|
What is the most powerful flying bug? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| 🦋 |
|
15 | 3.71% |
| 🦇 |
|
115 | 28.47% |
| 🪰 |
|
12 | 2.97% |
| 🐦 |
|
67 | 16.58% |
| dragonfly |
|
94 | 23.27% |
| 🦟 |
|
14 | 3.47% |
| 🐝 |
|
87 | 21.53% |
| Total: | 404 votes | ||
|
Dreylad posted:The Russia dragging things out is fair enough, but it's really hard to say exactly what the Ukrainians will be happy with. They've said all recaptured territories, but as they push further east that's going to cost more and more lives and at some point you expect them to sit down to get more territorial concessions diplomatically and not through spending lives. I mean I don't think they're going to try to march on Moscow so figuring out exactly how far is far enough has been kind of perplexing. It does come down to when Russia shifts from "negotiations to secure what we've got" to "get a peace deal before we're completely embarrassed and lose everything." I would say the split here is about capabilities. On one side perhaps the Russian military itself is totally materially spent and this is the best they can do and the Ukrainians will eventually push them one way or another back to their borders; or that political not material limitations restrain the Russian military and that these limitations are self-imposed by the Kremlin, much of it because of the time of issues that might crop up with a more unrestricted campaign. I would say it depends on how far you want to go. For example, they hit recently reportly threw 90 missiles in Ukraine, that took out power for 10 million people...a pretty large barrage. However, because of the targets chosen, much of the power was restored relatively. Was it because the Russian military can only hit certain less critical equipment (even when more critical targets were available), or they did as a type of message? It is pertinent because for example if they had shifted their target priority, the effect wouldn't be minor. I would argue that the Russians do very much have the capabilities for a much more unrestricted campaign, but it is still immaterial at this time because the deciding factor is still optics. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 03:02 on Nov 17, 2022 |
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 02:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 01:00 |
|
|
Once again the "leftist" forum shows its true colors by balking at the prospect of nuclear war
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 03:00
|
|
|
Meow Tse-tung posted:I opened the ukraine reddit to see how theyre taking the news cycle and one thread has people accusing others of being russian spies for having the wrong takes lmao. This war brought back the red terror. People missing that McCarthyism nostalgia get in all your tankyism while you can, your thought crimes are being recorded
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 03:00
|
|
|
bonelessdongs posted:Once again the "leftist" forum shows its true colors by balking at the prospect of nuclear war should have posted a good picture of him
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 03:02
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 03:03
|
|
|
I mean the Ukrainians react the same way to every strike where it’s a genocide but also Russia is pathetic and out of missiles, both of which are playing to a western audience and neither of which has led to negotiations so it does make me wonder why they’re going through the motions still.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 03:03
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:I mean the Ukrainians react the same way to every strike where it’s a genocide but also Russia is pathetic and out of missiles, both of which are playing to a western audience and neither of which has led to negotiations so it does make me wonder why they’re going through the motions still. I would say this is still primarily for a domestic audience, who is very much feeling the effects of the conflict while the public in the West has mostly tuned out. To be fair, I don't think the daily situation right now is probably that great for many Ukrainians, and if you want morale to be kept up you need to something to sell them in a sense. It is kind of why it has to be a Russian missile for example because suggesting otherwise would show some of the weakness of Ukrainian AD, something you don't want when you are being hit with waves of missiles. - Things may be hard now, but Ukrainians are hoping for the day of victory after which their country will be rebuilt and join the EU... -
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 03:07
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:I mean the Ukrainians react the same way to every strike where it’s a genocide but also Russia is pathetic and out of missiles, both of which are playing to a western audience and neither of which has led to negotiations so it does make me wonder why they’re going through the motions still. They're working off a marvel movie summary but someone exercised the option for a 64 part series at the last minute and the writing team wasn't up to the task. That's why every episode of Slava ukrainia has the same plot development as roger ramjet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 03:08
|
|
|
speng31b posted:I still think the more likely possibility is that lil Z is high on his own supply and just mad that his allies broke away from his narrative. he's been getting away with saying almost any bullshit he can imagine and having the entire western apparatus parrot it uncritically for almost a year now, it's gotta be jarring to get a different result now. probably just found the limit of what he can push, that being anything that threatens to get NATO off the sidelines there's no way zelenskyy has limits. he's just getting started
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 03:16
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:I mean the Ukrainians react the same way to every strike where it’s a genocide but also Russia is pathetic and out of missiles, both of which are playing to a western audience and neither of which has led to negotiations so it does make me wonder why they’re going through the motions still. It's cause they're Nazis op 
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 03:31
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/marina0swald/status/1592743324494229504
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 03:36
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:With Russia having, as you said, limited and well understood war aims, the Ukrainian government deciding to fight total war from day one, including arming the populace immediately, has tied the fate of the nation to the maintenance of their policy and refusal to negotiate, which is only making things more dangerous as time goes on. Yeah, but once a population has committed to full mobilization, how often has strategic bombing, or the tenuous and limited occupations fought by a smaller invading force spread too thin, ever resulted in a substantial negotiated surrender? Go look at your field manuals, see how many troops Russia would, doctrinally, want to have to occupy even the territory they've claimed so far, and then look at what they've got. Are the Russians supposed to grind the Ukrainians down by blowing up infrastructure with air raids? When has that ever worked? Realistically, even if the Ukrainian government decided to negotiate terms now--what would they reasonably settle for that Russia would accept? Simply returning to the pre-war situation would require Russia to basically take a hard L on the entire situation, and renounce control over at least some (ostensibly) annexed territories, so that's no-go. Ukraine conceding territory not only around the Donbas but also in S/SE Ukraine around Melitopol and Mariupol would go a step further and at least allow a Russian land bridge to Crimea...but even that would fall far short of Russia's initial war aims and do literally nothing to achieve any of their stated political objectives. So even for Russia, it would be a consolation prize, far enough removed from Russia's invasion rhetoric as to carry potentially severe political consequences domestically. And for Ukraine...why would they settle for that now, when they are "winning"? Anything beyond that would require, at minimum, the mutual expectation that Russia will eventually occupy and hold more territory than they have now...as they are presently losing territory, half-assing mobilization, and generally being fuckups. For any kind of negotiated settlement there needs to be, on both sides, some mutually similar idea of where the war will end up, and the cost of concessions away from those borders vs. the cost of war. Right now, that doesn't exist, and I don't think it's really the fault of the Ukrainian government. They are doing what any country would be expected to do under the circumstances--they are continuing to fight while they are making gains, and they are exploiting the public support they have both in response to the initial invasion and from successful counter-offensives. They are doing this to maximize their position in any subsequent negotiations, and so that they can negotiate from a position of strength. Maybe things will go to poo poo in 3 months, but right now they aren't, and based on everything the Russians are doing or have done...there isn't a great reason to suspect that they are gonna turn this thing around any time soon. Fact is, the Ukrainians don't have much to go on when it comes to estimating how much they can reasonably win vs. what Russia will reasonably take/hold, because Russia has been consistently coming in well below expectations for months. The Russians, on the other hand, clearly have no idea what the gently caress they are doing or what they want out of this. Their initial war aims were clear enough: to, after a quick, decisive, and limited war, arrive at a more cooperative Ukrainian government, supported by a significant number of pro-Russian Ukrainians. That clearly isn't happening anymore. So what, ultimately, do they want, how much blood and treasure are they willing to spend towards it, and to what strategic or political end. Frankly, I'm not sure even they know the answer to these questions--especially the last part. What does strategic victory even look like at this point? What's clear enough is that before figuring that out, they are trying to stem the bleeding and at least stabilize the current situation--and even then they are failing, and probably reaching the limits of what is politically sustainable. So, as limited or as well understood Russia's war aims may have been, the path towards them has been evaporated for months, and in the meantime they are presiding over one of the most bumblefucked offensives in the history of contemporary warfare. Under those circumstances, is it really surprising, at ALL, that a negotiated surrender by Ukraine has not been forthcoming? You can certainly argue that the human cost of this war grinding on over these territorial and political considerations is unacceptable. Or that it is stupid, and wrong, to throw human lives away in such number just to "solve" for your best post-war territorial outcome, rather than negotiating for a potentially less favorable one today. But that's literally every war. It is both possible and common for wars to start over stupid reasons, and to continue for stupid long, just because each side expects it has more to gain by fighting. You know that better than most people. What's new? Morbus has issued a correction as of 03:48 on Nov 17, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 03:44
|
|
|
Dreylad posted:The Russia dragging things out is fair enough, but it's really hard to say exactly what the Ukrainians will be happy with. They've said all recaptured territories, but as they push further east that's going to cost more and more lives and at some point you expect them to sit down to get more territorial concessions diplomatically and not through spending lives. I mean I don't think they're going to try to march on Moscow so figuring out exactly how far is far enough has been kind of perplexing. It does come down to when Russia shifts from "negotiations to secure what we've got" to "get a peace deal before we're completely embarrassed and lose everything." It's a good question, and I think Russia would make figuring it out a lot clearer if they would STOP making GBS threads THE BED. How far is far enough? When will recapturing territory become no longer worth it? Who the gently caress knows?! If you told me 6 months ago Russia would be withdrawing from Kherson I would have been incredulous but here we are.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 03:47
|
|
|
The Atlantic Council said it best when they observed that Georgia failed by not daring Russia to destroy Tbilisi and its civilian population. The Ukrainian government’s success ultimately comes from exploiting that, there’s no reason for them to have done all this over Minsk II, and while you can point to their success at doing so it’s come at the cost of their civil society, economy, who knows what else.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 03:51
|
|
|
This simply year one of the next hundred years war. Though I guess the last one technically went for 116 years or so.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 03:59
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:The Atlantic Council said it best when they observed that Georgia failed by not daring Russia to destroy Tbilisi and its civilian population. The Ukrainian government’s success ultimately comes from exploiting that, there’s no reason for them to have done all this over Minsk II, and while you can point to their success at doing so it’s come at the cost of their civil society, economy, who knows what else. See this is what I mean when I say stuff that is "adjacent to the moralistic good guy v. bad guy junk that this thread generally does a good job of not falling into". It is my firm and longstanding conviction that the Ukainian government are a pack of shitters. However, saying "there's no reason for them to have done all this over Minsk II, is, at the very least, a deeply asymmetrical framing. It was, at the end of the day, Russia that decided to invade Ukraine. And it was Russia that apparently failed to plan for the entirely predictable response and it was Russia that failed in its war plan so badly as to completely destroy any chance of achieving it's initial war aims. At least the Ukrainian thought process has some shred of logic to it: 1.) Ignore Russia 2.) They won't invade us because that would be loving stupid 3.) Profit (literally) Whereas for Russia, I guess it was: 1.) Conduct an limited offensive with a number of troops both incompatible with our own doctrine and enormously below well accepted force ratios, because anything more than that is too much trouble to be worth it 2.) ??? 3.) Ukraine is now friendly Which, you know, if you just roll over Ukraine sure I guess maybe? But it was a dumb loving plan to begin with and it became exponentially dumber as it became clear they couldn't pull it off.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:13
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/PoliticoRyan/status/1592975683294490625?s=20&t=m_KlNiS1bbSSjmHjzc3VHQ
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:13
|
|
|
Morbus posted:Which, you know, if you just roll over Ukraine sure I guess maybe? But it was a dumb loving plan to begin with and it became exponentially dumber as it became clear they couldn't pull it off without destroying the capital and its inhabitants. Yes. Russia’s war aims and direction of the war have been misguided and characterized by poor judgement and under resourcing. That was exploited by the decision to go to total war. If they had decided on the doctrinally appropriate course of action of assembling several hundred thousand soldiers in heavy mechanized formations to conduct deep battle the war would be over in a week or two, but the fate of Kiev in that scenario would still ultimately be up to those empowered to capitulate it. Frosted Flake has issued a correction as of 04:21 on Nov 17, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:15
|
|
|
What's missing from the conversation is always that Ukraine has been part of Russia and its various regimes for centuries. It's like if an even more antisemitic Texas broke off from the United States and was then invaded by the US government. They probably wouldn't bomb it into the ground like they did Iraq.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:18
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:What's missing from the conversation is always that Ukraine has been part of Russia and its various regimes for centuries. It's like if an even more antisemitic Texas broke off from the United States and was then invaded by the US government. They probably wouldn't bomb it into the ground like they did Iraq. Nah I'm pretty sure all of recorded history only goes back 20 years or so.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:19
|
|
|
Morbus posted:Yeah, but once a population has committed to full mobilization, how often has strategic bombing, or the tenuous and limited occupations fought by a smaller invading force spread too thin, ever resulted in a substantial negotiated surrender? Go look at your field manuals, see how many troops Russia would, doctrinally, want to have to occupy even the territory they've claimed so far, and then look at what they've got. Are the Russians supposed to grind the Ukrainians down by blowing up infrastructure with air raids? When has that ever worked? lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:22
|
|
|
Morbus posted:See this is what I mean when I say stuff that is "adjacent to the moralistic good guy v. bad guy junk that this thread generally does a good job of not falling into". Because Big Israel was happening anyway, with or without an invasion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:22
|
|
|
Morbus posted:It was, at the end of the day, Russia that decided to invade Ukraine. GRrrrarrr Russia hungry!!!
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:23
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:Yes. I think the simpler explanation isn't that they misunderstood what they needed to do to defend the splinter territories and invaded a bunch of territory that didn't help with that, but instead had other poo poo that they cared about and the splinter territories were useful tools to those ends.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:23
|
|
|
The Separatists didn't want Minsk 2 because it changed nothing about their geographic proximity to murderous nazis. The Ukrainian nazis didn't want minsk 2 because it gets in the way of big israel.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:24
|
|
|
It was not an entirely predictable response that Zelensky would not capitulate or flee once the Russians broke in around day four or five. Neither was the decision to arm the civilian population. Both of these, in light of what others have said about Ukraine existing as a country for three decades and “the West” opposed to a Russian “East” not at all. Knowing what we do now about what ripples the Georgia War sent out, the ultimate goals of Maidan, the ideology of the Ukrainian right and how they have been empowered, yes it makes more sense, but prior to being threatened on camera by members of Azov Zelensky had been the peace candidate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:24
|
|
|
Morbus posted:It was, at the end of the day, Russia that decided to invade Ukraine. Did they? Or were they manipulated by some darker power...
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:25
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:It was not an entirely predictable response that Zelensky would not capitulate or flee once the Russians broke in around day four or five. Neither was the decision to arm the civilian population. Both of these, in light of what others have said about Ukraine existing as a country for three decades and “the West” opposed to a Russian “East” not at all. also the level of material western support was definitely not predictable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:27
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:It was not an entirely predictable response that Zelensky would not capitulate or flee once the Russians broke in around day four or five. Neither was the decision to arm the civilian population. Both of these, in light of what others have said about Ukraine existing as a country for three decades and “the West” opposed to a Russian “East” not at all. Going forward I think there's a real concern that Zelensky can't survive a negotiated peace. Like he has reasons to stake out the position that Ukraine will reclaim all Ukrainian territory that go beyond fear for his personal safety, especially when they seem to be winning, but ultranationalists who wear a bunch of weird symbols blaming their Jewish president for stabbing them in the back if they don't get all their hopes and dreams seems like the most predictable thing in the world.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:29
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:Yes. If Russia had decided on the doctrinally appropriate course of action, they would, at the very least, be able to durably occupy territory on their side of the Dnieper, and the best even the most bullheaded Ukrainian government could hope for would be pointless attritional warfare at the periphery, punctuated by slow but steady Russian territorial gains. More likely the Ukrainian government and military would have just collapsed if it was faced with that kind of force well before its own mobilization materialized or before they could recieve significant foreign support. Under such circumstances, maybe the Ukrainians would come to a negotiated surrender quickly. Maybe they would come to one eventually. Maybe it would become a years long frozen conflict. Who knows, it's a counterfactual. But in any case that's not what happened and Ukraine "exploited" the situation by countering the eminently counterable Russian offensive because of course they did.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:32
|
|
|
this all could have been avoided if they had taken kiev in march
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:36
|
|
|
paul_soccer12 posted:this all could have been avoided if they had taken kiev in march This but 2014.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:37
|
|
|
Morbus posted:Yeah, but once a population has committed to full mobilization, how often has strategic bombing, or the tenuous and limited occupations fought by a smaller invading force spread too thin, ever resulted in a substantial negotiated surrender? Go look at your field manuals, see how many troops Russia would, doctrinally, want to have to occupy even the territory they've claimed so far, and then look at what they've got. Are the Russians supposed to grind the Ukrainians down by blowing up infrastructure with air raids? When has that ever worked? (Peers over dice shield) That's a great backstory intro but can you tell me a little more about your twilight 2000 character and what gear they'll be using?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:40
|
|
|
I agree that abandoning deep battle and its consequences have been a disaster for all Ukraine, and if I was a general officer I would have told to politicians that prior to agreeing to jump off. Overkill is nearly always preferable to underkill, and worst case Russia mobilizing on a large scale in February might have gotten Minsk II signed. Most of this is only visible in hindsight but my personal preference is to always bring more to bear than you have to because your worst case is paying people to stand around unneeded. Because mobilization is tied to politics and the stability Ardennes has identified as pivotable to Russian internal politics, that makes the war a harder sell from the onset with possible implications for the Russian political landscape and Russian society writ large. So, a Social Democrat or Socialist Russia that can inspire public support by offering something probably would mobilize, maybe even in secret like in 68, but this is a society like ours and how many of us would accept a call-up for our current governments to force the implementation of some treaty? Frosted Flake has issued a correction as of 04:43 on Nov 17, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:41
|
|
|
Dr Kool-AIDS posted:This but 2014.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:41
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:I agree that abandoning deep battle and its consequences have been a disaster for all Ukraine, and if I was a general officer I would have told to politicians that prior to agreeing to jump off. Overkill is nearly always preferable to underkill, and worst case Russia mobilizing on a large scale in February might have gotten Minsk II signed. frosted flake isn't a canadian artillery officer, he's eric shinseki
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:43
|
|
|
paul_soccer12 posted:this all could have been avoided if they had taken kiev in march or just as easily, if there was no invasion in february if we're throwing around alternate timelines
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:44
|
|
|
Dr Kool-AIDS posted:Going forward I think there's a real concern that Zelensky can't survive a negotiated peace. Like he has reasons to stake out the position that Ukraine will reclaim all Ukrainian territory that go beyond fear for his personal safety, especially when they seem to be winning, but ultranationalists who wear a bunch of weird symbols blaming their Jewish president for stabbing them in the back if they don't get all their hopes and dreams seems like the most predictable thing in the world. I agree 100%. Even without the outright nazis, I think recent counteroffensives have created a feedback loop of enthusiasm that makes backing down politically untenable. I don't really know when poo poo will hit the fan but I think Russia's behavior will radically change when things shift from "Lost Cause SMO" to "Defending Crimea".
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:47
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mdfzeh/status/1592856835262144512 TIL the RPO Shmel thermobaric rocket launcher has a booster motor that just falls to the ground 15 feet in front of you in a rather unsettling way when launched.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 01:00 |
|
|
I mean, Shinseki was Al Gore’s pick for JCS, so America could only have the required troop count with a better society, but on the other hand he was responsible for the move to brigades and giving everyone black berets, so a mixed legacy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 04:48
|
|