Beltrami2005
New Member
Russia rides into battle on donkys...its a threat on the level of iran and north korea. Can it do damage? Yes. Is it manageable? Yes.
The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread
KipPotapych
Well-Known Member
Indeed.
Well, having been fighting for nearly 4 years now and progressing at snail, though increasing, pace with the reported amount of casualties and sustaining the astronomical costs of the war, while still signing up volunteers, enough to replace the losses and form new reserves, I’d say the motivation is there and, at least for now, there are no signs that it is going to fade in the near future.
In another post, you talk about some drone production, artillery shells, etc. What you missed in your post that Fedorov also said was that there are over 2 million draft dodgers and some 200,000 deserters. I don’t know about the draft dodgers, but the AWOL numbers are surely significantly higher than the 200K he mentioned. From one of my earlier posts at the end of last summer:
There were many more people going AWOL between July 2025 and now. The last reported number was some 21,000 for October alone that I can remember and talked about it here previously (they stopped reporting that number since then). The overall number is probably closer to 300K. Mathematically speaking, the limit of enlisting new personnel into the UA armed forces is approaching zero. Whether slowly or not, we don’t know. Just think about it: about one third of all drafted and enlisted personnel are deserters, while there are at least 3 to 4 times as many draft dodgers as there are people currently serving in Ukraine (including foreign volunteers).
So the motivation you are referring to is very selective and questionable and Ukrainians overall are definitely not “extremely highly motivated” as you think they are. It could not be more clear from the data I provided above alone.
Consider that Ukraine also offered roughly equivalent bonuses and payments to the younger men, those below the age of forced mobilization, and it failed miserably. They signed up less people in 8 or whatever it was months than there are those from the same age group leaving the country each month. All of this was discussed here previously and it is not a fairy tale.
See, I find it hard to follow your line of thinking. You basically refer to what you think rather than what, at the very least, appears to be happening on the ground in both countries, supported by facts and/or reports with a fair or better degree of reliability. Or so it seems.
And back to drones you had mentioned in the other post. Whether it is true or not is not necessarily relevant (and it probably isn’t coming form a UA official (as it equally would not be if it was coming from a Russian official)). What matters is that all more or less recent reports (and at the very least some were cited and discussed here previously) indicate that Russia has advantage in that department and that goes for numbers, tech, trained (and in training) units and so on. So again, I do not see where your optimism (or conviction, to be more precise) is coming from, but, maybe, reading propaganda from one side and that being Ukraine and lemming-type reports on social or other media.
Will it? Is that some fact based on evidence? Is that what the Ukrainians actually know for a fact (or even believe), as you imply, or is that what you think/believe? If the latter, what is your rationale for this belief?
About the only thing the wars you mentioned have in common with the current one discussed here is that they are all wars. The biggest difference, however, is that Russia has a plan and strategy of attrition which they follow through with (perhaps similar to the other wars you mentioned). What is not different for Ukraine and us (the supporters) is that neither has any strategy, including exit. I have discussed it in a fair bit of detail before and won’t go into it again.
As for losing and winning… yes, Ukraine is currently losing snd Russia is currently winning. I may be missing something, but I cannot see any other way of looking at it. What’s to come could be debated, sure. To count on some collapse of the Russian Federation is like planning your (winning!) way out based on the “act of god” or “force majeure” clause. It’s ridiculous. There are no signs that such an event is going to take place anytime soon; though, by definition, it never is. And I mean none.
Having said that, winning the war does not mean actually winning in the strategic sense. I, again, had already talked about it previously and more than once. Ukraine is most likely going to lose and Russia is going to win, but both are losers. One more than the other (those that are new can go back and search why I think this is the case in my previous posts and I have been very consistent and explained it more than once, even when most thought Ukraine was actually winning). The biggest thing here is that there is a lot more uncertainty with Russia here than with Ukraine as far as the future is concerned. To note, less (even a lot less) uncertainty does not guarantee a better outcome. In my view it simply means that Ukraine’s bleak future is much more probable than Russia’s (and there are many more contingencies today than last year, for example, to talk about the Russian future with any degree of certainty). Again, I explained many times before why I think this is the case. Both would be better off today if they could agree to terms and avoid the war. It is not only Ukraine that had to agree to terms, however, on that side of the aisle and it is still the case.
KipPotapych
Well-Known Member
The most concerning part, currently:
In one of my recent posts, reflecting on this very thing, I wrote that the immediate course of action is to run the water periodically and drain all pipes that are in risk of being frozen, if possible. Since the level of ingenuity is not as high as being reported, I have no idea why this was not widely advertised (by the authorities) to be the course of action as this is the most foreseeable and most devastating course of events in the circumstances. Surely and understandably, there are people who cannot do any of it themselves for various reasons, but those should have been helped by neighbors and/or authorities. As it is, and if it is as wide of occurrence as being reported, this has devastation written all over it. Pipes breaking, flooding, flood freezing, etc. This has potential to get very, very bad.
And more strikes are reportedly expected, while the cold wave is there to stay still. This has potential to leave some cities, or huge chunks of cities, simply without living conditions. Consequences could be very dire indeed. Hope for the best possible outcome for the people and, hopefully, the hype in the media is just that and plenty of exaggeration.
In one of my recent posts, reflecting on this very thing, I wrote that the immediate course of action is to run the water periodically and drain all pipes that are in risk of being frozen, if possible. Since the level of ingenuity is not as high as being reported, I have no idea why this was not widely advertised (by the authorities) to be the course of action as this is the most foreseeable and most devastating course of events in the circumstances. Surely and understandably, there are people who cannot do any of it themselves for various reasons, but those should have been helped by neighbors and/or authorities. As it is, and if it is as wide of occurrence as being reported, this has devastation written all over it. Pipes breaking, flooding, flood freezing, etc. This has potential to get very, very bad.
And more strikes are reportedly expected, while the cold wave is there to stay still. This has potential to leave some cities, or huge chunks of cities, simply without living conditions. Consequences could be very dire indeed. Hope for the best possible outcome for the people and, hopefully, the hype in the media is just that and plenty of exaggeration.
KipPotapych
Well-Known Member
But donkeys, mate, haven’t you heard? All manageable too, which is why this war is still ongoing with no end in sight and no one willing to step up and say their piece backed by the imaginary force to stop the evil. All good in his world.
KipPotapych
Well-Known Member
Good sign, no doubt. I said before they need find a way to speak to the Russians. My point was that to find a way to directly express the unacceptable terms is not necessary at all as they are heard quite loudly as it is. It appears that the current moods of the Euros and Russians suggest that there is not much to talk about it at this time.
Just as an aside, on a recent holiday in Phuket in Thailand I was amazed at the number of Russian tourists.
I can certainly see the appeal of a tropical beach destination compared to the cold of winter in Europe.
I was taken back by two things, one the number of Russians and two their reluctance to engage with other nationalities.
Oddly enough it really didn’t come across as either arrogant or shyness but something else that I just couldn’t workout.
The fact so many were on holiday suggests there are many Russians who have both money and time to indulge in a trip abroad.
Good luck to them, but I must confess it made for a strange dynamic walking the streets of what is a relaxed and beautiful beautiful part of the world.
Maybe It appears conflict has a long reach.
Cheers S
I can certainly see the appeal of a tropical beach destination compared to the cold of winter in Europe.
I was taken back by two things, one the number of Russians and two their reluctance to engage with other nationalities.
Oddly enough it really didn’t come across as either arrogant or shyness but something else that I just couldn’t workout.
The fact so many were on holiday suggests there are many Russians who have both money and time to indulge in a trip abroad.
Good luck to them, but I must confess it made for a strange dynamic walking the streets of what is a relaxed and beautiful beautiful part of the world.
Maybe It appears conflict has a long reach.
Cheers S
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Although Thailand has very competitive tourism pricing, I think the real driving factor is many former vacation destinations have not welcome signs posted for Russians.
Well the first step in making a compermise is the most important that is the realization that not making a compermise is unattainable as a goal. From this point on the goal post should start to shrink, tho there is of course the risk of a return to no direct communications, long term that is not as just a negotiations tactic something I'm sure we will see
Last edited:
Well first as has been stated Russian military power is a undeniable reality it exists and well yes far inferior to the combined power of Europe it's relative to any individual state Superior. Also it's power projection (nuks and ballistic or hypersonic) capabilities are strong as it's its defensive strength. That is Russia invading the e.u vs Russia being invaded are two very different questions.
The economic point is somewhat a false naritive first Russia is a exporter of needed goods as we can currently see it's very hard to remove buyers in that equation (food and energy). Russia is also a very self reliant country a legacy of the Soviets structure in part but also current policy and something they are in many ways blessed by geography and frankly social structure in achieving. So yes there GDP may not be high in Western terms but it also doesn't need to be high to function let alone prosper. The analogy I like tho by no means even across the board is the cost of bread (a historicaly good benchmark) it's .70 cents up to 1.00 in Russia it's 3-4.50 in the United States for example both have immense access to wheat and bakery's. Russia just does it at a far cheaper cost. And this is currently btw as in with the effect of sanctions and war. Tho to be fair also with some government subsidies tho that method of social economics is not regarded as athama in Russia as it is (hypocriticaly I may add) in the west
To deny Russia has a say is no offence to deny the evidence before your eyes thus war is Russia having a say precisely because it was ignored. Or in spite of it depending on your view as truth is even a win is still a lose for Russia just less so of a loss then not fighting or being militarily defeat would have been.
Truth is Russia does now and historicaly always has had a voice in European affairs. Of course there has always even those who want to silence that voice but Russia has had the strength to remain as is true for well purity much every power even on this planet
Last edited:
Beltrami2005
New Member
Where is this "russian military power"? Its laughed at here. It even depends on countries like North Korea or Iran to survive. Its also not "superior" to individual states in Europe. Russia has no working navy and its strategic bomber fleet lost 20% capacity through drones delivered by a truck.
Truth is that Russia has no power left to project, its clubbed down in the middle east and lost all its muppets. Its black sea fleet doesnt exist anymore. From a strategic point of view russias collapse in Ukraine is positive for Europe. Remember evry bomber destroyed is one less that can threaten Europe. Its USSR stocks are mostly depleted. Its population development is catastrophic. Very low birth numbers next to over a million soldiers fallen.
Russia 2026 is a vasall state of China and completly incompatible to Europe.
Also Russia did not "Always" have a say in Europe. Show me the russian voice during the reign of Emperor Marcus Aurelius? Or during Elizabeth I reign? They were always backwater and in evry connection negative.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #13,651
I don't think Russia depends on Iran and North Korea to survive. Do you have any evidence of this? Because buying weapons from them doesn't mean Russia would not be able to survive without them. Russia does have a working navy, Russian ships from multiple fleets active in various places. Details can be found here; Russian Navy - News and Analysis
Details can also be found with a simple google search. Also, can you explain how you arrive at the 20% number for Russian bomber fleet losses?
Ukraine would beg to differ.
Not sure Russia had much in the way of client states, outside of Syria, to begin with. The USSR did, but modern day Russia not so much. And Assad did have his own relations with Iran, as well as Russia, so even there the influence was limited.
A blatant lie.
Unless said collapse results in bigger problems, like proliferation of dangerous materials, a permanent zone of instability to the east. The collapse of the Soviet Union went relatively well. There's no guarantee a collapse of modern day Russia would.
Do you have a source for the million soldiers fallen number? I'm assuming fallen means KIA.
In the reign of Marcus Aurelius the current peoples of Europe didn't have a say in Europe.
Well Marcus Aurelius was never in Russia Russia as a state or even honestly a psdo state did not exactly exist it can roughly very roughly be compared to the Germanic tribes. As far as the workings of a singular state are concerned and indeed it's voice in European affairs was in effect the same. That is nothing there but war and hardship for those inclined.
During Elizabeth t first well Ivan the terrible was in charge and point of fact had many treats with England as well as other nations so yes it had a voice even then it's was not a place a ambitious leader would want to start marching his army.
Russia's offensive potential as pertains to it's missle forces is immense there is no city or state that Russia could not wipe off the face of the earth if it so desired. This is a reality all propaganda aside. This is the power projection I'm talking about and I'm not even taking nuclear here just conventional air and missle power name a city that is safe? Tell me how you put a army in the Feild to invade Russia and protect it? Of course the same applies in reverse if Russia was to invade Europe as a whole. Single state on state is of course a different question if it shares a boarder Russia has a advantage. Honestly Ukraine could trash most European Army's in combat if the had to stand alone vs each other
As I said Russia invading Europe is not a threat, but neither is Europe invading Russia.. and let's be honest if Europe thought they could kick Russia's door I well they would be in Ukraine wouldn't they. It's not like there not trying everything short of actually going to war with Russia because the feel like Russia is to weak to resist them