- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted on 5/17/24 at 8:50 am to No Colors
Posted on 5/17/24 at 8:50 am to No Colors
quote:
What, specifically, is the inevitable?
The fall of Kiev? Odessa? Total surrender? Four oblasts? What does a Ukraine defeat look like? What does a Russian victory look like?
Russia clearly tried to take the whole country in February of 22. When that failed, the objective of the whole invasion became murky.
But since you seem to know, tell us.
I think his point is more about, at least in his view, a narrow if not nonexistent path to victory for Ukraine.
It doesn't really matter what Russia's victory looks like if Ukraine can't win regardless, at least in terms of the fact that we need to find an off ramp and take it now before the end-game for Ukraine looks worse than it did in 2022 and at least as bad as it does now.
2
Posted on 5/17/24 at 8:53 am to No Colors
quote:
The fall of Kiev? Odessa? Total surrender? Four oblasts? What does a Ukraine defeat look like? What does a Russian victory look like?
Russia can't keep ships in the Black Sea, there's 0% chance they're within 2 years of taking Odessa. IMO, France would send soldiers to Ukraine before Russia had a chance.
Ukrainian "defeat" will look like: Russia getting Crimea and the Donbas, and Ukraine free to align itself with the EU/NATO.
If Russia had simply offered that from the start, there would have been no war. Go figure.
Posted on 5/17/24 at 8:54 am to RuLSU
quote:
If Russia had simply offered that from the start, there would have been no war. Go figure.
Ukraine had been saying since the beginning they won't give up an inch of land.
Posted on 5/17/24 at 8:57 am to VolSquatch
quote:
Ukraine had been saying since the beginning they won't give up an inch of land.
In reality, they've given up a lot of land and have no realistic means of getting it back, IMO.
Posted on 5/17/24 at 9:04 am to VolSquatch
quote:
I think his point is more about, at least in his view, a narrow if not nonexistent path to victory for Ukraine.
Ukraine wins if they survive as an independent nation.
Face it thrir country is at risk of being eliminated, and you bozos can’t grasp that.
Posted on 5/17/24 at 9:18 am to RuLSU
quote:
Russia can't keep ships in the Black Sea, there's 0% chance they're within 2 years of taking Odessa. IMO, France would send soldiers to Ukraine before Russia had a chance.
Putin's 200,000 sq ft palace on the Black Sea is halfway between (Novorossiysk and Tuapse) the drone strikes of yesterday.
Posted on 5/17/24 at 9:19 am to doubleb
quote:
Ukraine wins if they survive as an independent nation.
Face it thrir country is at risk of being eliminated, and you bozos can’t grasp that.
If that's the only goal they should have taken the 2022 peace deal
Posted on 5/17/24 at 9:22 am to RuLSU
quote:
In reality, they've given up a lot of land and have no realistic means of getting it back, IMO.
That and outside of the poorly planned initial attack Russia hasn't really even tried to gain that much land since this thing began. They sat put for well over a year. Part of that is almost assuredly lack of capability, but I have very high doubts they would be entirely incapable of taking large swaths of territory if they committed to it (and committed to heavy casualties).
Posted on 5/17/24 at 9:25 am to CitizenK
quote:Yeah, I'm afraid so. Sorry. The "lord and savior" business is right off a 3rd grade debate stage.
Not at all.
quote:Unfortunately you seem lack the intellectual curiosity or capacity for self-assessment necessary to reach that conclusion. For example, the Cato Institute is anything but "far leftist/Kremlin propaganda."
I'm not an ignorant dumbass to buy the far leftist/Kremlin propaganda that the CIA overthrew a government
Posted on 5/17/24 at 9:39 am to VolSquatch
quote:
If that's the only goal they should have taken the 2022 peace deal
Again, 2 parties have to agree for their to be a peace deal and Russia is on record saying it wasn't signing that deal because it mentioned security guarantees. No matter Ukraines opinion on this matter it was never happening, so there was no peace deal to take
FWIW I do agree with your next post about Russia on the face of it, but I do think Russia has tried and failed to take more territory. The defensive lines in this conflict are truly WWI impressive and the front lines probably won't move too too much with meat wave attacks sadly. But neither side seems ready to throw in the towel so we are where we are.
I do think if the front lines could freeze where they are and allow the countries to go about their way, that would be the best but that proposal has a snowballs chance in hell of being signed by either belligerent right now.
This post was edited on 5/17/24 at 9:44 am
Posted on 5/17/24 at 9:43 am to VolSquatch
quote:
That and outside of the poorly planned initial attack Russia hasn't really even tried to gain that much land since this thing began. They sat put for well over a year. Part of that is almost assuredly lack of capability, but I have very high doubts they would be entirely incapable of taking large swaths of territory if they committed to it (and committed to heavy casualties).
Russia attempted 3+ offensives in 2023, but only succeeded in Bakhmut with exceptionally high costs.
Lack of gains is not from a lack of effort. Ukraine has done a remarkably good job of defending. Now that they have sufficient artillery ammunition (per Zelensky) we'll see if they can roll back Russian gains or not.
Posted on 5/17/24 at 9:45 am to doubleb
quote:Perhaps.
Your opinion of NATO is seriously flawed
On the other hand, had Yeltsin been extended an invitation to join NATO, rather than be faced with NATO's eastward expansion into the ex-Soviet SOI, how different would things look now? Sans NATO's 2008 Bucharest Summit Declaration, how different would things look now? What has NATO done to protect Ukraine? What has NATO done to endanger Ukraine?
Posted on 5/17/24 at 9:49 am to VolSquatch
quote:
f that's the only goal they should have taken the 2022 peace deal
It’s not their only goal and you know that.
You guys live in an alternative world. You believe Russia was guaranteed that NATO wouldn’t move eastward. You believe that the CIA overthrew the Ukraine government. You believe that there was a peace deal that everyone agreed to, but the West stopped it.
But really is there is a signed agreement that Russia would guarantee Ukraine’s sovereignty and you ignore that.
Posted on 5/17/24 at 9:49 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Cato
It is not the Cato it used to be. Leftists like Nick Gillespie moved it away from its credibility
Posted on 5/17/24 at 9:52 am to CitizenK
quote:
Leftists like Nick Gillespie
That's ridiculous. He's not a Leftist. He's an actual libertarian, which means that he seem very Left on some issues and very Right on others. I'm not a libertarian and disagree with him on lots of stuff, but come on.
Posted on 5/17/24 at 9:56 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
On the other hand, had Yeltsin been extended an invitation to join NATO, rather than be faced with NATO's eastward expansion into the ex-Soviet SOI, how different would things look now?
Yeltsin didn’t last. Would Russia in NATO last?
Or would that deal last as long as the Stalin-Hitler pact? There is no way to know what might have happened; except we know Russia’s history of breaking deals, attacking their neighbors and generating chaos around the globe.
In hindsight it is apparent that Russian moves towards a democracy and a capitalist economy didn’t last at all and Russia would have been a cancer in NATO.. They just don’t play nice with others.
Posted on 5/17/24 at 10:05 am to GOP_Tiger
quote:
He's an actual libertarian
Ayn Rand said the same just dumber than a Marxist
Posted on 5/17/24 at 10:10 am to doubleb
quote:What an interesting observation.
Yeltsin didn’t last.
quote:Why?
it is apparent that Russian moves towards a democracy and a capitalist economy didn’t last at all
quote:Facts not in evidence. In fact, it is very likely that given an inclusive "Marshall Plan" extended to Yeltsin at the conclusion of the Cold War, Putin would have never happened. We cannot unwind that clock, but we can learn from the outcome.
Russia would have been a cancer in NATO
Posted on 5/17/24 at 10:10 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
On the other hand, had Yeltsin been extended an invitation to join NATO
Russia partnered with NATO but didn't want to play by the same rules for admission as a full member so Putin pouted and pulled out
Your ideas are flawed as usual
Posted on 5/17/24 at 10:13 am to CitizenK
quote:My questions related to Yeltsin. He preceded Putin.
Putin pouted and pulled out
Page 3796 of 3846
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News