Europe War in Ukraine - Thread 4 - thread rules updated

[Gethelred]

This is the thread for discussing the War in Ukraine. Should you want to discuss the geopolitics, the history, or an interesting tangent, head over here:

Europe - Backdrop to the war in Ukraine

This is the thread for the geopolitics, history and framework around the Russia-Ukraine conflict. If you want to discuss the events of the war, head over to this thread: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/war-in-ukraine-thread-4-thread-rules-updated.1376293/page-146

www.bigfooty.com

If a post isn't directly concerning the events of the war or starts to derail the thread, report the post to us and we'll move it over there.

Seeing as multiple people seem to have forgotten, abuse is against the rules of BF. Continuous, page long attacks directed at a single poster in this thread will result in threadbans for a week from this point; doing so again once you have returned will make the bans permanent and will be escalated to infractions.

This thread still has misinformation rules, and occasionally you will be asked to demonstrate a claim you have made by moderation. If you cannot, you will be offered the opportunity to amend the post to reflect that it's opinion, to remove the post, or you will be threadbanned and infracted for sharing misinformation.

Addendum: from this point, use of any variant of the word 'orc' to describe combatants, politicians or russians in general will be deleted and the poster will receive a warning. If the behaviour continues, it will be escalated. Consider this fair warning.

Finally: If I see the word Nazi or Hitler being flung around, there had better have a good faith basis as to how it's applicable to the Russian invasion - as in, video/photographic evidence of POW camps designed to remove another ethnic group - or to the current Ukrainian army. If this does not occur, you will be threadbanned for posting off topic

This is a sensitive area, and I understand that this makes for fairly incensed conversation sometimes. This does not mean the rules do not apply, whether to a poster positing a Pro-Ukraine stance or a poster positing an alternative view.

Behave, people.

 

[Chadwiko]

Ukraine should think harder, can either of them hit a target anymore?

Ukraine wants to give Putin the ol' "don't argue".

 

[Visions]

Who would have guessed Russian fascists would lie?

Not that hard to believe. Russian missiles are pretty good at destroying their own assets, and Russians are efficient at killing their own people.

But its still all Ukraine's because you know....

 

[wannabejack]

Invaders introduce state of emergency in Sevastopol

Following the explosions in Crimea, the Russian invaders introduced a state of emergency in the temporarily occupied city of Sevastopol. â Ukrinform.

www.ukrinform.net

A different take.

Sevastopol declares state of emergency after Ukrainian attack

Sevastopol Governor Mikhail Razvozhayev issued instructions "to declare a state emergency in the city of Sevastopol until further notice"

tass.com

 

[Zidane98]

Spotted at Euro 2024

 

[jatz14]

Saw another interesting analysis that should give those that think making Ukraine give up is the best option a pause.

Prior to WW2, Germany dismantled Czechoslovakia. But Czechoslovakia had a strong army, and one of the worlds best defence industries, and a willingness to fight. Germany was not at all guaranteed it would be able to beat them at that point. Germany was largely bluffing. But France and England betrayed them, because they wanted peace.

But it was the geographical position, and the Czech arms industry, and Slovak soldiers, they got from being given Czechoslovakia, that let them invade Poland, and the success the Germans had, that induced Stalin to strike a deal with them.

Provide Czechoslovakia with material and support, you get a war in Czechoslovakia, but probably no deal with Russia, or invasion of Poland, or WW2.

If Putin wins, and moves on to the next target, with the geographical position and economic boost Ukraine gives him, odds of WW3 go way up.

Its not this war that is the greatest threat for WW3, its the next one. Don't want a next one, don't let Putin win this one. Its that simple.

 

[Aussie in exile]

Not something that will told on Russian media outlets.

Ukraine destroyed columns of waiting Russian troops as soon as it was allowed to strike across the border, commander says

Ukraine is now able to strike military targets in Russia using Western-supplied weapons. One commander said Ukraine had destroyed columns of troops.

uk.yahoo.com

 

[MrKK]

Spotted at Euro 2024

View attachment 2030302

Misinformation - image is from a Polish league match 2 years ago.

 

[Visions]

Not something that will told on Russian media outlets.

Ukraine destroyed columns of waiting Russian troops as soon as it was allowed to strike across the border, commander says

Ukraine is now able to strike military targets in Russia using Western-supplied weapons. One commander said Ukraine had destroyed columns of troops.

uk.yahoo.com

This is why the “red line” being crossed by attacking Russian terrorists inside Russia was always bullshit.

Russia would never tell its sycophants that hundreds of its soldiers, equipment and command centres were being destroyed as they cant reveal the great motherland army is actually weak.

 

[Chadwiko]

Translation:

"Our artillerymen found that for every three shots of ours from the barrel artillery, the enemy retaliates with twenty shots from their side. The activity of the enemy artillery increased sharply. Sharp, for every three shots, 20 of their shots. And in the course of the counter-battery fight, the Ukrainians are masters in this business, they fire on our barrels from two sides. You can imagine that. What does this tell us? That the enemy's potential for artillery use has increased significantly. New guns have arrived, new ammunition has arrived. They're not in short supply. They were complaining four or five days ago that for every one shot they fire, we fire ten. Now it's the other way around: three of ours and twenty of theirs. Shitty. Not good. Well, the money they get, they use it to strengthen their combat capabilities."


Pretty strong refutation to a few pro-Putin clowns lurking around BigFooty who seemed to claim that Ukraine was on the brink of total defeat because they had run out of ammo and support.

 

[Zidane98]

Translation:

"Our artillerymen found that for every three shots of ours from the barrel artillery, the enemy retaliates with twenty shots from their side. The activity of the enemy artillery increased sharply. Sharp, for every three shots, 20 of their shots. And in the course of the counter-battery fight, the Ukrainians are masters in this business, they fire on our barrels from two sides. You can imagine that. What does this tell us? That the enemy's potential for artillery use has increased significantly. New guns have arrived, new ammunition has arrived. They're not in short supply. They were complaining four or five days ago that for every one shot they fire, we fire ten. Now it's the other way around: three of ours and twenty of theirs. Shitty. Not good. Well, the money they get, they use it to strengthen their combat capabilities."


Pretty strong refutation to a few pro-Putin clowns lurking around BigFooty who seemed to claim that Ukraine was on the brink of total defeat because they had run out of ammo and support.

With support from Europe & the US Ukraine can hold off and advance on the fascists for years now if they need to.


Meanwhile Putin has to beg North Korea for ammunition & cruise missiles. Funnily enough you don't hear Zelensky whining in the press about North Korea using Russia as a proxy.....

 

[Zidane98]

Saw another interesting analysis that should give those that think making Ukraine give up is the best option a pause.

Prior to WW2, Germany dismantled Czechoslovakia. But Czechoslovakia had a strong army, and one of the worlds best defence industries, and a willingness to fight. Germany was not at all guaranteed it would be able to beat them at that point. Germany was largely bluffing. But France and England betrayed them, because they wanted peace.

But it was the geographical position, and the Czech arms industry, and Slovak soldiers, they got from being given Czechoslovakia, that let them invade Poland, and the success the Germans had, that induced Stalin to strike a deal with them.

Provide Czechoslovakia with material and support, you get a war in Czechoslovakia, but probably no deal with Russia, or invasion of Poland, or WW2.

If Putin wins, and moves on to the next target, with the geographical position and economic boost Ukraine gives him, odds of WW3 go way up.

Its not this war that is the greatest threat for WW3, its the next one. Don't want a next one, don't let Putin win this one. Its that simple.

Hitler also did this to Czechoslovakia to "protect" Sudeteland Germans.....

 

[jatz14]

With support from Europe & the US Ukraine can hold off and advance on the fascists for years now if they need to.


Meanwhile Putin has to beg North Korea for ammunition & cruise missiles. Funnily enough you don't hear Zelensky whining in the press about North Korea using Russia as a proxy.....

The steps the US, Europe and NATO are taking to insure Ukraine against a Trump presidency are significant.

But I think it is pretty clear that Europe is determined to stay the course even without the US.

On SM-A346E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[barreness]

Well, none of them.

If Russia is advancing, then they are on pace to conquer Ukraine about 2250, give or take a decade.

And you forget, with all Russia's advances, all those meters gained, they are still backwards of where they were 2 years ago.

In what world is regaining a tiny amount of territory you lost, winning?

If the war progresses over the next few years like it has over the last few, Russia's military will have advanced back into Russia.

Russia currently holds about 20% of Ukraine and are making incremental gains. Ukraine hasn't tried a counter attack for a year. Your argument doesn't make sense

And yes, Ukraines military is surviving on Western donations, which means, that cost is spread over many countries and many hundreds of millions of people.

Russia's aren't.

Did you see the captured Ruusian turtle tank?

It's gun didn't work, it had no ammo, it's turret couldn't rotate, it had almost no visibility. It was a rusted out useless piece of shit, covered in sheet tin, used to ferry troops.

They are pressing into service equipment so old and shit, it cannot cost effectively be employed in its intended role.

What happens when even the shit runs out?

On SM-A346E using BigFooty.com mobile app

So you see one bit of propaganda and ignore larger issues.

Tanks have proved largely useless for both sides in the war. Donated Challengers, Leopards, and Abrams have been withdrawn form the frontline because they get chewed up. Same for whatever T varient the Russians referbed, glorified IFV's at this point.

It's Artillery war with drones and a few missiles. It looks like Russia/NK/Iran can outproduce NATO in this category, Or at least the US cant supply Israel and Ukraine at the same time

 

[barreness]

NATO gives a serious amount of equipment, planes and pilots to Ukraine, Russia tucks tail and runs.

Putin orders Nukes, High command shoots him in the head and surrenders to NATO. Bloody purges ensue.

So go full accelerationism until we hit Nuclear war, cool. Awful lot of faith in Russian high command, they're probably more mad than Putin

Russia firing nukes at anyone guarantees the destruction of Russia. Nobody in Russia is suicidal.

This is the issue, destroying Russia would demand they launch all the nukes. Direct confrontation is nuclear chicken, not a policy I'm keen on

They're just the mafia. Even the mafia knew not to go after the police.

Ummmmmm, which mafia? A lot of them control the police

Even Putin aint ordering Nukes. He'll do a Netanyahu and start a new front in Dagestan or Azerbaijan.

lol. Dagestan is just your standard terrorist things. On which side are they starting this front with Azerbaijan? they sell them all their weapons and I doubt they actively attack Armenia

 

[barreness]

Russia has lost 550,000 people in this war. Russian society is a shambles. Russia is banned from most international organisations, associations. Natural resource income has been obliterated by this war. Russia cannot compete at the Olympics, World Cup, Euros, UEFA competitions. Hundreds of billions in Russian assets are frozen of friendly oligarchs to Putin's dictatorship.

Russia only counts Belarus, North Korea, Syria & Iran as significant allies. Russians crave their place in the European community - this currently is not possible because of Putin's fascist actions.

Putin right now is like Hitler around 37/38. There is no negotiating with a dictator who declares Ukranian sovereignty, language & culture aren't real despite himself signing a treaty in 2003 which Russia absolutely recognised Ukraine's borders / sovereignty.

The war ends when the cost becomes so great to Russia that Putin simply must retreat from Ukraine. Or h is purged / shot in the head during another Wagner style insurgency (happy anniversary btw).

Whatever the result for Putin there won't be a nuclear conflict either. Everyone knows Putin's implied nuke threats are laughable. They are treated mostly as a source of amusement these days. Putin/Medvedev have hundreds of nuke threats in the 21st century. You and I know they are all bs.


Strap in tovarsich, you are in for a long period of hardship in Russia as long as Putin is around. Perhaps there will be a time you and your comrades can rise up against Vladimir the Tsar and purge him.

They are until they aren't

Your ability to keep pumping out the same arguments over 2 plus years in the face of changing circumstances is remarkable, did Putin get over his cancer diagnosis? still waiting on that economic collapse due 18 months ago

Not to mention the 106 bombs Russia has dropped on Belgorod region in the last few months. Remembering Belgorod region was transferred by the USSR from Ukraine SSR to Russian SSR in the early 1920s perhaps they would be safer if the region was returned to its rightful owner, Ukraine.

And Crimea was given to Ukraine in the 50's. You know rightful owners is a rubbish argument

 

[barreness]

Saw another interesting analysis that should give those that think making Ukraine give up is the best option a pause.

Prior to WW2, Germany dismantled Czechoslovakia. But Czechoslovakia had a strong army, and one of the worlds best defence industries, and a willingness to fight. Germany was not at all guaranteed it would be able to beat them at that point. Germany was largely bluffing. But France and England betrayed them, because they wanted peace.

But it was the geographical position, and the Czech arms industry, and Slovak soldiers, they got from being given Czechoslovakia, that let them invade Poland, and the success the Germans had, that induced Stalin to strike a deal with them.

Provide Czechoslovakia with material and support, you get a war in Czechoslovakia, but probably no deal with Russia, or invasion of Poland, or WW2.

If Putin wins, and moves on to the next target, with the geographical position and economic boost Ukraine gives him, odds of WW3 go way up.

Its not this war that is the greatest threat for WW3, its the next one. Don't want a next one, don't let Putin win this one. Its that simple.

Or Britain and France could have signed on with the Soviets and the whole thing is over in a few months, that's not what happened though.

The comparison has to be always be made to WW2 because it was the only justified war Europe has done, therefore Putin is Hitler and can't be negotiated with. This is far closer to the winter war or a bunch of other wars that ended in a negotiated settlement rather than complete defeat

 

[Saint]

Or Britain and France could have signed on with the Soviets and the whole thing is over in a few months, that's not what happened though.

The comparison has to be always be made to WW2 because it was the only justified war Europe has done, therefore Putin is Hitler and can't be negotiated with. This is far closer to the winter war or a bunch of other wars that ended in a negotiated settlement rather than complete defeat

Except the Winter War isn't a good indicator, the Russians had practically smashed the Finnish Army, it was all over bar the march on Helsinki, but Russia was worried about stepping on Germany's toes too much.

The only reason Finland gave up land was because it was going to be taken anyway and none of their allies turned up to help them take it back.

Also, they saw how severe the ethnic cleansing was afterwards.

If Russia were acting on an actual grievance and had the intention of, I dunno, not ethnically cleansing and killing thousands of people, then they might have a stronger negotiating position. But you can't negotiate with a party hell-bent on complete victory. They're negotiating like Israel. Doesn't matter what they say, you know that the day after, they're going to continue the ethnic cleansing and path to complete eradication of the enemy. So what's the point is a peace agreement if you know the other party will break their side of it?

 

[jatz14]

Or Britain and France could have signed on with the Soviets and the whole thing is over in a few months, that's not what happened though.

The comparison has to be always be made to WW2 because it was the only justified war Europe has done, therefore Putin is Hitler and can't be negotiated with. This is far closer to the winter war or a bunch of other wars that ended in a negotiated settlement rather than complete defeat

But you want a complete defeat though?

Because under most circumstances, the closest countries get to complete defeat, is negotiating from a place of weakness. Negotiating where they are told what the conditions are. Even Japan was a negotiation in the end, it was a negotiation where the Japanese got to sit there and be told what peace would look like.

The only way to make Ukraine negotiate now, is to force them to, by withholding the material they need to fight on.

That way, they have no choice, and no position at the bargaining table as anything other than condition takers. Which is complete defeat.

If you think this war needs to end in negotiations though, actual negotiations, where each side is both a condition giver and a condition taker, then Ukraine has to fight on.

Negotiations that occur because Ukraine must, because the West forces it to, is complete defeat in all but name.

Actual negotiations will require perhaps years more support.

So, what do you support, surrender now, or negotiations later?

I want this war to end, in negotiations. Real negotiations, where both sides walk away unhappy with a deal they are prepared to sign.

I dont think that happens before 2026, and maybe not even in 2026.

 

[Smeg Head]

They are until they aren't

Your ability to keep pumping out the same arguments over 2 plus years in the face of changing circumstances is remarkable, did Putin get over his cancer diagnosis? still waiting on that economic collapse due 18 months ago


And Crimea was given to Ukraine in the 50's. You know rightful owners is a rubbish argument

Russia is a fake state invented by the mongol horde to collect tribute for them. They have no rightful claim to any land.

 

[barreness]

Except the Winter War isn't a good indicator, the Russians had practically smashed the Finnish Army, it was all over bar the march on Helsinki, but Russia was worried about stepping on Germany's toes too much.

I mean not according to my reading.
Ukraine is in a very similar position to the Finns, exhausted but mostly holding, and willing to risk a surprise war a few years later
Foreign opinion is similar
World opinion largely supported the Finnish cause, and the Soviet aggression was generally deemed unjustified. World War II had not yet directly affected France, the United Kingdom or the United States; the Winter War was practically the only conflict in Europe at that time and thus held major world interest. Several foreign organisations sent material aid, and many countries granted credit and military materiel to Finland.
From wiki

The only reason Finland gave up land was because it was going to be taken anyway and none of their allies turned up to help them take it back.

So how Ukraine is now? US actually sent quite a few pilots but that's too far in this war

Also, they saw how severe the ethnic cleansing was afterwards.

They negotiated because they foresaw the future? cheeky buggers with a time machine

If Russia were acting on an actual grievance and had the intention of, I dunno, not ethnically cleansing and killing thousands of people, then they might have a stronger negotiating position. But you can't negotiate with a party hell-bent on complete victory. They're negotiating like Israel. Doesn't matter what they say, you know that the day after, they're going to continue the ethnic cleansing and path to complete eradication of the enemy. So what's the point is a peace agreement if you know the other party will break their side of it?

Israel wants Lebensraum, Russia wants the people too. Russia has offered several negotiating positions that all end up with a Ukrainian state, Ukraine has made it illegal to negotiate with Putin

 

[barreness]

But you want a complete defeat though?

Nah, a settlement that still retains Ukrainian sovereignty. They are in a position of weakness though and will have to concede territory

Because under most circumstances, the closest countries get to complete defeat, is negotiating from a place of weakness. Negotiating where they are told what the conditions are. Even Japan was a negotiation in the end, it was a negotiation where the Japanese got to sit there and be told what peace would look like.

That was just weird stuff with the Emperor to save face though, in reality Japan was completely defeated well before the nukes and was being fire bombed into the ground unchallenged. Blockaded, no oil, barely any food etc

The only way to make Ukraine negotiate now, is to force them to, by withholding the material they need to fight on.

Nah they could negotiate at any point except Zelensky made it illegal for himself. See the 2022 talks that got very close

That way, they have no choice, and no position at the bargaining table as anything other than condition takers. Which is complete defeat.

If you think this war needs to end in negotiations though, actual negotiations, where each side is both a condition giver and a condition taker, then Ukraine has to fight on.

Negotiations that occur because Ukraine must, because the West forces it to, is complete defeat in all but name.

Actual negotiations will require perhaps years more support.

So, what do you support, surrender now, or negotiations later?

Negotiations now ffs, stop the death for cm's of gains

I want this war to end, in negotiations. Real negotiations, where both sides walk away unhappy with a deal they are prepared to sign.

I dont think that happens before 2026, and maybe not even in 2026.

Great. At current trajectory Ukraine's position gets worse and worse, their bargaining position follows this. Two more years of meat grinder and 100's of thousands more casualties for a worse position isn't my idea of a good time

 

[barreness]

Russia is a fake state invented by the mongol horde to collect tribute for them. They have no rightful claim to any land.

Low key based take

 

[Saint]

I mean not according to my reading.
Ukraine is in a very similar position to the Finns, exhausted but mostly holding, and willing to risk a surprise war a few years later
Foreign opinion is similar
World opinion largely supported the Finnish cause, and the Soviet aggression was generally deemed unjustified. World War II had not yet directly affected France, the United Kingdom or the United States; the Winter War was practically the only conflict in Europe at that time and thus held major world interest. Several foreign organisations sent material aid, and many countries granted credit and military materiel to Finland.
From wiki

So how Ukraine is now? US actually sent quite a few pilots but that's too far in this war

They negotiated because they foresaw the future? cheeky buggers with a time machine

Israel wants Lebensraum, Russia wants the people too. Russia has offered several negotiating positions that all end up with a Ukrainian state, Ukraine has made it illegal to negotiate with Putin

World Opinion might have supported Finland, but Germany were their largest supplier of materiel. Every other nation was so scared of Germany that they supplied next to nothing. The North Sea was too dangerous and Norway refused to let goods come overland, so Finland was isolated from enough material to resist and had run out of artillery shells and captured Russian shells. Note how much artillery they've accumulated to resist future Russian attacks.

Peace was only reached after Viipuri fell and Finland agreed to give up the land rather than let Russia go all the way to Helsinki. (And Germany had told them not to conquer all of Finland and the puppet regime they'd lined up had fallen in a heap).

Russia does not want a Ukrainian state, in fact they want to ban Ukrainian nationalism in Ukraine. And Russia will break the agreement like they have every other agreement with Ukraine.

So why would Ukraine give up land for peace, when peace would be short-lived but the land would be given up forever?

 

[barreness]

World Opinion might have supported Finland, but Germany were their largest supplier of materiel. Every other nation was so scared of Germany that they supplied next to nothing. The North Sea was too dangerous and Norway refused to let goods come overland, so Finland was isolated from enough material to resist and had run out of artillery shells and captured Russian shells. Note how much artillery they've accumulated to resist future Russian attacks.

Peace was only reached after Viipuri fell and Finland agreed to give up the land rather than let Russia go all the way to Helsinki. (And Germany had told them not to conquer all of Finland and the puppet regime they'd lined up had fallen in a heap).

Yeh fair. So if Ukraine loses Kharkiv they should negotiate?

Russia does not want a Ukrainian state, in fact they want to ban Ukrainian nationalism in Ukraine. And Russia will break the agreement like they have every other agreement with Ukraine.

Well I mean Ukranian nationalism does have some pretty dicey history.

So why would Ukraine give up land for peace, when peace would be short-lived but the land would be given up forever?

Hypothetical, no reason why it would be short lived. Once again ill post this, neutrality has worked in the past
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finlandization
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austria–Soviet_Union_relations

 

[Smeg Head]

World Opinion might have supported Finland, but Germany were their largest supplier of materiel. Every other nation was so scared of Germany that they supplied next to nothing. The North Sea was too dangerous and Norway refused to let goods come overland, so Finland was isolated from enough material to resist and had run out of artillery shells and captured Russian shells. Note how much artillery they've accumulated to resist future Russian attacks.

Peace was only reached after Viipuri fell and Finland agreed to give up the land rather than let Russia go all the way to Helsinki. (And Germany had told them not to conquer all of Finland and the puppet regime they'd lined up had fallen in a heap).

Russia does not want a Ukrainian state, in fact they want to ban Ukrainian nationalism in Ukraine. And Russia will break the agreement like they have every other agreement with Ukraine.

So why would Ukraine give up land for peace, when peace would be short-lived but the land would be given up forever?

Soviet aviation was also a big risk to Finnish population centers behind the lines too I think