Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire PUTIN PUFTERS, Mass mobilization, More Orcs for the slaughter

I don’t think Russia or the US planned on a war like this.

For Russia’s part I think they planned on going in there, taking the territory they wanted and making a quick deal after showing people they weren’t fcking around. They didn’t plan on this level of foreign support that is in and of itself so damaging to the Ukraine and the western nations themselves.

I think the US hawks saw an opportunity to make Russia bleed and took it.

The danger is that the Russians aren’t going to back down with this being in their backyard anymore than we would if we had invaded northern Mexico. And the American plan is sort of ad hoc with no real plan of what victory looks like except for complete Russian capitulation which isn’t realistic unless there is a direct war between the US and Russia.

No matter how many billions of dollars we send them, Ukraine will never able to defeat Russia on the battlefield. I guess from an American hawk perspective the best outcome is a bleeding sore that costs Russia men and money and eventually fatally undermines Russia and the Putin regime. Of course, the problem with that is that history shows us that such uncertainty would likely bring a MORE hardline and anti-western regime into being.

It’s a very dangerous, wasteful, and useless endeavor that if it doesn’t get us killed in the short term, is going to have cascading ramifications for decades to come if not longer with all kinds of unforeseeable outcomes.

That is a very astute and succinct analysis, JoeBob.

The only parts I disagree with is that you state Putin only wanted some territory and that Ukraine cannot defeat Russia.

Putin tried for Kiev early on and would have taken the whole country if he could have.

Regarding the second assertion, I guess it may depend on the definition of “defeat,” but in 1917 Russia’s involvement in WWI sparked the Russian Revolution.

Afghan guerilla fighters repelled the Russians in the 80’s and were one of the factors causing the break up of the Soviet Union.

Only Stalin was able to maintain political stability AND run a costly (both blood and treasure) war, and he did so through an extremely oppressive totalitarian state, which essentially made ongoing efforts in WWII the better alternative. Of course, he also had the Nazis’ butchery and mass executions to help him keep the people in line.

Putin may poison a few adversaries here and there, but he’s no Stalin, and I’m not sure if he could implement such practices today with the internet and social media, etc. To run such state, you need mass censorship and propaganda. I don’t think the Russian people would allow it today.

At the end of the day, Putin launched an invasion that was not clearly necessary from the Russian perspective. As the bodies pile up, his support will erode.

I don’t think Russia or the US planned on a war like this.

For Russia’s part I think they planned on going in there, taking the territory they wanted and making a quick deal after showing people they weren’t fcking around. They didn’t plan on this level of foreign support that is in and of itself so damaging to the Ukraine and the western nations themselves.

I think the US hawks saw an opportunity to make Russia bleed and took it.

The danger is that the Russians aren’t going to back down with this being in their backyard anymore than we would if we had invaded northern Mexico. And the American plan is sort of ad hoc with no real plan of what victory looks like except for complete Russian capitulation which isn’t realistic unless there is a direct war between the US and Russia.

No matter how many billions of dollars we send them, Ukraine will never able to defeat Russia on the battlefield. I guess from an American hawk perspective the best outcome is a bleeding sore that costs Russia men and money and eventually fatally undermines Russia and the Putin regime. Of course, the problem with that is that history shows us that such uncertainty would likely bring a MORE hardline and anti-western regime into being.

It’s a very dangerous, wasteful, and useless endeavor that if it doesn’t get us killed in the short term, is going to have cascading ramifications for decades to come if not longer with all kinds of unforeseeable outcomes.

US and UK Evonomist send letters of support for the price cap on Russian seaborne oil to Janet Yellen.
Price caps should be in place late November, early December.
Fortune, WSJ

That is a very astute and succinct analysis, JoeBob.

The only parts I disagree with is that you state Putin only wanted some territory and that Ukraine cannot defeat Russia.

Putin tried for Kiev early on and would have taken the whole country if he could have.

Regarding the second assertion, I guess it may depend on the definition of “defeat,” but in 1917 Russia’s involvement in WWI sparked the Russian Revolution.

Afghan guerilla fighters repelled the Russians in the 80’s and were one of the factors causing the break up of the Soviet Union.

Only Stalin was able to maintain political stability AND run a costly (both blood and treasure) war, and he did so through an extremely oppressive totalitarian state, which essentially made ongoing efforts in WWII the better alternative. Of course, he also had the Nazis’ butchery and mass executions to help him keep the people in line.

Putin may poison a few adversaries here and there, but he’s no Stalin, and I’m not sure if he could implement such practices today with the internet and social media, etc. To run such state, you need mass censorship and propaganda. I don’t think the Russian people would allow it today.

At the end of the day, Putin launched an invasion that was not clearly necessary from the Russian perspective. As the bodies pile up, his support will erode.

It was only necessary if Russia wanted to survive the coming assault by your NWO buds.

Keep telling us what MSNBC says. It sounds good to the puppets.

Modern Russia is not the USSR. There are certainly analogies to be made, but it is NOT the USSR. That is something that a surprising number of folks either refuse to acknowledge or don't get.

Ukraine ain’t Imperial Germany which possessed the best army to ever exist. And Russia wasn’t militarily beaten in Afghanistan. Like us, they just got tired of fcking around and went home.

That’s the point about Ukraine. They won’t ever “just go home”. They consider it an existential war.

According to the Russian intelligence community, in the past two days, the United States has completed plans for a possible military invasion against Russia.

It sounds like the Ukrainian SBU used the driver of the truck to unknowingly and involuntarily involve himself in the “suicide” explosion on the bridge. If that’s true and I believe it is then as far as I am concerned that’s a war crime in and of itself. Soldiers mistreating soldiers on the battlefield is one thing, Ukrainian military using hospitals, schools and civilians as cover while they fire from those areas is another thing but using an unknowing civilian truck driver to drive the explosives and then remotely detonating the truck is a despicable war crime and cold blooded murder of their own innocent civilians. I don’t subscribe to war crimes in the same way that the modern media tries to force that narrative. War in general is a crime so when “human rights advocates” are picking flyshit out of pepper and calling everything a war crime I lose interest. This action however has me angered because while innocent civilians die in war in disproportionate numbers the intentional murder of the Ukrainian truck driver by the Ukrainian military is a despicable crime and it is absolutely inexcusable in my mind!

If this is how the Ukrainians expect to win then God have mercy on their black souls, they deserve everything they receive! That is NOT how organized militaries conduct themselves if they desire any semblance of support from civilized nations…unfortunately I’m no longer convinced that we are a civilized society…

Based on what? What info? You have solved a crime based on something that 'sounds right to you'? Or do you have other info?

It just sounds a little conclusory. Maybe it did happen that way, but maybe not. I don't think we have the facts to make a decision either way.

That is a very astute and succinct analysis, JoeBob.

The only parts I disagree with is that you state Putin only wanted some territory and that Ukraine cannot defeat Russia.

Putin tried for Kiev early on and would have taken the whole country if he could have.

Regarding the second assertion, I guess it may depend on the definition of “defeat,” but in 1917 Russia’s involvement in WWI sparked the Russian Revolution.

Afghan guerilla fighters repelled the Russians in the 80’s and were one of the factors causing the break up of the Soviet Union.

Only Stalin was able to maintain political stability AND run a costly (both blood and treasure) war, and he did so through an extremely oppressive totalitarian state, which essentially made ongoing efforts in WWII the better alternative. Of course, he also had the Nazis’ butchery and mass executions to help him keep the people in line.

Putin may poison a few adversaries here and there, but he’s no Stalin, and I’m not sure if he could implement such practices today with the internet and social media, etc. To run such state, you need mass censorship and propaganda. I don’t think the Russian people would allow it today.

At the end of the day, Putin launched an invasion that was not clearly necessary from the Russian perspective. As the bodies pile up, his support will erode.