Putin is testing for years how far he can go. He uses salami tactics on NATO for ages.
A bit of sabotage here, planes and drones flying in or over NATO territory, ghost ships and shadow fleets doing crimes, disturbing GPS, etc, etc, etc.
A bunch of European businesses are still doing business with Russia, so doubt it’s true.
Define “ready”, Martin Jaeger. They’re second best in Ukraine, so it can’t be in terms of capacity to win.
If you disregard ability to win, any one of us is technically ready to attack Europe.
I have an army of 1 with a water pistol ready to annex Switzerland
You’d have a better chance than most armies, because they might actually let you in like that.
They still have their usual ‘wunderwaffle’ to roll out - Waves of Humans and zero care for human lives.
Russia is as dangerous now as Japan was in WW2.
Japan had an aircraft carrier fleet rivaling the US, better carrier fighter planes than the US, and were occupying a lot of China, who was a peer opponent. It also took a US-USSR alliance to take them down.
Russia on the other hand is able to wreak a lot of havoc, and is also good on some technological fronts, like drone warfare, espionage and ballistic missiles, but it has recently lost a lot of its fleet against an opponent with no navy, and is stuck in trench warfare with equipment that in WWII would be the equivalent of muskets.
This whole posturing is because Russia ran out of easily recruitable people, and needs internal justification to start throwing in conscripts as well.
Oh, BTW it’s “Wunderwaffe”, if you want a “Wunderwaffle”, go to Brussels, they put strawberries and cream on it so high it won’t fit in your mouth.
Remember that they want Europe to be afraid and stockpile material that otherwise would go to ukraine.
It’s time for you guys to decide whether you want direct war with Russia or not. Imagining that they aren’t ready for it, and this is just a diversion, is seriously risky. I’m nervous with how Europeans are getting bolder the more Ukraine fails to fulfil its military objectives. Nobody is doing more than doubling down on political narratives that were dry in 2022.
deleted by creator
Oh is that what was implied? You’re so cute.
“f me right wing dictator,…f me!” –some tankie with said poster on the wall.
Wrong, that is what Europe is saying “Little Borat” (you love Mossad propaganda so much you named your reply guy account after it, hmmm), they have determined the best way to avoid war with Russia is provocation. Keep shaking your dainty little ass at them and just hope America saves you. After all, NATO is the sword, and the sword’s shield. 😂
You have a poster in the room with Putin on the horse, don’t you?
And a life-size Putin cuddle cushion
Do you find your “work” fulfilling?
No one finds your Russian BS fulfilling and it’s also work to read it.
Silly kid, trying to fill out the “free space” on his bingo twice. You’re not too clever are you?
I can tell you don’t read Ukrainian newspapers by your blind dismissal of any military shortcomings. They bicker about it constantly. Why do you think Zaluzhny as exiled?
they couldn’t and still can’t handle their neighbor, so what makes them think they’re now all the sudden ready for a new multinational conflict? what is Russian for spread too thin? reliance on their asset djt is helping them but is it enough?
Their state of being unable to handle their neighbour is that they are winning incredibly slowly.
They don’t have the ability to conquer anyone else, but that’s not the only hot conflict that there can be. Drone attacks? Border skirmishes? Missiles “getting lost”?
Europe has also not successfully increased its military production to cope with the increased threat, so much of Europe’s ability to fight back is tied up in Ukraine
Their state of being unable to handle their neighbour is that they are winning incredibly slowly.
They’re winning so slowly that they’ve advanced essentially nowhere after their intial gains three years ago.
Their foreign trade is down the shitter since their ability to export fossil fuels has been badly degraded, and if they run out of money before they win, they’re fucked.
Exactly how is Russia winning the war in Ukraine?
If you measure success by territory gained, they’re gaining ground. At a huge cost in lives and equipment, but they’re doing it.
End of the day wars winner is measured by the government and it’s cost by it’s people.
But these are kilometers here and there, where Ukraine rather keeps forces alive than fighting for it.
Russia is not winning massive amounts of territory, their economy will crash once the war is over etc.
They are slowly gaining ground. If the war stopped today with the front line frozen they would have failed to achieve key objectives but would have succeeded in stealing vast amounts of territory with natural resources, people and industry (whatevers not destroyed), securing a corridor to Crimea, intimidating many small countries, and creating a bigger buffer between Russia proper and unfriendly countries.
One consequence of Russia invading Ukraine is that Finland and Sweden joined Nato. Finland has a 1,340 km border with Russia, so Putin has not created a “bigger buffer” - he has managed to double Russia’s border with Nato. Also, the countries you label as unfriendly are peaceful countries who are only ‘unfriendly’ to Russia because they worry about Russian imperialist expansion, and Russia’s aggression habit.
The whole border argument is silly anyway. Russia has the longest border of any country, and they expect that border to be surrounded with buffer states that they control. If they engulf them, then there’s an even bigger border and more states to seize control over. It doesn’t take much to see the self-serving imperialist logic of this position. They’ll grab evrything they can until they’re stopped. That’s the real situation.
Gaining ground isn’t the same thing as winning, a lesson that the Russians should be all too familiar with, as it’s how they beat the Germans in WW2 (though a more accurate point of comparison would be Germany’s failure against the West in WW1; they held significant ground in France at the time of their surrender. It wasn’t that their lines collapsed or that they were outmanoeuvred on the battlefield; it was their economy that could no longer bear the weight of the war). It is, in fact, an extremely effective strategy to slowly cede ground at a cost that is too high for your aggressor to bear, and that’s exactly what Ukraine is doing to Russia. This doesn’t mean Ukraine is guaranteed to win, but their success largely depends on the continued support of their allies in Europe and North America. Whereas Russia has no real clear path to success at this point.
Russian doctrine relies on punching a hole, moving and exploiting that gap to create a salient and outmanoeuvre your enemy. Ukraine has gotten too good at entrenching, and is creating deeply layered defences that the Russians have no way to break through in a decisive fashion, and Ukraine is being extremely careful with it’s manpower, whereas Russian continues to waste theirs on pointless attacks and dispersed operations. We’re seeing constant footage and reports of Russian sections consisting of only 2-4 men attacking over open ground with no vehicle support, and getting picked off as they come in by Ukrainian machine gun positions and FPVs. The Russian economy is grinding to a halt under the weight of the war; they held out a lot longer in the face of sanctions than anyone in the West predicted, but the choices they made early on to keep the economy flowing are now turning into major pain points (massive interest rate hikes to control inflation now turning into a serious lack of investment and consumer spending, dumped foreign currency reserves used to float the rouble now leaving them with no fallback for the hard times ahead, etc). Ukraine has developed new long range attack drones that can strike deep into Russia, opening up all of their industry, and particularly their oil refining capabilities, to attack. Russia is so big that they simply cannot defend all of it from aerial attack, and Ukraine’s intel is good enough that they can continually shift their focus to wherever Russia isn’t defending.
This is why Putin is eager to talk peace now. He would love to, as you describe, stop with their current gains. That would actually constitute a win. The longer this goes on for, the worse it gets for Russia, while Ukraine can continue to hold out for as long as we continue to stand with them and keep them supplied. Their manpower losses are serious, but manageable if they continue with their current strategies, and while Russia continues to hammer their infrastructure, Ukraine has superior - and more efficient - air defence and most of their manufacturing happens outside of the country where Russia can’t hit it.
Ukraine has developed new long range attack drones that can strike deep into Russia, opening up all of their industry, and particularly their oil refining capabilities, to attack. Russia is so big that they simply cannot defend all of it from aerial attack, and Ukraine’s intel is good enough that they can continually shift their focus to wherever Russia isn’t defending.
It is especially delicious how Russia’s greatest advantage in this war - their size relative to Ukraine, hence significantly higher manpower and resources than Ukraine, as well as territorial depth that let them have important military facilities beyond the range of Ukraine, has been turned by Ukraine into one of Russia’s worst strategical weaknesses.
Anywhere in Ukraine can be hit by Russia, even with shitty shit drones like Shaheed, so Ukranians adapted, plus comparativelly to Russia their’s is a smaller country hence with fewer sites of strategical value, which means having enough AA to take down most of Russia’s missiles and long-range drones is actually possible, which is why Russia’s ever larger mass attacks of late have had so much less effect than smaller attacks did at the start of the Invasion.
Meanwhile Russia’s strategically important infrastructure is all over a large country, so they would have to deploy AA to defend every individual site and they don’t have enough of the kind of AA that can successfully deal with low-flying drones (it doesn’t matter how good their coverage with longer range systems like the S-500 is when that weapon system is not suitable to deal with Cessna-152s converted into drones flying at low altitude plus each missile costs many times more than each of those drones).
In this, Ukraine’s strategy is masterful, IMHO.
This is why Putin is eager to talk peace now.
Putin’s definition of peace is that the aggressor is rewarded and the international community hands Russia what it couldn’t win by force.
No arguments there.
Russian doctrine relies on punching a hole, moving and exploiting that gap to create a salient and outmanoeuvre your enemy.
According to whom?
According to the actual battlefield, Russian doctrine relies on throwing wave after wave of poorly trained criminals and shanghaied DPR/LPR citizens into the machine guns, artillery and drones of the Ukrainians.
Don’t get me wrong, there are massive weaknesses, and we may see Ukraine exploit them. But we aren’t seeing that translate to battlefield success. Putin hasn’t shown any eagerness to talk peace; only the same old “peace” meaning capitulation. He’s been keen on that since the beginning.
According to whom?
Funnily enough, experts on Russian battlefield doctrine. The ones I talked to all work in the CAF, but you’re welcome to search up your own sources on the subject. This guy was the commander of the US armed forces in Europe from 2014 to 2017, so I’d say he probably knows his stuff, and his analysis aligns with that of the experts I’ve spoken with; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qjrYpDDWS4&t=1s
If you’re trying to understand the disconnect between their doctrine and what’s actually playing out on the battlefield, it’s surprisingly simple really. This is what happens when you have an inflexible command structure that relies exclusively on doctrine and rigid adherence to chain of command (eg, individual soldiers are basically just machines to operated by their superiors), mixed with a huge amount of institutional corruption and an unwillingness to report the basic facts of the situation on the ground because it’s politically unfavourable to admit that things aren’t going to plan. The doctrine says “Smash a hole” so they try, and fail, repeatedly to smash that hole. That leads to waves of men being thrown at targets to no effect because if you haven’t smashed the hole you can’t move on to step two, so you just keep on repeating step one.
The Russian thirst for poorly trained conscripts cannot be adequately explained by corruption and poor reporting obscuring what’s actually happening. At some point you have to accept the possibility that Putin knows what’s happening and is ok with it.
Sure, it’s possible that Russia hasn’t changed its doctrine in 3 years, but it seems unlikely. Old doctrine is obsolete on a battlefield where all movements are immediately observed and armoured vehicles are more vulnerable due to a proliferation of anti tank weapons.
But throwing cannon fodder at the guns to reveal where they are, then shooting them with something else - that never stops working as long as you have cannon fodder.
I wonder if we’re just arguing over whether this strategy is something deserving of praise, with you thinking that, since I characterise the balance favouring Russia, I think this is strategic genius? In case of that, I don’t; it’s stupid and wasteful. But it’s also working in the sense that it’s gradually pushing Ukraine back.
Russia is using WWII equipment, Ukraine recently retook a big piece of land, Russia’s economy is on the brink of collapse, opposition of the regime grows bolder day by day.
This does not seem like a winning power to me.
Russia is using WWII equipment
Yeah it’s pretty ridiculous. The outcome is what matters, though.
Ukraine recently retook a big piece of land
I don’t think this is true, and in any case, Russia is still advancing consistently. Go on DeepStateMAP and check the past few months (not every day - just once per month) and you will get the picture: no major breakthroughs, but grinding advancement.
Russia’s economy is on the brink of collapse
It’s been massively weakened by sanctions but a quick google for
russian economy "brink of collapse"reveals as many articles predicting this as dispelling the predictions going back at least two years.If the Russian economy is on the brink of collapse, there will be confident assertions it’s not true until the actual day of the collapse.
Their state of being unable to handle their neighbour is that they are winning incredibly slowly.
And it’s only cost them one point one million casualties so far.
Bleeding out is an idiotic way to “win incredibly slowly”.
But I suppose the ends justify the means. In this case, ends refers to territory captured and held, and domestic oil production.
Winning incredibly slowly. LMAO
“I am bleeding, making me the victor.”
“I must apologize for Wimp Lo, he is an idiot. We have purposefuly trained him wrong, as a joke.”
All casualties that Putin doesn’t give a shit about, so why is that important, really? There may come a point where Russia’s high casualty rate has significant domestic impact, but it is not yet. With control of the media, Putin is able to paint a much rosier picture at home, and when his military’s ranks are swollen with convicts and North Koreans, the actual losses are of lower impact to begin with.
To put it another way: if Russia is currently losing, what would you call a state in which Russia stops advancing? What would you call a state in which Ukraine were able to take back - and then hold - territory?
People who talk shit about how Russia is losing, is idiotic and so on, I think still have the mentality most people did in the first months of the invasion, when Russia had just been shown to be a complete paper tiger relative to prior expectations. A war they were supposed to win in a few days is still going, and they haven’t won it yet - a terrible humiliation for Russia. But the fact that they suffered a terrible humiliation, were ridiculously less powerful than most people believed, doesn’t mean they’re losing. “Slowly gaining territory at great cost” is not losing. Achieving a victory for Ukraine means a change from the current state of affairs; they need more weapons and support than they are currently receiving.
You haven’t actually disagreed with any of the potential things I pointed at Russia being able to do, or at Europe’s slow rearmament. Those were the substantive things.
All casualties that Putin doesn’t give a shit about, so why is that important, really?
The Russians should put you in charge of signing up new recruits. LMAO
There may come a point where Russia’s high casualty rate has significant domestic impact, but it is not yet.
Definitely put you in charge of the enlistment PR team. LMAO
With control of the media, Putin is able to paint a much rosier picture at home, and when his military’s ranks are swollen with convicts and North Koreans, the actual losses are of lower impact to begin with.
That explains all the state controlled media encouraging all Russians to take lots of road trips. LMAO
To put it another way: if Russia is currently losing, what would you call a state in which Russia stops advancing? What would you call a state in which Ukraine were able to take back - and then hold - territory?People who talk shit about how Russia is losing, is idiotic and so on, I think still have the mentality most people did in the first months of the invasion, when Russia had just been shown to be a complete paper tiger relative to prior expectations. A war they were supposed to win in a few days is still going, and they haven’t won it yet - a terrible humiliation for Russia.
At least you’ve correctly identified Russia’s terrible humiliation. Special Military Operation. LMAO
But the fact that they suffered a terrible humiliation, were ridiculously less powerful than most people believed, doesn’t mean they’re losing.
Make that your first recruiting slogan. LMAO
“Slowly gaining territory at great cost” is not losing.
To learn more, contact your local Recriting Officer. LMAO
Achieving a victory for Ukraine means a change from the current state of affairs; they need more weapons and support than they are currently receiving.
Yeah, they’ve only been able to kill a smidgen over a million Russians with their meager resources. Thankfully, the Russians haven’t sustained any serious equipment losses. LMAO
You haven’t actually disagreed with any of the potential things I pointed at Russia being able to do, or at Europe’s slow rearmament.
Sorry, I wasn’t able to see any of your points through the field of one point one million sunflowers. LMAO
Those were the substantive things.
Of course they were. LMAO
Make that your first recruiting slogan. LMAO
Most of your reply is just continuing down this nonsensical fantasy. Are you ok?
You still haven’t replied to the points about European preparedness potential future russian aggression, and have now to top it all conflated casualties and deaths.
Lmao indeed. But I’m guessing you won’t be laughing the next time a cargo ship registered conveniently in the Caribbean “accidentally” causes damage to Western interests. Will you then connect your complacency to what’s happening?
You still haven’t replied to the points about European preparedness potential future russian aggression, and have now to top it all conflated casualties and deaths.Lmao indeed.
Russians have treachery going for them, and that’s about it. As far as military might is concerned, you can watch Russian soldiers, pilots, operators, drivers, vehicles explode in Ukraine. Up close and personal footage.
But I’m guessing you won’t be laughing the next time a cargo ship registered conveniently in the Caribbean “accidentally” causes damage to Western interests. Will you then connect your complacency to what’s happening?
Sabotage and treachery. This is what you do when you don’t have the Might. Whatever master plan you’re trying to spell out is an increasingly lame Hail Mary. If you want an accurate assessment of what they’re capable of militarily, land, air, or sea, watch them bleed during the Special Military Operation.
Cool! And since “sabotage and treachery” are perfectly capable of dealing great damage to Ukraine and other European nations alike, we should not be gung ho about Russia.
I mean this was true 20 years ago, it wasn’t as obvious before they invaded Georgia in 2008 (let alone now), but multi decade research (including research that accounts for preference falsification) has clearly shown a consistent level of support among a strong majority of russian society for genocidal imperialism.
Propaganda works.
Russian society’s genuine love for genocidal imperialism has nothing to do with propaganda (if that’s what you were referring to).
Mind you, they are fully capable of change, they just don’t want to and have no incentive to do (Westerners enabling and promoting their victim-hood narratives only contribute to this).
Curious how he defines “ready”.
Ready to fuck around. Not ready to find out.
Threatening and posturing to destabilize Europe and NATO, while going heavily on grey zone warfare and divisive misinformation campaigns. At the top, should not want any kinetic warfare against NATO, but rhetoric, ‘yes’ men, and arrogance may make some think they can and should.
Also and as somebody else pointed out, if makes sense for him to try and scare European nations so that they refrain from sending as many weapons and ammo to Ukraine because of thinking they might need those to defend themselves from Russia.
So a sabble-rattling discourse and even the recent air-space intrusions by Russian military planes are cheap ways of trying to get the strategical gain of Ukraine receiving fewer weapons from the rest of Europe and even if those things fail he loses nothing from doing them (at this point, he’s hardly going to get in a worst situation than he already put himself in).
It makes absolute sense to pursue a strategy where at best you gain something and at worst you lose nothing.
Now, if the response to the Russian intrusion in European airspace had been for European nations to set up and enforce a no fly for Russia inside Ukraine, that would’ve definitelly been a loss for him (at the very least the rest of Europe would protect Western Ukraine from Russian drones and air assets, freeing Ukranian assets to be used elsewhere), but the leaderships of European nations have yet to show a willingness or capability to act decisivelly like that as a group: even the help with weapons and ammo took ages to get going properly, was riddled with “red lines” (like “no tanks”, then “no jets”, then “no long range cruise missiles” and who could forget the whole “can’t be used against Russian territory” artificial limitation) and there was a lot of feet-dragging, especially from Germany) so actual direct intervention even if only with air assets doesn’t seem likely as response to “mere” Russian air space intrusions and unconventional warfare that can be denied (cyber attacks, election interference, support for extreme political forces, cutting of undersea cables and so on).
That’s Putin, always claiming he’s got a royal flush even when just holding a pair to try to intimidate the opponent into folding. It’s the same every time.
Saddest part is his grand strategy is literally open source, i.e. “Foundations of Geopolitics”, written by a Russian ultra nationalist, taught in Russian military academy’s. Main points are weakening NATO and US by supporting internal strife and divisions, allowing Russia to take back its “land” and sphere of influence.
Top many willing useful idiots for them to use. . .
So: divide and rule, and do as much imperialism as they can get away with.
Guy must be some kinda fuckin’ genius.
I read that book, boy it’s a steaming crock of shit. They are following the worst book second to mein kampf that has soo many misconceptions that you really get a sense on why Russia is such a shithole.
Yeah, but that’s kind of what they’re already doing, in which case it’s not news. He’s implying they have some nebulous new kind of readiness.
Maybe they do, maybe he’s just trying to get everyone on board with rearming. Which I guess is a good idea in any case.
