it will), do you think Russia wants Moscow to be within range of a joint NATO no-fly zone, when Russia's ethnic minorities rebel against the government? Or do you think they'd rather have them far, far away?

Libya and the Arab Spring was an eye opener for the world. At least before, the US had the excuse of a major terrorist attack on its soil to justify removing previous heads of states. The Arab Spring had nothing to do with NATO, but we still got involved. It wasn't about national security or even interests--Obama and other Western leaders treated it like a fucking hobby. That one act actually made the world more dangerous, because it showed the US to be very unpredictable in how it acted.

No shit Russia and North Korea became more aggressive.
Click to expand...
Russia isn't Libya, try again.

And the US isn't the EU.
 
The Original Sixth said:
It's not about what Ukraine wants. It's what Ukraine needs to do to survive. It's what Ukraine needs to do to assure its own existence. And instead of following that imperative, Ukraine bought into the sweet self-delusions of the West. Who thought that Russia wouldn't or couldn't stop them. And because of that, the Ukrainians have drastically miscalculated.

The Ukrainians thought the Russians weren't going to respond to a pivot towards the EU. The Ukrainians thought that the Russians wouldn't invade them. The Ukrainians thought that NATO would come to their rescue if the Russians did invade. And because of that, their leadership gravely miscalculated. They persisted in pulling away from Russia and that was simply not acceptable to Moscow. So Moscow is forcing the issue with military strength.

It's not fair, it's not kind. But that's the reality of the world we live in. And the West and Ukraine should have known better.

And as for why Ukraine got a different response than Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania? Russia can crush those states at any time. Belarus and the Russian Enclave are so close, it's child's play to cut those states off and rush in from the East. Especially due to their small size. Unless NATO deploys lots and lots of troops, they aren't worth worrying about at the moment.

Ukraine is another matter. It's home to 45 million people. It is twice the size of Texas, leads directly into Russia's wheat belt, commands the Black Sea, and is south of Moscow with no geographical barriers between them. For Ukraine to host NATO weapon systems and troops is putting a dagger at the heart and throat of Russia itself. It is simply unacceptable to Russia's security that Ukraine be NATO-aligned.
Click to expand...
Well that and the Baltic states don’t present a new threat, as Russia has always been vulnerable through the Baltic, so them joining nato doesnt mean anything, as the Russians will never be able to shut down that route of entry.
 
Vaermina said:
Russia isn't Libya, try again.
Click to expand...

Try reading comprehension. Libya proved that the US was willing to engage in replacing the local government purely out of the sake of preference--instead of security or national interests. The US had no interests in Libya. It only intervened because of the public outrage within the West's social media. And to Russia, that makes it dangerous. Because as Russia's strength diminishes within the coming decades, a Ukraine allied with NATO could serve as a launchpad against Moscow, should Russia serve similar rebellions.

As I already explained.

And the US isn't the EU.
Click to expand...

The US basically writes the EU's security policy. As it does with every NATO member. Everyone knows it. That's why we created Bretton Woods and the WTO as the bribe; everyone gets access to our markets for free and we write their security policy, while doing most of the heavy lifting.
 
Chiron said:


Interesting. Kherson Base housed a Brigade and its clear said Brigade just disintegrated once the main HQ Blocks were hit.
Click to expand...

They are now the Phantom Brigade of Kiev. :ROFLMAO: 😂
Well, if the commissars and the neonazi goons were in there that probably leaves raw conscripts and shtrafbats.
Guess what they'd do if they are all no longer blocked by barrier troops. ;)
 
LordSunhawk said:
All I'm going to say is that I'm glad I live close enough to likely targets in a Russian nuclear strike on the US that I won't have to deal with the aftermath. Hope you neocon warmongers are happy with yourselves and have real big epeens right about now, I'm looking at you, Zach.
Click to expand...
I'm in the same boat; except I also wonder if they'll feel that focusing on and prioritizing opposing Russia above everything else was a good idea, even after the Biden administration declares all criticism and dissent to be Russian propaganda, and criminalizes it.
 
Floridaman said:
I mean we already had double digit inflation.
Click to expand...
High double digit is probably over 50%.

Save a pig(and money), eat a neocon.
Nuland and Chaney and the two younger offshoots of the Kagan family look particularly succulent.
Blinken, Kamala and Brandon on the other hand look stringy as hell.
Romney will probably be very leathery, like chewing on an old shoe, Lindsey Graham and Mich McConnel too.
Kinzinger will probably give you mad cow disease.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top