AnimalNoodles
Well-known member
Where you getting this?
Look at the casualty estimates i posted up earlier in the thread.
Where you getting this?
I gave something we know Russia will go to
How long did you think they would take Kiev? Kharkiv? Kherson?
It is horrifyingly clever really.Putin wants to drain the non-Russian minorities of as much manpower as possible to preserve ethnic Russian superiority, as many of the ethnic republics were outbreeding the Moscovites and Petersburgers. Using the ethnic minorites as fodder for the invasion of Ukraine removes that demographic advantage in the most useful way possible.
Seriously? I know I said you're stupid, but you can't be this stupid. I have to believe you're pretending to avoid answering a question that was too difficult for you.Russia hasnt sustained a 10-1 casualty rate, its inflicted a 10-1 casualty rate. Ukraine is the one getting mauled.
I am asking for the source.Look at the casualty estimates i posted up earlier in the thread.
I highly doubt that.Kharkiv region will come first i think. I am not going to take any bets, because i cant predict.
Seriously? I know I said you're stupid, but you can't be this stupid. I have to believe you're pretending to avoid answering a question that was too difficult for you.
How, if Russia has a sustained casualty INFLICTED rate of 10:1, with greater starting numbers, can their positions be considered untenable? As a further question, accepting that they retreated only from untenable positions, and given that they retreated from literally every axis of advance, must we conclude that Russia's entire position was untenable? How can that possibly be true, if they're inflicting 10 to 1 casualties? And further still, if they had greater numbers to start with, and had a wildly disproportionate advantage in exchange rates, why on earth did they go for an exceedingly unpopular and wildly under-resourced draft? Why did that have a strategic pause whilst waiting for the drafted soldiers?What was the question?
I'm not seeing it in the search bar when I look for it.AJAB means All Journalists are Bastards. I believe i posted that in the past.
Yeah, pathetic. Just like "freedom fries".every major store has renamed "Chicken Kiev" to "Chicken Kyiv" and it's the most pathetic virtue signaling I have experienced in my life.
Yeah, pathetic. Just like "freedom fries".
Some soviet fan finally showed.Could you deliver stories about soviets fighting evil spirit,becouse cowardly nazis arleady run ?You can delude yourself all you like, but It took 8 years to build up the defenses in donbass, and due to the nature of donbass, its a highly defensible place. The lines they are building elsewhere will not be so dense, so heavy, so concentrated and so highly developed.
Ive been saying for months the russians main target in this point of the war is maximising their advantage in artillery to grind down the Ukrainian army. While you were all jubilant about very costly meme offensives into lightly occupied or evacuated regions like Kherson or Kharkov and fantasizing that this will lead to some grand advance in Crimea, Russia has been grinding the Ukrainians down in the real center of the fight..donbass.
Even the Ukrainians are starting to admit the lopsided nature of the casualties there.
Bakhmut will soon fall. The Ukrainians will be forced back to the fourth line, and there are 200,000+ fresh Russian reserves waiting for whatever conditions the russians have set to enter the fight.
Ukrainian defeat comes gradually, then suddenly. And it wouldnt have happened if the Americans and their British vassals had allowed their Ukrainian colony to negotiate peace last march.
Question, if he was showing pro-Ukraine sentiment would he be working for the CIA? Just to ensure things are neutral and fair?Some soviet fan finally showed.Could you deliver stories about soviets fighting evil spirit,becouse cowardly nazis arleady run ?
I miss @Chiron for that.
Or any other current soviet propaganda.
P.S if you work for kgb,do not meet them alone.@Chiron could die that way.
How, if Russia has a sustained casualty INFLICTED rate of 10:1, with greater starting numbers, can their positions be considered untenable? As a further question, accepting that they retreated only from untenable positions, and given that they retreated from literally every axis of advance, must we conclude that Russia's entire position was untenable? How can that possibly be true, if they're inflicting 10 to 1 casualties? And further still, if they had greater numbers to start with, and had a wildly disproportionate advantage in exchange rates, why on earth did they go for an exceedingly unpopular and wildly under-resourced draft? Why did that have a strategic pause whilst waiting for the drafted soldiers?
I'm not seeing it in the search bar when I look for it.
Why was it becoming "logistically untenable"? What happened to the high technology and artillery superiority that you talked about so that Ukrainians with their scraps of western tech could make it "logistically untenable"?Its quite simple. Until recently Russia was considerably outnumbered.
In the late summer and fall, it was dramatically outnumbered. Ukraine had just completed reforming its army with mass conscription and weapon transfers, and Russias army had diminished from a large number of contract soldiers going home after their contracts ended.
As a result, Russia withdrew men from places that were secondary to their aims. This allowed Ukraine to surge in the kharkov, which was lightly garrisoned. Which prompted Russia to mobilise its reservists.
Russia didnt withdraw from Kherson due to casualties. The casualty rates were wildly in favour of Russia. They withdrew because Kherson was was becoming logistically untenable. The Ukrainians were placing constant pressure on it. It was too dependant on a vulnerable bridge and thus It was too difficult to keep supplied.
So they pulled out. This allowed Russia to shorten its line and move those units to Bakhmut.
As for why they waited? I dont know. I suspect Russia still hoped to negotiate, or some politics at play we dont know about.
Yeah, pathetic. Just like "freedom fries".
What about renaming oil to "Molecules of Freedom"?Meh... changing Kiev to Kyiv in a niche American chicken dish isn't as ridiculous to me as replacing the word French with Freedom IMHO. I'd find this about as traumatizing as respelling a Margherita Pizza or whatever for grammatical/geographical reasons. Which is to say not at all.
Why was it becoming "logistically untenable"? What happened to the high technology and artillery superiority that you talked about so that Ukrainians with their scraps of western tech could make it "logistically untenable"?
Why were they vulnerable? Why would Russians with all the supposedly common and advanced tech and artillery superiority and world class air defense be unable to make it not so vulnerable, like it was in earlier months?Because it was linked only by one or two vulnerable bridges. The Russians were also concerned that the Ukrainians might find a way to destroy the local dam as well. If they were taken out, it would trap the Russians.