sserafim
they say it's darkest of all before the dawn
- Sep 13, 2023
- 9,012
Will the Russia-Ukraine War become World War 3? How do you think things will play out in the future?
-
⚠️ UK Access Block Notice: Beginning July 1, 2025, this site will no longer be accessible from the United Kingdom. This is a voluntary decision made by the site's administrators. We were not forced or ordered to implement this block. If you're located in the UK, we recommend using a VPN to maintain access.
pollux
Knight of Infinite Resignation
- May 24, 2024
- 228
Protracted conflict with no clear winner as both sides grind themselves to death. I don't see either side being able to achieve meaningful gains; Ukraine since will probably lose reliable US support (due to the Dems probably losing this year) and Russia since, without a complete Ukrainian collapse, they are most likely unable to breach Ukrainian defenses.
DarkRange55
I am Skynet
- Oct 15, 2023
- 1,929
They can still hold their current territory they've claimed. It's a war of attrition.
Also the casualties are likely exaggerated.
DarkRange55
I am Skynet
- Oct 15, 2023
- 1,929
DarkRange55
I am Skynet
- Oct 15, 2023
- 1,929
We've been sold this narrative that painted a picture of Russians and Putin as these evil guys who unjustly invaded this sovereign nation and painted Ukrainians especially Zelensky as morally righteous and strong and brave and also in the right and winning the war. But the reality of this war is far from black and white.
Tucker Carlson interviewed a retired four star US Army general, McGregor, he was saying that according to his estimates and the circles that he moves, he was saying that Ukrainians lost close to 500,000 people. Which is way bigger than the NATO estimate. He said according to their estimates, the Russians have maybe lost close to 50,000. But if you look at Wikipedia it's totally different numbers. But who knows? I'm not going to say what that general said is statistically correct because I don't really have evidence to support either side of the argument. But I will say, if you just look at whatever numbers the West has come out with, Russia would have been done a long time ago. There is no way you could sustain a fight that long with those kinds of casualties. It's basically 1 times 5. Like one Ukrainian dies and 5 Russians die. The entire Russian military would be gone by 2025 or something. So maybe there is some truth in it but I don't really have the knowledge to support either side of the argument. Putin conducted I think two waves of mass mobilization inside the country, that kind of made people think that there might be a lot more casualties than he was expecting so thats why. Originally I think Russia only had 390,000 active combat troops to start with and thats the part I don't really appreciate, the narrative that NATO and Americans are pushing 390,000 troops to take over Poland, Ukraine and whatever comes afterwords. Are you serious? Thats the number you're working with and then you want to sell this narrative? That doesn't make any sense.
Tucker Carlson interviewed a retired four star US Army general, McGregor, he was saying that according to his estimates and the circles that he moves, he was saying that Ukrainians lost close to 500,000 people. Which is way bigger than the NATO estimate. He said according to their estimates, the Russians have maybe lost close to 50,000. But if you look at Wikipedia it's totally different numbers. But who knows? I'm not going to say what that general said is statistically correct because I don't really have evidence to support either side of the argument. But I will say, if you just look at whatever numbers the West has come out with, Russia would have been done a long time ago. There is no way you could sustain a fight that long with those kinds of casualties. It's basically 1 times 5. Like one Ukrainian dies and 5 Russians die. The entire Russian military would be gone by 2025 or something. So maybe there is some truth in it but I don't really have the knowledge to support either side of the argument. Putin conducted I think two waves of mass mobilization inside the country, that kind of made people think that there might be a lot more casualties than he was expecting so thats why. Originally I think Russia only had 390,000 active combat troops to start with and thats the part I don't really appreciate, the narrative that NATO and Americans are pushing 390,000 troops to take over Poland, Ukraine and whatever comes afterwords. Are you serious? Thats the number you're working with and then you want to sell this narrative? That doesn't make any sense.
DarkRange55
I am Skynet
- Oct 15, 2023
- 1,929
Examples like this really show there are many back channels of communications. When the US is operating in a place like Syria, they actually do coordinate with their Russian military counterparts specifically so things don't spiral out of control. There is a measure of control. Not a perfect system, but it's been mutually beneficial so far. A lot of this stuff is also theatrics, saber rattling for political capital.
www.zerohedge.com
WSJ's Evan Gershkovich & Ex-Marine Paul Whelan Freed By Russia In Major Prisoner Swap With US | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
