• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    162
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Russian officials publicly assure the world that their invasion will only last 1 week due to their overwhelming military superiority.

    109 weeks later without a victory, losing twice as many soldiers and equipment, Russian officials swear that the US, not an active combatant, is going to be so embarrassed.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      218 months ago

      I was watching an analysis on the 2023 progress of the war. The author said that while he acknowledges that Russia seems to have the favour making the war a stalemate and took more strategic, albeit small, locations than Ukraine did; this leads to Catch-22 for Kremlin that the more Ukraine struggles, the more money Ukraine will receive which is not on Russia’s favour.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        268 months ago

        There’s also the fact that Russia never really seemed to account for most of its monetary and material taps getting turned off. When you’re (ALLEGEDLY) throwing conscripts out there without even a single full magazine of ammo, you’re burning through old post-WWII ammo stocks, and constantly having to beg old SSR states “hey can we buy/borrow some of your tanks and APCs please,” it doesn’t look great.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          The trouble is, the material taps haven’t turned off they’ve been rerouted. Apparently enforcing sanctions is hard and more importantly also pisses off your donor base consisting of amoral business types. You can find any number of articles of Ukrainian complaining (even years into the war) that they find western electronics in downed Russian missiles.

  • Billiam
    link
    fedilink
    English
    122
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    The Kremlin warned that American support for Ukraine could turn into a decade-long folly, urging the U.S. to not oppose its invasion of the country as Congress appears set to pass a $60 billion aid package.

    Buried lede: Russia thinks its “three-day special military operation to de-nazify remove US biolabs de-NATO Ukraine resurrect the Soviet Union” could take a decade. 😂

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      338 months ago

      Also, they think they might need a decade to defeat a power that has a fifth of its military size, and which has, so far, roundly managed to make a laughingstock out of much of the Russian military.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        168 months ago

        Let’s assume Ukraine and all the funding it receives does delay it a decade and Russia eventually wins.

        Isn’t that still a resounding success delaying Russia by 10 years and crippling them from the extended war?

        It might suck for Ukraine, but from a foreign policy perspective that’s a success

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          108 months ago

          💯💯💯 these fuckers are enlisting prisoners and using 50 year old tanks. Their readiness is supremely fucked RIGHT NOW let alone a year or more from now.

          Any victory, if ever, will be phyrric at best.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Uhh no it isn’t? What the fuck? The very fact of a war is a foreign policy disaster if you care about the well being of Europe at all. God I hate America sometimes

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            28 months ago

            The war is inevitable. America doesn’t decide if Russia invades Ukraine or not. It can only decide if it will help Ukraine or not.

            If america helps Ukraine, they will severely cripple Russia, thus making later invasions unlikely.

            I america doesn’t help Ukraine, Russia will just get what they want and move on to invade more countries, leading to more wars.

            You can’t just give a flower to the invader, say “peace” and suddenly there are no more wars.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1128 months ago

    Really?

    Last I checked, we haven’t had almost 500k casualties and lost billions in military craft to old mothballed weapons we since moved on from.

    • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin
      link
      fedilink
      English
      818 months ago

      It’s actually kinda incredible for Russia to have not realized that the US is literally just letting Ukraine integrate itself into NATO standards by training on and building up NATO standard equipment as it runs out of the shitty Soviet era alternatives

      Meanwhile Moscow is instead developing a dependency on Iranian and Chinese made military hardware, stuff that neither is especially willing to part with given their own war plans.

      The US could 1000% just barely provide enough aid to tactically let Russia chew its teeth out trying to break Ukraine, but it’s sending what Ukraine needs to win whenever it can because the US sees Ukraine winning as more important than Russia losing at this point.

      • BombOmOm
        link
        fedilink
        English
        55
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        US is literally just letting Ukraine integrate itself into NATO standards by training on and building up NATO standard equipment as it runs out of the shitty Soviet era alternatives

        Not just Ukraine, either! All the NATO Eastern Bloc countries donated their Soviet equipment (and much more) and are actively rearming and retraining their own militaries on NATO standard equipment.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        47
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Unfortunately “barely enough” is closer to the mark. Ukraine should’ve had this funding last year and we should’ve been close to the next round at this point. If this is actually all America can muster when it is committed to “winning” then then thats a bit sad and scary considering the incompetent broke ass country we are trying to beat while having homecourt advantage.

        The only thing that gives me solace is the thought that this is carefully architected to bleed out Russia and not actually a show of real force.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          258 months ago

          You have to remember that half of the political parties in the US are owned by and promote Russian interests. That’s the only reason it took 8 months to get this funding approved, and it was approved in spite of the former fuckwit president.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                18 months ago

                The Black Sea Ukrainian Shelf was discovered in 2012 to contain an estimated 2 trillion cubic meters of natural gas. Access to a huge portion of it depends on Crimea which was annexed in 2014.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        68 months ago

        US is literally just letting Ukraine integrate itself into NATO standards by training on and building up NATO standard equipment

        Excellent point. Due to the equipment Ukraine now has the west is at a point where they will stand to lose a lot of valuable technology if Russia wins making it necessary for western intervention if things go bad for Ukraine.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        88 months ago

        At the risk of being jingoistic, this type of opponent is exactly what our military is designed to utterly destroy. If the US was an active participant it would have very quickly wiped the floor with the Russian army and would be dealng with Russian backed insurgents in the east.

        Ukraine has been beating them with the stuff we routinely throw away (when the Republicans don’t get in the way), I am convinced they have no non nuclear answer to our actual military.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          40 years ago maybe, but afaik after 20 years of Iraq and Afghanistan the us army has shifted quite far into focusing on counterinsurgency and away from fighting vs mass armor and artillery

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            18 months ago

            I mean, they’ve gotten way better at it, but most of their equipment and doctrine are still targeted at utterly destroying a near peer level threat. The f-22 wasn’t designed to fight insurgents, nor is it suited to that task.

            I would think that the USAF would happily establish and easily enforce a no fly zone over Ukraine and could probably pull it off within a few days of getting the order conservatively.

            There was the story a few years ago when a well equipped and trained Wagner battalion “accidentally” picked a flight with a US army unit or base in Syria and got immediately demolished.

            Writing this out definitely feels like braggadocio and it likely is. But I would think the Russians don’t want to find out why we don’t have universal healthcare first hand.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            18 months ago

            The USA has plans, thousands of plans and how to modify them agains the russians (well the USSR), and that’s as important as having the right tools/weapons.

      • Captain Aggravated
        link
        fedilink
        English
        158 months ago

        By contrast, the United States lost fewer than 2,500 service members in the entire 20 years we were in Afghanistan.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    938 months ago

    funny that the Russkis mention Afghanistan 😅

    And as always, as long as the cunts in Russia are complaining and riding their propaganda train at full speed, we are doing something right.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      268 months ago

      These brainiacs had concerts singing Gruppa Krovi from Kino to recruits early in the war. A literal Afghanistan-era Soviet anti-war anthem. They have no sense of irony.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    828 months ago

    Hey Putin, remind me again how many days into your 3-day special military operation you are?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    648 months ago

    Russian government spokespeople say lots of things.

    Very few of them are true, or accurate.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      358 months ago

      Oh it’s a bit dumber than that. Russia tried to occupy Afghanistan in the 1980s and got fuckin romped worse than the US did and that was with peak Russian power and no near endless supply of Russia surplus for insurgents to use.

      • Ricky Rigatoni
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Maybe they’re saying Zelensky will make another 9/11 like Osama did after we supported him in Afghanistan?

        e: ya’ll ever hear the old addage “don’t downvote the messenger”? go and downvote putin or something.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        48 months ago

        USSR went there on the request of their government at the time (unlike America’s rampage invasion) and withdrew after the USA heavily armed extremely backwards Muslim extremists who were doing every war crime in the book

        It’s still a better ending than a 20 year war (u lost lmao)

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      88 months ago

      They seem say whatever would be best for them regardless of truth, so you can’t even rule out what they say like if they consistently lied.

  • Jaysyn
    link
    fedilink
    578 months ago

    Ruzzia knows all about humiliating fiascoes.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    488 months ago

    Ukraine wants the help. Afghanistan didn’t. Also, the Soviet Union did a similar thing in Afghanistan.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        338 months ago

        I always know someone doesn’t know anything about Afghanistan and its people when they refer to them as Afghani’s.

        An Afghan is a person. Afghani is a currency. Anyone who calls them Afghani doesn’t even know the right term to call the people. It is a giveaway to how little you know about them when you don’t even know what to call them.

        Meanwhile all the Chineses and Viet Congs are turning in their graves right next to the Afgani.

  • Jeena
    link
    fedilink
    English
    448 months ago

    The question is, which time Afganistan, when Russia had to get out or the US?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    368 months ago

    The difference is that Vietnam and Afghanistan were civil wars. It’s very difficult to win a war when a sizable portion of the citizens are fighting against you. Ukraine seems to be very united against a common enemy: Russia.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      The difference is that Vietnam and Afghanistan were civil wars.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas

      A civil war that’s been ongoing since 2014.

      Ukraine seems to be very united against a common enemy

      Western Ukraine, sure. But that’s not where Russia’s military is occupying territory.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    338 months ago

    Because Russia had so much success against Afghanistan themselves. Pretty sure they’ve had their asses handed to them in the far east as well.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      68 months ago

      Because Russia had so much success against Afghanistan themselves.

      Despite nominally being a staunch supporter of George Bush Jr’s War on Terror, Afghanistan was one place Putin absolutely refused to give support. You can call it cowardice or wisdom or simply being once-bitten-twice-shy, but the Graveyard of Empires isn’t the place you send in troops casually.

      Pretty sure they’ve had their asses handed to them in the far east as well.

      Do you mean the Russo-Japan War? That was over a century ago.

      With the exception of the First Chechen War, The Post-'91 Russian Federation’s record on the battlefield has generally been successful.

      Russian military leadership is well-blooded and one of the only institutions that wasn’t gutted by Perestroika. The folks who were laughing up their sleeves at the “Oversized Gas Station” when the Ukraine fight started may have underestimated the monster that was unleashed.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    248 months ago

    I mean he’s kinda right if we don’t just commit to fully helping Ukraine instead of waffling with every budget, bill, and election.

    But him saying that is a good way to motivate stubborn Americans, so he can keep on saying it. It’ll get us going.

    • andrew_bidlaw
      link
      fedilink
      English
      158 months ago

      “Time is running out for Russia,” wrote Artur Rehi, an Estonian soldier and analyst.

      That’s the phrase we hear for years now. It shouldn’t be taken into consideration. A country of 140mil and 1\4 of land that won’t back off can fight for a very long time until it runs out of resources or people. After two years it sounds like a copium and a reason to just sit and wait, while another country’s clocks are ticking faster.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        128 months ago

        Besides, isn’t China already selling ammo to them? I could very well see China selling vehicles to Russia in large quantities, even on loan – and all it will take is Russia to become even more of a Chinese satellite state.

        We tried sitting this out and it didn’t work. Ukraine’s new approach of actively making Russia hurt looks more promising.

        • andrew_bidlaw
          link
          fedilink
          English
          88 months ago

          Not China directly, but Iran and NK as proxies. Some Chinese banks stopped processing russian businesses’ payments since the start of this year. They don’t want to risk their 50% of market in EU and US over merely 3% purchases from Russia, so they themselves started to clean the room.

        • The Snark Urge
          link
          fedilink
          English
          68 months ago

          Russia becoming essentially a Chinese satellite was always how this ended. The question is how much damage is done along the way and how well our nice little international status quo fares in the meantime.

          • Icalasari
            link
            fedilink
            28 months ago

            Oddly less scared of China running Russia than I am of Putin running Russia

            I guess it’s because the Chinese government at least hasn’t seemed insane enough to make me seriously ponder if we’re about to see nuclear armageddon

            • The Snark Urge
              link
              fedilink
              English
              28 months ago

              All other things being equal, there are no benevolent dictators. One more powerful one isn’t an improvement on two weaker ones.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        68 months ago

        Well the other option would be a quick NATO operation against the russkis in Ukraine but for some reason no one want to take this route, so were kind of out of options here. I would favor a direct hit against Russia in Ukraine anytime. It would end this war quick, would cause a devastating blow against Putin and I personally think that Russia wouldn’t use any nukes, as they are their life insurance and also their big bluff against the west.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            5
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            What that operation would consist of?

            It could have different stages depending on the current situation on the battlefield. First could be to secure the airspace over Ukraine, so that we provide air support against rockets, drones, jets and helicopers of the Russians and see what they do next. If they keep the war going the next stage could include the use of JDAM’s or even an armored naval, ground and aerial approach against the russian forcees in the east and south of Ukraine to drive them back to their degenerated motherland.

            Last stage would the implementation of a (temporary) defense zone against russia, “peace” and reperations talks and of course the inclusion of Ukraine into the NATO so Russia will think twice about starting this again. Then we will watch what happens in Russia and see if there will be changes for the better so we can try to reestablish our relationships with them. And if not we can keep the sanctions up and let Russia float into insignificance.

            • andrew_bidlaw
              link
              fedilink
              English
              28 months ago

              I thought your proposed swift response would be less conventional than continuing the land war but with unlocked NATO DLC. I think it would face even more scrutiny than the fast leader-snatching operation and can cause currently undecided countries step in on russian side.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                5
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                I thought your proposed swift response would be less conventional than continuing the land war but with unlocked NATO DLC

                Well with “unlocked NATO DLC” this operation would be swift one. Russia is barely making progress against Ukraine and loosing a lot of soldiers and equipment, what do you think will happen when a real threat enters the battlefield?

                and can cause currently undecided countries step in on russian side.

                Why join a loosing party or risk a global crisis if the war is only located in Ukraine and has the only goal of driving the russian forces out of the country. Why would someone join the fray to support the russians when it’s all about ending their degenerate “special operation”? I would agree to you when it’s against Russia itself, but in this case it would only be against the forces of Russia in a land that is not Russia. I don’t see the benefits for China or anybody relevant. Maybe Iran will join, but those dipshits wold join everything that is against the west…

                • andrew_bidlaw
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  38 months ago

                  There’s many of aging dictators around who’d see the fall of russia as being in danger themselves, or seeing NATO being temporally occupied there, thus acting irrationally. No one touches Iran for it’s stable and don’t put much trouble, even Syria is somehow not worthy attention now. And if there’d be a probability of waves of coups or perceived danger of being displaced, NATO risks the need to be deployed here too for it’d hurt way more than whatever these authoritarian regimes do now. It won’t be a symmetric warfare, but random acts of terror and civil wars, imagine Kosovo 2.0. Africa already have some of them, relatively bloodless, some like Houthis or Myanmar never really stopped and can be reignited anew. That’s one of the reasons NATO doesn’t act in full, they perceive this region as a keg of black powder. And they don’t want take responsibility for so much problems at once, as after WW2 when they semi-successfully deprogrammed Germany and Japan via occupation, they had a hard time in Balkans, and recently left Afghanistan for talibs.

                  Well with “unlocked NATO DLC” this operation would be swift one. Russia is barely making progress against Ukraine and loosing a lot of soldiers and equipment, what do you think will happen when a real threat enters the battlefield?

                  Total mobilization, zerg rushes until there’s no one to send, heavy losses on the superior army’s part too, and it counts it’s losses more strictly since Nam, a lot of budget spendings relocated towards replenishing stocks that would probably kill some candidates in democratic countries, weird position in terms of what to do with these two countries after the guns stop shooting that’s still far away from today, thus these politicians can sleep at night. You seem to downplay these things. Besides, current Ukrainian and Russian AF practice warfare now, and even without shiny toys, they manage to use cheap tech efficiently, while using the full might of the US MIC, even just one Abrams, is a logistical puzzle and a costy endeavour. Air and water superiority are examples of what none of them can manage, and there NATO can put it’s weight, but in the field those troops who are currently deployed and survived for years are more experienced than whoever NATO can send. They can teach how to use advanced weaponry right, but there weren’t a conflict like than in Europe for a long time.

                  I’ve seen some lingo in your answers that paints russian threat as a joke, so if you’d want to answer, first, tell me how ukrainians call opposing side’s soldiers, and how russians usually call them back. This two year massacre is a tragedy and I don’t want to talk to someone who sounds like they read to much /k/ another evening. With all due respect.

            • andrew_bidlaw
              link
              fedilink
              English
              28 months ago

              They won’t solve everything, but yeah, they would put a lot of pressure.