Major developments in the Russo-Ukraine war

[Tudo]

10 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

Literally, millions of people in Brasil live in animal like conditions in slums and nobody there gives a fuck about them. How about you focus your energy on solving that issue instead of worrying about whether Russia or Ukraine wins the war that you have nothing to do with?

Yeah, but a lot of our problems come from the colonial past (Europe-made). The US meddled multiple in our internal affairs. Last year, France, for example, suggested the "internationalization" of the Amazon forest. At the same time that European countries are the biggest buyers of illegal deforestation wood.

The worst economic crisis in 2014-2016 was mainly created by "Lava- Jato". The CIA and the FBI were involved.  This destroyed a lot of our large companies.

The west is definitely our enemy. A lot of our problems are their fault.

Edited October 13, 2022 by Tudo

[Tudo]

We need to have nukes. Because the west will try to take the Amazon forest one day probably.

Wars are going to be fought over water and rare-earth metals.

We are the second largest food exporter in the world. If they try to sanction us for building nukes, Europe will go hungry.

And I think we can build them fast compared with countries like Iran, because we have a lot of know-how involving uranium, we are even building a nuclear submarine right now.

 

 

Edited October 14, 2022 by Tudo

[trenton]

3 minutes ago, Tudo said:

WARS ARE GOING TO BE FOUGHT FOR WATER AND RARE METALS IN THE FUTURE.

I would prefer to avoid the implied yelling through typing in all caps.

On the other hand I have a question. I've heard of the water wars caused by climate change induced droughts and Saudi Arabia is already talking about water wars. In fact the drought in Syria crippled the economy to the point that it partially motivated the civil war in the region.

I haven't heard of wars for rare metals. Where did you hear about wars for metals and what metals are those? Do you know the function of these metals?

[Tudo]

10 minutes ago, trenton said:

 

I haven't heard of wars for rare metals. Where did you hear about wars for metals and what metals are those? Do you know the function of these metals?

These are metals usually used in high-tech technology and just a few countries have them.

Examples are Neodymium and Cerium.

Edited October 13, 2022 by Tudo

[slimper]

@Something Funny War is a thing because

1. the resources are limited;

2. ego thinks there are others.

Look at the nature closely. Animals are in the constant state of survival. It's only natural for humans and societies to act that way too.

So I don't think it's silly or pointless. It's how the life is if you can't protect your ego.

On the bright side, you get to see the devil lose the war more with each day. It's uplifting to see the goodness prevail. And at the same time you can gauge how much it costs for goodness to prevail in the $ and production equivalent. You need the help of the whole world to defend even half of what the other nation may throw at you.

[no_name]

1 hour ago, Tudo said:

Well, if Brazil was being invaded by NATO, I guarantee you, Ukraine wouldn't give a damn about us.

With that golden logic then… Brazil deserves to be bombed the shit out by NATO or even Russia, I think the whole world should just nuke Brazil, because it clearly doesn’t give a damn about the war in Democratic Republic of Congo or Ethiopia… 

[slimper]

@Something Funny that's not what's being survived. The idea of super-Russia is. While in part it's about money for Putin, mostly it's just an idea of the super-Russia (or USSR) that he's trying to forge into existence. It's very dumb, yes. But he's a dying old man fed with misinformation about Russia's capabilities. He's just bitten more than he could ever chew and is now choking. The problem is that russians choke with him.

Edited October 14, 2022 by slimper

[Fleetinglife]

13 hours ago, How to be wise said:

Actually, when you invade another country, like Iraq invaded Kuwait, you can. 

The invasion of Iraq wasn't justified on the grounds of the aftermath of the Gulf War of 1991, after which promptly the US sanctioned Iraq for 12 years until the full-blown military invasion and regime-change operation of Saddam Hussein in 2003.

As we know it was justified on the now-proven subsequently manufactured and false presumption and claim that Saddam's regime in Iraq was directly, and indirectly involved or was also the one orchestrating the suicide bombing of the World Trade Center, Twin Skyscraper Towers in New York, US, while in fact twelve of those sixteen suicide-bombers were from Saudia Arabia and were indoctrinated among other things with the extreme wing of fundamentalist Wahhabist Islamist ideology that has/and still has to an extent it's main sponsorship in the Islamic world from Saudia Arabia, the US and some other western countries main petroclient and oil slushfund in the M.E. up until that point, we shall see if that still remains the case in the fututre now having this current conditions and mood towards it currently in mind, and on the false amplified and trumped up moral panic and alarmist hysteric claim that his regime was in the meantime actively working on a program, under heavy crushing economic sanctions and embargoes as a 'punishment' for it's Gulf War adventurist invasion generating a huge humanitarian and actual famine inducing crisis in Iraq in the 12-year time span in the meantime before the invasion, for manufacturing weapons of mass destruction to target American troops in the Middle East.

Not to mention the fact that the US and some other western countries like France in the Iraq-Iran war almost openly publicly and actively backed Saddam Hussein with some modern tech and weapons in just 2-3 years prior to the Gulf War in invading Iran, which was then seen as reactionary clerical Islamist theocratic state regime that needs to be overthrown and strangled as soon as possible while it's weak in its cradle in order to get the Shah back in power and to secure that sweet Persian gulf oil for extraction for western private multinational oil companies for a cheap price of course.

What's even more devilish and deceptory in the invasion justification itself is that a NATO country, the US in this case, for the first and one only time still in NATO history called upon Article 5, on the basis that it was attacked on its own soil, to call upon other NATO members to go with it in Afghanistan to jointly conduct bombing, miltarily invade the country and subsequently then conduct counter-terrorist operations within it, because the Taliban helped shelter and provide logistics and some collaboration to Osama bin Laden right before and after the 9/11 bombing while Saudia Arabia where the main bulk of the ideologically motivated terrorists that carried out that terrorist attack where from was magically left off the hook, spared any shared guilt, burden or responsibility for directly or indirectly providing a lot of the ideological basis behind the attacks, while at the same time engaging in regime-change operations of the Taliban government in Afghanistan as well and beginning its attempt of nation-building for the long-term, and it also tried to goad some other NATO members to invade Iraq as well on that same basis and justification and false claims and manufactured, distortedly presented evidence that Saddam Hussein was also involved in the 9/11 bombings, which most of them as far as I am aware of refused, except for Amerophile, cringe part of Poland, undermining it's until then principally held historical legacy as an often defensive, historically victimized, invaded and occupied buffer country with that hypocritical, cringe move, that actually sends some of its active detachments there together with the main invasion force.

The fact also that France, which was aware that it was also actively backing militarily and economically Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war, outwardly refused, out of not wanting to jump in its own mouth, to participate in the invasion of Iraq, a country that it actively backed not some fifteen years prior and goading it to try to defeat Iran in the war in order to collapse it's newly founded unfavorable to it regime there, instead of the US or Britain, says volumes in itself about the actual proven, existing ulterior motives that went behind the justification behind that invasion operation and plan as well.

So in short, to recap, a country headed by an unfavorable brutal, authoritarian figure for the Western economic interests at that particular moment, not from before I assume when he invaded another country ten to three years prior in which he was actually partially militarily and economically aided by some western countries to do so because that current regime is unfavorable to you namely the Islamic Republic of Iran, screwing up your economic interests at home and abroad in the Middle East by spiking up the oil prices because of his still partial at that moment invasion and occupation of the north of Kuwait, where the main oil field dispute was, until after the announcement of operation Desert Storm the Iraqi military proceeded then to invade it's capital city as well is you think a justification enough to bomb and invade a country, as a whole after imposing crushing economic sanctions on it, 12 years after on the basis on an unrelated incident to itself that involved most of the perpetrators coming from a country that also could be known to be even more barbaric, vicious and brutal, or you could say socially regressive and authoritarian in some social aspects than Iraq at that said time and which at that time most promoted and sponsored the ideology which motivated the main bulk of those perpetrators to carry out those world-famous terroristic attacks and acts but that is also needed for your oil flow and economic interests as a economically key partner and client in the Middle East?

13 hours ago, How to be wise said:

This statement is proof of your bias toward Russia.

I’m English.

The fact, that you also said that you are currently living or from a country that was one of the main junior partners of the US in the invasion and the subsequent war-torn occupation zone partialization of Iraq during the regime change operation, namely Britain, while seemingly brazenly, proudly and in the open, without a degree of self-reflection and guilt, gish-galloping on inventing ad hoc reasons that first come to your mind as you go about the stereotypes of the history of that country for the justification of its bombing and invasion based on directly unrelated historical events and engaging in deliberate or undeliberate distortion and deception about the actual historical events and facts to seemingly fool people who know no better on it's history that led up to the invasion while simultaneously projecting on and claiming biases on others based on nationality is so biased, clueless, morally empty and hypocritical that it's astounding that there is not an actual degree of self-reflection and degree of guilt and consciousness regarding that involved here.

You project and claim Leo is blinded by bias that you conveniently invented for him to project yourself (or perhaps your own guilty consciousness) upon by you asserting for him, almost as a nationalist authoritarian would, his main nationality for him to identify with in the Russia-Ukraine war, while you as a claimed and identified with Brit seemingly openly cheeringly and without a tinge of seeming guilt and shame actively go on about inventing cherry picked reasons from some selective pulled through events of Iraq's history as you go in justifying your country's past military involvement in the bombing and invasion of Iraq which left an estimated almost million people dead in total in its wake and aftermath several years after is so hypocritically morally empty and vacuous, astoundingly ignorant and borderline criminal that one should not even have to point it towards and out to someone if he is that un-self-reflective and unconscious regarding his own countries of origin and identification with past not so long ago crimes.

 

 

 

Edited October 14, 2022 by Fleetinglife

[Hello from Russia]

Even if on this forum we have so much bias and knee jerk reactions we are fucked as a society

Time to retreat to a cave or deep in the woods

[Revolutionary Think]

On 9/21/2022 at 11:05 PM, Nilsi said:

Russia is not just gonna roll over and die, while having a full nuclear arsenal at hand.

Well Russia is not Putin. Will the Russian people really want the entire world to be destroyed just because of Putin and his disgusting regime? 

[Hatfort]

Russia is attacking the Ukrainian electricity system...

Uh, seems Russia is waiting for the winter to use cold as a weapon. Once again.

Putin called 300.000 Russian men for his army. He may not need more than 100.000 then, or less, if I know anything about negotiation.

Plus Germany was dependent on Russian gas to have its industry functioning in winter.

[Hatfort]

Russia declares martial law in occupied territories Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson.

He is trying to send the message that these territories are already Russian, although they are not recognized internationally. Most part of them, not all, which is important, are in fact under Russian military control. The population of Crimea was 90% Russian, I don't know what the percentage can be in these other four regions, in this war context it's impossible to know, but that will be a determining factor too in medium-long-term. Russia will do as much as possible to increase it to their favor, and won't do it cleanly.

[trenton]

@Hatfort thanks for the update.

I was waiting for the situation in Kherson to clarify. It seems that the Russian army is preparing to retreat. Ukraine is likely to take back a significant amount of territory in the region over the next week.

It is not immediately obvious to me why the Russian army is using its kamikaze drones And cruise missiles to target civilian infrastructure. It's possible that they are planning to weaken Ukraine's defense in Kyiv before invading through Belarus. Ukraine has its northern border fortified in case this happens.

[trenton]

A few weeks later there have been some major developments.

So far the war is mostly a stalemate with a lot of back and forth in terms of the territory occupied. The same cannot be said for the vehicles and soldiers.

The Russian army is sending less advanced equipment to the front line, including cars without armor. Conscripts are surrendering for two common reasons. One, they are abandoned by their commanders. Two, friendly fire is a serious issue in the Russian army. The problem is that Russian artillery fires in the general direction of the enemy with less precision. The soldiers close to the front line often  get hit because of this. The gap in technology is becoming noticeable and problematic when the Ukrainian army receives all kinds of up to date equipment from NATO.

The daily casualties have been increasing as untrained men are sent to the front line. Apparently, Russia is getting low on tanks and missiles, making it increasingly dependent on North Korea. Belarus does not seem to be joining the war, which is good news for Ukraine.

One thing I can't tell is if the numbers are inflated. Is Russia really getting low on tanks? How many are left? Counting the losses for both sides remains complicated. I don't know if I trust all of these numbers, especially since it is a common point for propaganda to make the soldiers feel high morale like they are winning.

[thisintegrated]

Russia's ""elite special forces"" just got completely wiped out, again.  Luckily they've still got a few 100k untrained kids and homeless drunks to throw at this.

[trenton]

3 hours ago, thisintegrated said:

Russia's ""elite special forces"" just got completely wiped out, again.  Luckily they've still got a few 100k untrained kids and homeless drunks to throw at this.

It really is looking pretty bad for Russian soldiers on the ground as the casualties continue to rapidly increase.

Ukraine said that they should be ready to take back Kherson within a few more weeks, hence they refused the ceasefire. So far Kherson is still at a standstill for the moment. Ukraine is not advancing, but Russia moved a lot of civilians out of there not too long ago.

[trenton]

Kherson is liberated.

The update I have been anticipating. However, the president of Ukraine is cautious of the media's celebration. Although, Ukraine has taken back a significant chunk of territory, about 20,000 Russian soldiers are estimated to be ready for redeployment on another front.

The fighting near Bakmut city and the Kharkiv region have been very intense and the future reinforcements may make the war more difficult in these regions. In exchange Ukraine has put itself in a position to strike various military targets near the Crimean peninsula.

The president is wise to see this as not an outright celebration, but as a change in the Russian strategy. The war is far from over.

[Blackhawk]

Weird how Russia gave up Cherson without a fight.

[trenton]

22 minutes ago, Blackhawk said:

Weird how Russia gave up Cherson without a fight.

Actually, this is not surprising.

The Russian soldiers had supply issues due to being on the other side of a river where the bridges were destroyed by Ukrainian missile strikes.

Furthermore, the Russian lines were collapsing rapidly in other regions and reinforcements are needed to stabilize the army.

[Blackhawk]

@trenton I see.