Play Nice The NM Devil's Chessboard Thread - Part II

[The Warlord]

Putin made the Brits racist is just chef's kiss stuff. Truly Orwellian in that he literally predicted this in 1984.

 

[The Warlord]

I don't think Ukraine made this move just for headlines. I think it's a legitimate strategic defense move that has the added bonus of embarrassing Putin

You do know he's unembarassable right? Like, he's not a Western politician?

The IRA could do this stuff to British PMs, coz they had to face an electorate, he doesn't.

and increasing the level of angst amongst Russian citizens towards the conflict.

All reports I've seen are that Russian citizens are looking at it as proof that Ukraine is now simply a base for NATO attacks on Russia, which is what Putin said all along.

Footage of Bradleys driven by guys wearing SS patches heading towards Kursk isn't going to make the average Russian hate Putin lol, its going to make them hate Ukraine and the West even more.

 

[The Warlord]

He's an absolute fukcwit. The mask is fully off now.

The mask is off and he's peeling back skin to reveal the hideous reality beneath, like in a movie.

 

[The Warlord]

If they can hold it and hold supply lines its a great move.

Why?

What's the gain when they've had to pull units out of the Donbass where they were already losing to do it?

After the Belgorod incursion the Russians put their energy system one missile strike away from complete collapse.

What's the point of sitting in some fields just over the border when you're still losing in Donbass and your people are freezing in winter?

Only logical explanation to me is that its a Hail Mary hope to get more $$$ and weapons out of the West and then just keep hoping.

 

[ferball]

View attachment 2077333
Putin made the Brits racist is just chef's kiss stuff. Truly Orwellian in that he literally predicted this in 1984.

A quick search reveals the company that own Metro owns the Daily Mail.

LOL.

 

[ferball]

Why?

What's the gain when they've had to pull units out of the Donbass where they were already losing to do it?

After the Belgorod incursion the Russians put their energy system one missile strike away from complete collapse.

What's the point of sitting in some fields just over the border when you're still losing in Donbass and your people are freezing in winter?

Only logical explanation to me is that its a Hail Mary hope to get more $$$ and weapons out of the West and then just keep hoping.

Because it will take resources and energy from the Russians concentrating on the lines they want to control.

If they can hold that city and move further into Russia then its more than a hail mary option. If they can't then they're probably screwed anyway whatever they do.

 

[Chadwiko]

View attachment 2077333
Putin made the Brits racist is just chef's kiss stuff. Truly Orwellian in that he literally predicted this in 1984.

The article/headline isn't saying that Putin "made" the Brits racist. It's literally saying that Russia is just capitalising on the unrest and stoking it further.

Not sure why you play dumb on this issue because you know deep down that it's factual. Denying it or downplaying it completely erodes that positions you take on Russia and Ukraine because it just becomes clear that you're incapable of being unbiased. You've become very, very stubborn on the topic of Russia to the detriment of the otherwise academic-esque opinions you usually try to utilise.

And when it comes to using propaganda to erode social cohesion, I don't pretend that it's unique to Russia either. The US does similar shit elsewhere (although in the last two or three decades it's fair to say the US does it a lot less overtly and a lot "softer", but they still do it and did it extensively from the 1940s-1980s).

 

[ferball]

The article/headline isn't saying that Putin "made" the Brits racist. It's literally saying that Russia is just capitalising on the unrest and stoking it further.

Not sure why you play dumb on this issue because you know deep down that it's factual. Denying it or downplaying it completely erodes that positions you take on Russia and Ukraine because it just becomes clear that you're incapable of being unbiased. You've become very, very stubborn on the topic of Russia to the detriment of the otherwise academic-esque opinions you usually try to utilise.

And when it comes to using propaganda to erode social cohesion, I don't pretend that it's unique to Russia either. The US does similar shit elsewhere (although in the last two or three decades it's fair to say the US does it a lot less overtly and a lot "softer", but they still do it and did it extensively from the 1940s-1980s).

Its an article published in a paper owned by the people that own the Daily Mail. They're obviously trying to distract from their own role in the situation.

If the Russians are trying to stoke this stuff their efforts are having a similar effect to a bit of humidity in Northern Sumatra after the 2004 tsunami.

 

[Chadwiko]

 

[Chadwiko]

 

[tazaa]

He's an absolute fukcwit. The mask is fully off now.

Yep

His posting is so warped now and he’s truly losing the plot.

As you said the covers are off and he is a certified piece of shit

 

[The Warlord]

 

[The Warlord]

Look who shows up right on cue. This shit is gold for Putin.

Proves once and for all his narrative is correct - senior US politicians want war inside Russia.

 

[The Warlord]

Because it will take resources and energy from the Russians concentrating on the lines they want to control.

They're still advancing very quickly in eastern Donbas.

If they can hold that city and move further into Russia then its more than a hail mary option. If they can't then they're probably screwed anyway whatever they do.

 

[The Warlord]

 

[The Warlord]

The article/headline isn't saying that Putin "made" the Brits racist. It's literally saying that Russia is just capitalising on the unrest and stoking it further.

I know how the media works, especially the UK press, having worked there and having friends very senior there in the BBC etc now.

Not sure why you play dumb on this issue because you know deep down that it's factual.

No, I don't know it - I'm very clear when I know there's been such interference, like with Brexit.

Denying it or downplaying it completely erodes that positions you take on Russia and Ukraine because it just becomes clear that you're incapable of being unbiased.

Conversely mon ami, you will continue carry water for racists and far right types - whether in Ukraine or now Britain or even fascist French colonisers in New Caledonia - because of your pathological hatred of Russia that makes you unable to analyse any situation they're involved in dispassionately.

You've become very, very stubborn on the topic of Russia to the detriment of the otherwise academic-esque opinions you usually try to utilise.

No I haven't, you're the one with a the simple rigid and immovable view on Russia.

I'll happily discuss the things they've actually done - meddling in Brexit, meddling in Africa - but I'm not buying patent spin that designed to cover up for the fact that white Brits are by and large deeply racist and violent.

Some of the worst of this violence was conducted by UDA/UVF thugs with long records for serious violence in Belfast ... and you bring RUSSIA into it lololololololoolol.

And when it comes to using propaganda to erode social cohesion, I don't pretend that it's unique to Russia either.

Welcome to the real world!

The US does similar shit elsewhere (although in the last two or three decades it's fair to say the US does it a lot less overtly and a lot "softer", but they still do it and did it extensively from the 1940s-1980s).

Nope, back into the world of unreality you've gone.

 

[The Warlord]

Its an article published in a paper owned by the people that own the Daily Mail. They're obviously trying to distract from their own role in the situation.

Far-right disorder had ‘clear’ Russian involvement, says ex-MI6 spy

Christopher Steele says officials will ‘look very carefully’ at online instigators such as Tommy Robinson

www.theguardian.com

Look who's back for another run - Christopher Steele lol.

Maybe Putin is angry because Kei Starmer pissed his bed or something lolololol

If the Russians are trying to stoke this stuff their efforts are having a similar effect to a bit of humidity in Northern Sumatra after the 2004 tsunami.

Well, after they convinced the peaceable natives of New Caledonia, who truly loved their French masters, to rise up, anything is possible, even making the Brits violently racist.

The very real cause of these riots is decades of austerity then American tech like social media fanning the flames.

 

[The Warlord]

If you're not barracking for a team in the war, the Ukranian offensive on Kursk is pretty easy to place.

They've had two major offensives since the Russian invasion began.

1) The autumn 2022 offensive into Kharkiv which regained them lots of territory. That worked because they struck lightly defended Russians lines hard and fast with mechanised units. The Russians then brought up reserves and halted it.

2) The spring/summer offensive of 2023. A horrific failure in which the US and West built them the equivalent of a medium sized army - and make no mistake, if the Ukrainians had headed west with that force they would have marched through Romania and the EU until they hit the Med - which they smashed up against exceptionally well prepared Russian defensive lines.

This second offensive was strategically very sound in design. If it had succeeded and they'd cut the Russian forces in two it would have likely made the fight untenable for Russia without the kind of massive society wide mobilisation that really would shake society and potentially make Putin's position.

But they didn't, they smashed up a huge armoured force and tens of thousands of men against Russian artillery firebags, minefields, ATGMs and Ka-52s.

So now the Ukranians know if they want to go on the offensive they have to do it against lightly defended Russian lines. Thing is with the size of Russia and Ukraine, there's always going to be weak points, they identified Kursk (having US eyes in the sky intel feed them what they need) and went through pretty easily.

A well thought and at that stage rational move.

But what's next, and what is the real goal?

History teaches us that invading Russia is easy, getting out alive again is very very hard, especially for those going west to east lol.

If the goal is to sit on a chunk of Russian land and aim to swap it that's stupid, and I don't think it is the Ukranian aim. They know full well they can't hold hugely fortified areas on their own territory they've spent a decade preparing, they'd not going to be able to dig in lines under Russian fire in Kursk that'll hold (that's been tried before lololol).

The idea they did it to embarass Putin is risible, the Ukrainians know full well (at least their military/intelligence people, the propaganda slop served up for brane addled US culture drunk types who view the war as something akin to a sports match is different) that doesn't work.

But if we look at it as an October 7 style raid that's never actually going to seize or occupy anything (Hamas weren't aiming to take Israeli land and hold it) but has pushed Ukraine back up the international agenda and garnered it huge attention, its a success.

Ukraine was falling down the priority chart before this, something Zelesnky was openly lamenting. Israel and the ME were getting everything - arms, money, attention.

By doing this Zelensky has firmly put the spotlight back on Ukraine and awakened the bloodlust of the US security state vampires like Lindsey Graham who has appeared in Kyiv on cue to demand more money and arms for Ukraine.

In that regard, the operation has been a striking success.

But then we have to ask what the costs are - Ukraine has spent lots of well trained troops and equipment that are in desperately short supply to achieve this.

Its robbing Peter to pay Paul, payday lending stuff. And the Russians are still advancing in the Donbass, and the war in the ME hasn't gone away.

Then the Russian response, and there WILL be a Russian response, is still to come.

We will see how it plays out in coming weeks and months, but my take is that it will end backfiring on the Ukrainians.

Contrary to Western propaganda, the Russian people do not hate Putin and yearn for Western democracy and McDonalds.

They did once under the Soviets, overthrew them and what they got in return for democracy was the US looting Russian resources, widespread gangsterism and a massive fall in living standards.

Putin turned that around and the Russian people know it, hence there never being any serious attempts to overthrow him beyond a few thousand Moscow and St Petersburg liberal kids getting paid to protest.

Its far more likely - and initial reports you see on Russian friendly social media reflect this - is that like any other country the Russians have not taken kindly to invasion and are now even more supportive of the war.

The great danger of the Ukraine adventure is that rather than bleed Russia out and establish Ukraine as a powerful battle hardened FOB on their borders from which to launch further attempts at hobbling/balkanising Russia and its sphere of influence like Georgia ... always the ultimate aim of US policy there ... Russia in fact wins and ends up a very powerful well equipped and experienced force on NATO borders.

That looks a far more likely outcome now rather than Putin being toppled and Russia humiliated.

 

[The Warlord]

 

[ferball]

But if we look at it as an October 7 style raid that's never actually going to seize or occupy anything (Hamas weren't aiming to take Israeli land and hold it) but has pushed Ukraine back up the international agenda and garnered it huge attention, its a success.

Ukraine was falling down the priority chart before this, something Zelesnky was openly lamenting. Israel and the ME were getting everything - arms, money, attention.

By doing this Zelensky has firmly put the spotlight back on Ukraine and awakened the bloodlust of the US security state vampires like Lindsey Graham who has appeared in Kyiv on cue to demand more money and arms for Ukraine.

In that regard, the operation has been a striking success.

If it gets them more resources when they were seriously running out then it porobably rates as a success.

LIke those old rts games where you raid someone else to steal their resources. It can make the difference between winning and losing a game.

 

[The Warlord]

If it gets them more resources when they were seriously running out then it porobably rates as a success.

Yep, agreed, but the ratio of resources gained v those spent has to be very high, then you add in the opportunity cost of taking those resources away from elsewhere to gamble in Kursk.

The Ukrainians desperately need to break out of the attritional warfare stage of the conflict, but the West simply can't provide enough resources to do that, and the Ukrainians don't have enough experienced troops any more.

LIke those old rts games where you raid someone else to steal their resources. It can make the difference between winning and losing a game.

I understand the logic, but actively invading Russia like this ... especially heading towards a talismanic place like Kursk ... drives the conflict up another level, making harder to win again.

The Ukranians fight bravely and skilfully - albeit with immense advantages of US ISR support - but they're never going to beat a much bigger neighbour like this.

Its not Vietnam or Afghanistan where the US or Soviets will pack up and go home. For the Russians they're fighting on home turf too, they're defending Russia and Russian speakers.

 

[The Warlord]

This is an interesting take

 

[Chadwiko]

 

[Chadwiko]

 

[ferball]

Yep, agreed, but the ratio of resources gained v those spent has to be very high, then you add in the opportunity cost of taking those resources away from elsewhere to gamble in Kursk.

The Ukrainians desperately need to break out of the attritional warfare stage of the conflict, but the West simply can't provide enough resources to do that, and the Ukrainians don't have enough experienced troops any more.



I understand the logic, but actively invading Russia like this ... especially heading towards a talismanic place like Kursk ... drives the conflict up another level, making harder to win again.

The Ukranians fight bravely and skilfully - albeit with immense advantages of US ISR support - but they're never going to beat a much bigger neighbour like this.

Its not Vietnam or Afghanistan where the US or Soviets will pack up and go home. For the Russians they're fighting on home turf too, they're defending Russia and Russian speakers.

Yeah it comes down to this I reckon. Like that line in Peaky Blinders (never watched it but have a Brmmie mate who like me has Irish and Roma ancestry,) - Big ****s Small. (Obviously this changes in a 4GW/asymmetric conflict.)

If you're facing a shit situation and can get enough resources to improve your position then negotiate a better outcome ... well that's about the best they could hope for.