Leopold

quote:

---

You and like 5 other posters can quote the ISW and let them think for you

---

Yup. There's your source, and one that influences multiple governments and militaries. You may not agree with it, but it's a statement backed up by a real source.

quote:

---

We discussed donations, and how those can be manipulated, ad nauseum in the old thread. It was a frequent topic. I think it's pretty obvious we manipulated the numbers there, but that's more of an accounting thing than it is anything malicious

---

We didn't manipulate anything. We sent them what was listed with verifiable sources. Again, just saying it's not true because someone disagree with you isn't much to stand on. But keep doing that.

quote:

---

I've talked about them using donkeys myself

---

Ya sure did, didn't you! Called it 'smart,' too, didn't you?
:rotflmao:

But I listed my sources, and they are the Russians, for God sakes.

quote:

---

The army who can't beat a much smaller force isn't good tactically? You had to read a paper to figure that out?

---

No, you did when I have to explain to you why the Russians only took 1% of a country and still think that taking a town of about 26k is somehow tactically significant. But again, I made a statement and backed it up with a source.
See how that works? Probably not.....

quote:

---

And I think my only issue with that logic is that I don't believe we've fully captured the runway Russia's economic shift has given them

---

I assure you, it wasn't much of one, and to make that point, here's a source:

Russia's Economy Falters asa Civilian Industries Collapse

The Russian 'War Economy' does nothing to help civilian industries, and, in fact, hurts many of them, so whatever supposed 'runway' their stupid transistion provided isn't going to help much, if any, the average civilian business and is going to gut their economy. Honestly, what is going to keep the economy going is just throwing their own people under the bus, just like in the USSR.

quote:

---

Also 5 examples when you post probably.... 5 times per day here? Thats not really that much.

---

Yeah, I saw this lazy argument coming. You're right, I don't want to go through ALL my posts, especially considering I repeated the same points mulitple times. But I provided the sources, however inconvenient you found them, you just don't like them or agree with them. But I did exactly what you said I didn't, didn't I?

quote:

---

I'm still waiting on you to show you know anything about anything other than how to use a keyboard to type a bunch of words that sometimes belong together.

---

It's funny, I didn't know I was supposed to impress a random guy on SECrant.com about political/military subjects. I'll make a note.

But seriously, Vol, I've given you a number of correct assessments, you just reject them out of hand. I've back them with reliable sources, you call them BS. Whatever, you have the right to reject them, but if you just want to reject them for the sake of rejecting them, so be it. Just don't turn into a TexAg, that would be depressing.

The bottom line is that Russia is f*cked, Ukraine's manpower issues are a concern but not dire, and we're probably not anywhere closer to peace than we were when Trump took office. I can definetly be wrong, and hope I am, but until Russia decides they want peace there isn't going to be any.

Good luck against Illinois.

quote:

---

If you can't find any differences between what was going on in the early months of the war, the failed counteroffensive, and then the past couple of years up until fairly recently, I can't really help you.

---

I know exactly the differences between the 2022 and 2023 counteroffensives by the Ukrainians, you fool, and those being run today, and that doesn't change the fact that the Ukrainians aren't running out of people anytime soon.

Jesus this is why nobody listens to you.

quote:

---

I'm confused. When did Ukraine say that they could have elections, during this war, without a ceasefire?

---

It's not a realistic option. Legally it's a challenge due to the country being under martial law but it's also unnecessary, so it's most likely Z calling Trump and Putin's bluff and throwing the ball back into their court. It's the Ukrainians playing the game the way the Russians play it.

Micheal Weiss, the reporter who was invited into Hegseth's and Vance's text conversation a few months ago wrote about it better than I ever could:

"Zelensky has turned the painful question of territorial concessions into a joint challenge for Trump and Putin, and he has deferred responsibility for whatever happens to the Ukrainian people, the better to keep his legacy from being tarnished by a forfeiture of national sovereignty.

Trump would have to guarantee the security of holding a national referendum (and it's unclear whether Ukrainians in the occupied territories would get a vote, or how they might vote under foreign coercion). Putin would have to accept a 60 day ceasefire, twice as long as the one on offer by the US and Ukraine in May, which Putin rejected....75% of Ukrainians rejected this proposal as of Dec. 15, according to the Kiev International Institute of Sociology, and so to change their minds, the US would have to really incentivize them. In short, Zelensky is calling America and Russia's bluff. And doing it with a handshake and a smile and invitation to Trump to come to Kiev. "

MIcheal Weiss's Twitter Account

quote:

---

The big news is that Zelensky is going to agree to something like the Witkoff plan. He's going to agree to give up the rest of Donetsk in exchange for Zaporizhzhia, etc. The US and NATO are going to bestow something like Article V guarantees for Ukrainian security. And Zelensky is coming to Mar-a-Lago on Saturday to officially sign off on it.

Except, of course, that any official territorial concessions would legally require a vote of the Ukrainian people, so Putin will have to agree to a 60-day ceasefire so that the vote can be held. Zelensky will be publicly inviting Trump to Ukraine to make the case to the Ukrainian people as to why they should vote for the plan and put their trust in the US to back it up.

In sum, Zelensky is going to put the ball right back in Putin's court. Will Putin agree to a 60-day ceasefire? Will he accept the kind of NATO presence in Ukraine that would be necessary for Ukrainian security guarantees? Doubtful.

And then what does President Trump do? We'll see

---

The story I've heard is that Witkoff finally met with the Ukrainians and the Ukrainians did to him what the Russians did - they poured their own side of the conflict down his throat and sent him back to Trump with a peace plan that they knew the Russians would never accept.

Honestly, Witkoff doesn't seem to be anything more than a monkey with a cup at this point. We're no closer to peace than we were six months ago.

Something tells me a rando on Twitter named `'Clandestine`' isn't an actual legal expert....

See, I tend to think this is true, that this would be the Russian end-around to take control over the Ukrainians, but I also wonder if the Ukrainians were to actually agree to something this stupid if the Russians would, again, just see that as weakness and then push for even more. Even if you gave the Russians everything they wanted, they would still, on principle, demand more.

Such is the greed and stupidity of the Russians.

quote:

---

I mean I think Russia will "win" eventually. But "think" is a key word there, and by "win" I mean be the side with the upper hand when this eventually gets negotiated to some sort of end (or pause). More of a winner in terms of "if we had to pick someone as the winner it would be them but both sides are kind of fricked".

---

Okay, I buy that. And I'm not entirely at odds with it.

But when we talk about winning, keep in mind the Russians, and Putin in particular, have consistently provided their definition of what 'win' means, and under specific conditions. The five goals that Putin gave when the war began, none of which have been achieved and at least one in particular that was complete BS, and then repeatedly saying that winning meant the complete capitulation of the Ukrainians.

Well, he's almost four years into this war and nowhere close to achieving any of that, and if anyone wants to think that the Russians are going to completely dominate Ukraine I've got some oceanfront property in Nebraska for you.

So while I share the whole 'they both lose' mentality, in terms of an actual military standard, Ukraine is winning this war and Russia is going to lose it.

quote:

---

If you just read Russian history, this is basically a new version of the Russian mindset ingrained for centuries now, it's hardwired. It really doesn't differ from the Arabic word Harb, meaning war. To Islam, war is everywhere not under Islamic rule. Meanwhile, peace is wherever Islam rules.

---

I get that. And there are those that have compared this Russian sense of exceptionalism to the American Manifest Destiny, and, honestly, it's not completely unfair.

But while the idea of a national identity tied to national expansion may be a natural and universal one, I don't think that openly lying and a open bloodlust for power is. Call me naive, but I think it's possible to exist and not attempt to conquer your neighbors, and, yes, I'm well aware of Russia's history. Especially when you consider the ways in which Dugin advocates expansion - I sure as reject the US as the Russian scapegoat, which Dugin is adamant about, and not because we did something wrong but because by his way of thinking there just has to be a scapegoat. So I don't except this as some 'historical' inevitability or reasonable rationale.

That, and I don't see any chance at a mulit-polar world taking place. Whose going to be the other pole?

Russia? *snort*
China? Maybe we thought this five or ten years ago, but right now China is a demographic, economic, and political mess. Xi seems to be doing nothing but consolidating power, so whenever he goes it's going to be a bloodbath and a possible civil war.
The Europeans could do it, but they don't want to. They have the population, the economy, and the history but they're too fractured and have grown lazy under the American led system. Even with the Trump administration doing everything they can to push the Europeans away, they still can't manage. There's a gun to their head, for god's sake, and they still are paralyzed from political inaction, so they aren't leading anything.

So, I don't see any other pole organizing during my lifetime. Let me know anyone who might be/

quote:

---

Saying "Russia will just continue to be imperialist" is an extremely simplistic way of looking at it, even if that possibility is one of the more likely ones. There is a TON up in the air right now.

---

HORSESCHIT.

The Russian is plan is laid out in Aleksandr Dugin's stupid, neo-fascist work "The Foundations of Geopolitics,' which is basically a Russian Mein Kampf.
I HIGHLY RECOMMEND THIS READ FOR ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO UNDERSTAND THE RUSSIAN MINDSET RIGHT NOW.

NOTHING is up in the air right now as long as Putin is in charge - NOTHING. Their plan is as simple as can be and any attempt to argue any other flavor is nothing more than enabling a genocidal, homicidal, evil dictator.

If we invade Venezuela they will not be turning into a democracy within the 21st Century. Just as with Vietnam and Afghanistan we will fuk up their government for generations to come and at our own great expense.

Jesus, we're going backwards as a country.