Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Prediction Thread: When Will Ukraine Conquer Russia

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Geronimo
    replied
    Originally posted by Berzerker View Post

    Russia didn't bring an army to conquer Ukraine, much less the old USSR or Europe and that was obvious to unbiased observers. Their plan was to occupy Ukraine in the east and send an army south from Belarus to Kiev so Zelensky would deal and he did... Ukraine would lose the Donbas with limitations on their future military. Putin's mistake was thinking the USA couldn't talk Zelensky into sacrificing thousands of Ukrainians for Joe Biden. Course Putin aint the one who'd assassinate Zelensky if he made peace.

    I'm sure the goal for Russia now is to neutralize the Ukrainian right wing so it doesn't rule Kiev when this is over but I dont see the USA ending its war, not when we still have willing cannon fodder. One of the reasons why the USA invaded Iraq was to attract Islamists to our preferred battlefield. I think that became Russia's plan after Zelensky violated their deal. Putin knows the USA and Nazis are the power in Ukraine so Russia built defenses and invited Azov to attack.

    The west supported ISIS in Syria to regime change Assad, not so ISIS could take over. If they had we would have wiped them out and replaced them with our people. That is Azov's fate in Ukraine. We dont really want Nazis running Kiev, we want them dying in a war with Russia. Two birds with one stone... What better way to attract the world's Nazis to their deaths. Soros is a Ukrainian Jew with a personal history with the Nazis, I dont think he likes Azov, do you? I know Soros hates Russia but he must hate Banderites too. I think that fairly reflects the broad consensus in the west.
    Apart from insisting that Washington could assassinate Zelensky but that Putin wouldn't or couldn't this entire post seems more plausible than your usual "Ukraine is a Washington puppet invading the Donbas at US behest" narrative and your "ISIS were created and funded by the US" narrative.

    I agree that it is possible that Putin wanted to conquer the Donbas and force Zelensky to deal with a march to Kiev. I don't agree that Zelensky ever signed a peace deal with Putin, and I'm sure Russia withdrew back across the Belarus border because the Kiev campaign had become a total fustercluck that threatened to otherwise lose all that war material. I don't think any foreign power could have stopped zelensky from signing anything but I certainly think he didn't really want to sign away anything and he certainly could be convinced that Ukraine's allies would be there for him. I *do* think they broke that promise and delivered far less military aid that should have been the case if they were determined to make sure Ukraine would win. There was no signed deal with Putin for Zelensky to violate. I don't see why you have difficulty accepting that.

    Russia no doubt may have hoped to porcupine against a Ukrainian offensive and follow up with an counter offensive as Ukrainian resources depleted. Where it goes from there might not diverge much between our PoVs Berz.

    I don't see why you think the west had to support ISIS whatsover. ISIS has considerable military resources to bring to bare all on its own and they did not *ever* control anywhere near a majority of the original anti-Assad opposition forces. It makes perfect sense that Washington would try to shore up the "moderates" while Assad and Russia would focus on destroying them first. Assad and Russia waited until ISIS was nearly destroyed before they attacked them at all. If the US had been able to somehow work with an abomination like ISIS, Assad would be history. Assad remains in power because nobody in Washington could even bring themselves to think about helping ISIS, or any other AQ fragment whatsoever. How is that difficult for you to understand?

    Leave a comment:


  • Berzerker
    replied
    Originally posted by Geronimo View Post

    I actually agree that Russia is likely to win at this point. Essentially any territorial gains at Ukraine's expense at all will constitute a victory over Ukraine and when the dust settles Russia will retain a large chunk of it. Russia was horribly inept and their entire operation devolved into a clumsy fustercluck, but they had a large enough economy to absorb all that and Ukraine didn't.
    Russia didn't bring an army to conquer Ukraine, much less the old USSR or Europe and that was obvious to unbiased observers. Their plan was to occupy Ukraine in the east and send an army south from Belarus to Kiev so Zelensky would deal and he did... Ukraine would lose the Donbas with limitations on their future military. Putin's mistake was thinking the USA couldn't talk Zelensky into sacrificing thousands of Ukrainians for Joe Biden. Course Putin aint the one who'd assassinate Zelensky if he made peace.

    I'm sure the goal for Russia now is to neutralize the Ukrainian right wing so it doesn't rule Kiev when this is over but I dont see the USA ending its war, not when we still have willing cannon fodder. One of the reasons why the USA invaded Iraq was to attract Islamists to our preferred battlefield. I think that became Russia's plan after Zelensky violated their deal. Putin knows the USA and Nazis are the power in Ukraine so Russia built defenses and invited Azov to attack.

    The west supported ISIS in Syria to regime change Assad, not so ISIS could take over. If they had we would have wiped them out and replaced them with our people. That is Azov's fate in Ukraine. We dont really want Nazis running Kiev, we want them dying in a war with Russia. Two birds with one stone... What better way to attract the world's Nazis to their deaths. Soros is a Ukrainian Jew with a personal history with the Nazis, I dont think he likes Azov, do you? I know Soros hates Russia but he must hate Banderites too. I think that fairly reflects the broad consensus in the west.

    Leave a comment:


  • Berzerker
    replied
    I'm seeing more stories from conveyors of the narrative Ukraine has lost

    Leave a comment:


  • Geronimo
    replied
    Originally posted by Berzerker View Post

    very Wilsonian of you... but what brain trust actually thought Russia would lose?
    I actually agree that Russia is likely to win at this point. Essentially any territorial gains at Ukraine's expense at all will constitute a victory over Ukraine and when the dust settles Russia will retain a large chunk of it. Russia was horribly inept and their entire operation devolved into a clumsy fustercluck, but they had a large enough economy to absorb all that and Ukraine didn't.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dauphin
    replied
    Dimitry Peskov.

    Leave a comment:


  • Geronimo
    replied
    Originally posted by Berzerker View Post
    "Boris Johnson came to Kiev and said that we will not sign anything with them at all, and lets just fight" - Zelensky aide
    this wouldn't prove anything. Who was this aide in any case?

    Leave a comment:


  • Berzerker
    commented on 's reply
    He kept mum about the deal for the Ukrainian negotiators. Please run down a list of his lies regarding Ukraine so we can compare it to the tome of our lies.

  • Berzerker
    replied
    "In an historic move, the Justice Department on Wednesday announced it is unsealing war crimes charges against four Russia-affiliated military personnel with disturbing details of their alleged torture and inhumane treatment of a U.S. national in Ukraine following Russia's invasion of the country last year.

    This is the first time ever that the department has filed charges under the U.S. war crimes statute."


    Leave a comment:


  • pchang
    commented on 's reply
    But, we do know that UAE will not be honoring anything as pesky as an Interpol Red Notice.

  • BeBMan
    replied
    Putin visits the UAE. At this point it is not known if he has enough alcohol, drugs and grenades on his plane.

    Leave a comment:


  • pchang
    replied
    “Nothing Putin promises is worth the paper it’s written on.” - Random guy on internet who KNOWS THINGS

    Leave a comment:


  • Ming
    replied
    Many guilty people plead innocence. But I guess your videos tell you to believe them too.

    Leave a comment:


  • Berzerker
    replied
    "Boris Johnson came to Kiev and said that we will not sign anything with them at all, and lets just fight" - Zelensky aide

    Leave a comment:


  • Geronimo
    replied
    Originally posted by Berzerker View Post

    So Biden armed Nazis to kill eastern Ukrainians is your proof Biden pursued peace? I #d your questions:

    1) Putin and the 'separatists' agreed to Minsk I&II and were negotiating peace right up to and shortly after the '22 attack. What has Biden done other than arm Nazis and sabotage peace efforts? If there are 'fine people' on both sides why arm them? Your argument equates a few 'little green men' with Nazi tattoos to a battalion or regiment of Nazis killing eastern Ukrainians. Putin is in charge of Russia, Azov/USA is in charge of Kiev. Millions of eastern Ukrainians were attacked by Nazis with our weapons and support and you equate that to a few Nazis defending the victims.
    Actions speak louder than words Berz. The Russian reporting soldiers and contractors were required to immediately leave the Donbas per Minsk. They never did. What was there for Ukraine to implement of Minsk in the face of that? Your little green men with Nazi tattoos have killed far more people than the Ukrainian side. Why do you get to dismiss them? Millions of Ukrainians were attacked by Russian weapons. There is no measure, be it property damage or reported injuries and fatalities by which Ukraine has killed more people in the Donbas than the Separatists, even before the Russian "special military operation" ballooned those numbers by more than an order of magnitude. Once the separatists (operating with active duty FSB officers at a that) began military operations (which was well before any substantial US military aid to anyone in Ukraine) arming anybody fighting them was about as much as anybody could do in the name of peace in the Donbass.

    Originally posted by Berzerker View Post
    2) Wouldn't have been a war if Biden armed the Donbas instead of Kiev... That alone should speak volumes
    How would it not have been a war? Russia has claimed all of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson in addition to all of the Donbas and those "Nazis" who have been operating in the Donbas overwhelmingly consisted of formations founded by Donbas residents appalled at Separatist depradations. Could World War 2 have been stopped by arming the Third Reich instead of the enemies of Third Reich? The reason the Separatists were at war wasn't because nazis attacked them. It was because the the Separatists were an armed insurrection...a war.

    Originally posted by Berzerker View Post
    3) I dont know, but I do know arming Nazis to kill eastern Ukrainians is not pursuing peace
    Oh good because it turns out they were armed to kill Nazi Separatist armies instead.

    Originally posted by Berzerker View Post
    4) Can anyone apply now? Yes, it would have prevented almost a decade of war in Ukraine.
    Why? Because Russia said so? Did giving the Sudetenland away prevent a war Berz?

    Originally posted by Berzerker View Post
    5-6-7-8) Chamberlain was buying time to build the RAF for the coming Battle of Britain and Putin is not Hitler... your analogies continue to amuse
    History doesn't repeat it rhymes. When Russian's say they are going to sort out all of eastern Europe by force of arms why don't you believe them? You clearly believe everything else they tell you. For Berz I suppose history is useless since it will all be amusing analogy by definition anyway.

    Originally posted by Berzerker View Post
    9-10) There would have been no coup and no war in the Donbas without Obama and Biden backing Nazis
    If there was no coup what would have been different? Since, in fact, there was no coup there would be, by definition, no difference. Obama and Biden took their sweet time backing Nazis. By the time they got around to doing it war was already a reality in the Donbas. How could not backing them have averted it? What is this mechanism by which disarming enemies of the Separatist military operation would lead to no Separatist Military operation when it began before any military formation in Ukraine had received so much as one red cent of foreign funding?

    Originally posted by Berzerker View Post
    11) Stay Ukrainian, but Obama backed a coup driving their democratically elected leader from office, so... they separated and Obama sent Nazis to kill them

    how dare Russians defend them, huh?
    Backed a coup how? landing marines in Kiev? power changed hands literally by act of parliament Berz. You call that a coup. Do you claim that any parliamentary change in power resulting at least in part from reactions to events you believe to be false flag becomes a coup? Doesn't that make every single election potentially a coup if it occurs in presence of fake news that some people believe? How is the claim that Obama sent Nazis to kill people in the Donbas for separating not extraordinary? Where is the evidence?



    Leave a comment:


  • Ming
    replied
    Blah blah blah... Putin attacked Ukraine ONCE AGAIN to grab more land for Russia. He is not protecting anybody... instead, his troops killed and raped the people he was supposed to be saving.
    But feel free to consider him a savior and Biden the cause of all evil... Russia is defending NOBODY. Just killing and raping them.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X