Well said, sir.They've been cannon fodder since before cannons.
Russia invades Ukraine - VI
- Thread starter crimsonaudio
- Start date
- Status
trebuchet fodderThey've been cannon fodder since before cannons.
not sure if true or not but I have read that Russia invested very heavily in 4G encrypted cell phones as their method of battlefield communication but then went into Ukraine with a plan to destroy all the cell towers to hurt Ukrainian communications efforts. Somehow they didn't realize that they needed the same towers for their fancy new phones to work so they've been forced to use unencrypted phones/radios to communicate
Yep. Dumbasses!
I was just thinking about 'modern' russia as I honestly don't know enough about russian history to go much further than that without looking it up. Call it a conservative number.
Can the U.S. and allies freeze Russian gold? Yes. Here's how.
Vladimir Putin has stockpiled more than $100 billion in gold reserves for Russia since he invaded Crimea in 2014. Now, it's a target of Western sanctions for his Ukraine war.
www.cbsnews.com
This is big.
www.cnn.com
President Biden says it's time for the G20 to remove Russia and warns the U.S. will respond if Russia attacks Ukraine with chemical weapons | CNN
CNN's Nic Robertson and Kaitlan Collins report.
www.cnn.com
This has always been the MO for Russian rulers from the Czars, the Communists, and even into Putin times. No regard for the lives of their foes or their own forces. I suppose the thinking is that somehow overwhelming numbers of soldiers, even if they are armed with pick axes, shovels, and scythes will somehow guarantee victory.
If you consider having an economy half the size of California with a larger population and enormous natural resources "working," I guess the answer is yes. It's produced many trillions for the oligarchs...
I was shocked to see that Russia without WMDs would essentially be Mexico. Or half of California. Numbers don’t lie.
Additionally, their life expectancy has trended as if it were a third world country (yeah, I know….maybe it is) — alcoholism, HIV and COVID have done a number on the populace as a whole. If you’re male and over 60, you’re on borrowed time.
On top of that, for a lot of tangentially-related reasons, their overall demographics are disastrous.
So their philosophy works for neither the economy as a whole nor the 99.99% of the population that isn’t a kelptomaniac / very slightly spiffed up Mafia.
But they do have WMDs. And they have a dictator that might or might not be insane...which dictator now fears at least for his professional life, and probably for his personal survival.
So here we are.
Thank goodness for the Ukrainians de-pantsing the Russian Army — that’s a big danged deal, with long-term ramifications, and can’t be un-done easily or soon.
I honestly don’t think the Russians can win in Ukraine (or, given their performance, anywhere else) without using WMDs. We’ll see pretty soon whether they play that card or not, and if so, how. And if they do, how they do it, and how NATO responds.
Sounds like NATO is of one mind on the contingencies.
To Crimsonaudio’s earlier point, none of us here in TF have that level of insight, so we have to trust their judgement. I sincerely hope that that consensus doesn’t leak into the public domain — though I recognize human nature, and expect that it probably will.
The next 30 days will be interesting to say the least.
Last edited:
working from a military perspective and for the people in charge is absolutely has, except for 1917
Mearsheimer is kind of a tool.
He is on the extreme end of the realist-idealist spectrum.
Realism dictates that great powers have spheres of influence and what really matters if power while liberals/idealist urge that all nations have an equal right to pursue their destiny as they see fit.
I had a conversation with an ethnic Russian from Sebastopol (who does not support annexation so he can no longer go home). A few years ago, when two Spetsnaz soldiers were captured in Ukraine, and the Kremlin disavowed them, I said that was shameful. To send a soldier on a mission, and, when it goes badly, to abandon them is a shameful act like something in a movie.
Anton responded, "You are thinking like an American."
It is cute you make that exception.
The Bolsheviks told the Russian army "get out of the trenches and fraternize with the enemy." The idea was that this would be the best way to spread the revolution.
The Bolsheviks, however, issued this order, not because they wanted to save the lives of Russian soldiers, but to advance the dialectic. The individuals meant less than nothing to them. Their value lay in how they advanced the dialectic. If advancing the dialectic meant you had to stop a war, so be it. If it meant you had to murder a few million individuals, that is good as well.
To your larger point, for as long as there has been a Russia, Russia has always been lavish in the blood of its soldiers.
- Status
Latest threads
-
FSQ QB Thomas Castellanos calls out Bama: "They don't have Nick Saban to save them. I just don't see them stopping me."- Started by BamaNation
- Replies: 16
-
-
-
-
-