Just a question, since you do this so often, can all your pants now be considered assless pants?
The Ukrainian offensive starts
- Thread starter mandrill
- Start date
The reason he doesn't throw cold water on extreme radical righties is because as he stated, he does a "... quick internet search to verify or understand headlines and opinions."
The results of his strict, unbiased and wholly factually based verification process is, shall we say, quite enlightening!
I do find this amusing after you accused me of not convincing anyone of anything that you do admit that you don't either.
Which makes this line of argument rather futile.
Time to get back on topic?
Institute for the Study of War
Ukrainian forces continued counteroffensive operations in at least three directions and reportedly made gains on June 15. Ukrainian General Staff Spokesperson Oleksandr Shtupun reported that Ukrainian forces conducted successful offensive operations
I do. You're just not paying attention.
I generally don't piggy-back on others (or pile-on) when they have the matter at hand.
A lot of words and no specifics.
In fairness, I'll give you a specific example of facts over opinions from "righties". Some will argue the Trump tax cuts were good for the economy and created growth. I've argued on several occasions that there was no material uptick in business investment. People with some exposure to economics as a science know that without pursuant business investment the impact of tax cuts on growth is negligible.
Last edited:
Frank, you do realize you brought this topic up just Wednesday night? Ask a question get an answer.
If ever there was a circuitous point, Frank's is it.
Last edited:
Do me a favor since I'm not paying attention. Just add a @squeezer next time you do so I can witness it for myself and be proud of you. I'll even give you a like! It will be akin to a medal of valour better than the Medal Dutchie gets when he completes his war games.
There are hundreds if not thousands of these games exploring different conflicts.
Here is a good point of departure: https://www.consimworld.com/.
Wyatt, do you realize that you brought it up first with this comment?
That came out of nowhere.
You should get back on topic.
Looks like Putin is having some dissent made public.
Why don't you quit obsessively insulting Frankie and then strutting around feeling proud of yourself?
It's not as cute or as clever as you seem to think.
It looks like Warhammer for poor people to me. If you put a nazi uniform on pokemon, it does not make it a WW2 simulator, it is pokemon with a nazi uniform. You are playing low-rent Warhammer.
Putin is threatening nuclear war again. The harsh reality an authoritarian regime built on plunder eventually rots from within.
Lukashenka's nipples are protruding with joy, Putin has authorized the relocation of nukes in Belarus. Is The Legendary Dictator bluffing, it's almost a certainty that Poland will invade Belarus if it gets nukes.
Putin overreacts. Putin could refrain from making nuclear threats
and Zelensky's financiers would still hold him back from striking into
Russian territory let alone allowing him marching on to Moscow ever.
At one point of the Korean War Douglas MacArthur also suggested
atomic bomb could be used. It was just his tactic of bluffing which
could have worked. Mao wasn't as audacious as he appeared in taking
on the U.S. and its allies. Mao's decision to come to the defense of North
Korea was contingent on air cover to be provided from Russia as
promised by Stalin. But then uncle Joe chickened out presumably out of
fear of provoking the U.S. after Mao mobilized his army. Harry Truman
was later harshly criticized in one of Richard Nixon's books for making
a declaration against the use of nuclear weapons which could have
deterred both Mao and Stalin from coming to the rescue of North Korea.
Putin has no reason to assure Ukraine and the west he
would never use nuclear weapons. And yet the best time
for him to launch nuclear attack is already in the past.
The war has been depleting Putin's war chest way way
longer than he anticipated and is probably already past the
point he find bearable. For Putin to openly reassure Ukraine
of keeping nuclear weapons out of the conflict at this time
is not a wise move to say the least.
and Zelensky's financiers would still hold him back from striking into
Russian territory let alone allowing him marching on to Moscow ever.
At one point of the Korean War Douglas MacArthur also suggested
atomic bomb could be used. It was just his tactic of bluffing which
could have worked. Mao wasn't as audacious as he appeared in taking
on the U.S. and its allies. Mao's decision to come to the defense of North
Korea was contingent on air cover to be provided from Russia as
promised by Stalin. But then uncle Joe chickened out presumably out of
fear of provoking the U.S. after Mao mobilized his army. Harry Truman
was later harshly criticized in one of Richard Nixon's books for making
a declaration against the use of nuclear weapons which could have
deterred both Mao and Stalin from coming to the rescue of North Korea.
Putin has no reason to assure Ukraine and the west he
would never use nuclear weapons. And yet the best time
for him to launch nuclear attack is already in the past.
The war has been depleting Putin's war chest way way
longer than he anticipated and is probably already past the
point he find bearable. For Putin to openly reassure Ukraine
of keeping nuclear weapons out of the conflict at this time
is not a wise move to say the least.
Last edited:
An effort to present a more realistic perspective:
Changing tactics
Moscow has learned from blunders, improving weapons and skills
Ukrainian troops are probing Russian defences as spring gives way to a second summer of fighting, and Kyiv’s forces are facing an enemy that has made mistakes and suffered setbacks in the 15-month-old war. But analysts say Moscow also has learned from those blunders and improved its weapons and skills.
Russia has built heavily fortified defences along the 1,000-kilometre front line, honed its electronic weapons to reduce Ukraine’s edge in combat drones, and turned heavy bombs from its massive Cold-War-era arsenal into precision-guided gliding munitions capable of striking targets without putting its warplanes at risk.
The changing Russian tactics along with increased troop numbers and improved weaponry could make it challenging for Ukraine to score any kind of quick decisive victory, threatening to turn it into a long battle of attrition.
U.S. Joint Chiefs chair Gen. Mark Milley said in an interview with The Associated Press on Tuesday that while Ukraine’s military is wellprepared, as time goes on, “this will be a back-and-forth fight for a considerable length of time.”
Most attention last week focused on catastrophic flooding in southern Ukraine caused by the destruction of the Kakhovka dam that both sides blame on each other.
At the same time, however, Ukrainian troops have unleashed a series of attacks in several parts of the front that so far have made only marginal gains against multi-layered Russian defences.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said last Saturday that counteroffensive and defensive actions are underway against Russian forces, asserting that his commanders are in a “positive” mindset about its success. Ukrainian authorities have stopped short of announcing the start of a full-blown counteroffensive.
A day earlier, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that it had begun, but that Ukraine failed to make any headway and suffered “significant” losses.
Richard Barrons, a retired general who led the U.K. Joint Forces Command, said the Russian military has built “textbook” defensive lines and adjusted its tactics following its hasty retreat from wide swaths of the Kharkiv and Kherson regions last fall under the brunt of a swift Ukrainian campaign.
He pointed at the improved Russian ability to both counter and use drones and also noted that Moscow has learned to keep key assets like command headquarters and ammunition dumps out of artillery range.
“And they have sharpened up how they can fire at Ukrainian artillery and tanks when they spot them,” he said.
“So if you add all that together, everybody knows this will be a harder fight than for Kherson or Kharkiv in the autumn of last year.
“People are still using those two successes, and they were successes, as benchmarks, which I think is unfair, unreasonable in the circumstances,” he said.
Russia has fielded more troops to protect the long front line, even though many of them could be poorly trained, he said.
At the start of the war, Russian military convoys stretched for kilometres to become easy prey for Ukrainian artillery and drones during a failed attempt to capture Kyiv, in what was seen as a major blunder.
Ukrainian missiles then sank the Russian cruiser Moskva, the flagship of its Black Sea Fleet, in a major blow to Moscow’s pride; Kyiv’s rockets pummelled Russian ammunition depots and command headquarters; and Kremlin forces hastily pulled back from large areas in the east and the south in the fall.
Despite those setbacks, Russia dug in to defend broad parts of Ukrainian territory it captured early in the invasion. Last month, it claimed control of the eastern city of Bakhmut after the war’s longest and bloodiest battle.
Fundamental Russian weaknesses remain.
Russian troops continue to suffer from low morale, there are shortages of ammunition, and co-ordination between units has remained poor. Vicious infighting has erupted between the military brass and the Wagner private military contractor, which has fielded tens of thousands of mercenaries to the battlefield to spearhead the battle for Bakhmut.
A major factor still limiting Russia’s capability has been its decision to keep its air force from forging deep into Ukraine after it suffered heavy losses in the war’s initial stages. Its attempts to knock out Ukraine’s air defences have failed. Thanks to supplies of western weaponry, Ukraine now poses an even more formidable challenge to Russian aircraft.
Barrons emphasized it’s essential for military leaders in Kyiv to continue keeping its adversary’s warplanes at bay so that “the counteroffensive isn’t the moment the Russian air force suddenly finds its capability and courage and romps ... all over Ukraine.”
Ukrainian military analyst Oleh Zhdanov notes that Moscow has maintained a numerical advantage in troops and weapons, despite any weaknesses.
While Russia has increasingly tapped its Cold War arsenals, deploying tanks dating to the 1950s to replenish its massive, early losses, such old weapons can still perform well, Zhdanov said.
“It doesn’t matter what tanks they have; they have thousands of them,” Zhdanov said, noting Russia put many of them to use as stationary weapons in their defensive lines, including in the Zaporizhzhia region where they proved effective.
He acknowledged Russian success in hitting Ukrainian military depots, relying on Moscow’s agents and collaborators, but said such losses were “tolerable.”
He also said the Russians increasingly use drones and improved electronic warfare to jam those from Ukraine.
Russia has stopped using battalion-sized tactical groups it deployed early in the war and shifted to smaller units, Zhdanov said.
While the Russian air force has operated in relatively small numbers, it has modernized its stock of bombs to turn them into gliding weapons that have proven efficient, he said. The 500-kilogram bombs adapted with a GPS module can inflict massive damage.
“The Soviet Union produced those bombs in uncountable numbers,” Zhdanov said, adding that the Russians drop up to 50 a day for a “major psychological effect.”
One such bomb accidentally released over the Russian city of Belgorod near the border with Ukraine in April blasted a huge crater and slightly injured one person.
Russian military bloggers hailed the punch of the gliding bombs and their ability to hit targets up to 70 km away. One former military pilot said in his blog that work is under way to convert 1,500-kg bombs into gliding munitions.
These conversions let the Russian air force ramp up strikes on Ukrainian forces without risking its warplanes.
The Royal United Service Institute, a London-based think tank that focuses on defence and security issues, listed these gliding bombs along with other improvements in Russian weapons and tactics.
“Although they only have limited accuracy, the size of these munitions poses a serious threat,” RUSI said in a recent report, adding Russia was working to improve their accuracy.
Russian engineers have shown prowess in building field fortifications and complex obstacles along the front line, including concrete-reinforced trenches and command bunkers, wire-entanglements, ditches, anti-tank hedgehogs or “dragon’s teeth” and complex minefields, the report said.
Extensive placement of sophisticated mines for use against tanks and infantry poses “a major tactical challenge to Ukrainian offensive operations,” the RUSI authors said.
Other Russian improvements noted in the report include better thermal camouflage for tanks; nimbler deployment of artillery into multiple positions, including integration with drones to avoid losses; and attacking Ukrainian artillery with loitering munitions — drones that hover until they acquire a target.
Such responsive Russian fire represents “the greatest challenge to Ukrainian offensive operations,” the RUSI report said.
Improved Russian electronic warfare systems have destroyed about 10,000 Ukrainian drones a month, while they also have been able to intercept and decrypt Ukrainian tactical communications in real time, it added.
They also have learned to intercept GPS-guided rockets fired by western-supplied launchers like the U.S.-made HIMARS, which embarrassed the Russians and inflicted major damage, the report said.
Russia’s military “is able to improve and evolve its employment of key systems,” RUSI said, but noted it could struggle to respond to similar quick adjustments by Kyiv that could make Moscow’s units “likely to rapidly lose their co-ordination.”
Changing tactics
Moscow has learned from blunders, improving weapons and skills
- Toronto Star 17 Jun 2023
Ukrainian troops are probing Russian defences as spring gives way to a second summer of fighting, and Kyiv’s forces are facing an enemy that has made mistakes and suffered setbacks in the 15-month-old war. But analysts say Moscow also has learned from those blunders and improved its weapons and skills.
Russia has built heavily fortified defences along the 1,000-kilometre front line, honed its electronic weapons to reduce Ukraine’s edge in combat drones, and turned heavy bombs from its massive Cold-War-era arsenal into precision-guided gliding munitions capable of striking targets without putting its warplanes at risk.
The changing Russian tactics along with increased troop numbers and improved weaponry could make it challenging for Ukraine to score any kind of quick decisive victory, threatening to turn it into a long battle of attrition.
U.S. Joint Chiefs chair Gen. Mark Milley said in an interview with The Associated Press on Tuesday that while Ukraine’s military is wellprepared, as time goes on, “this will be a back-and-forth fight for a considerable length of time.”
Most attention last week focused on catastrophic flooding in southern Ukraine caused by the destruction of the Kakhovka dam that both sides blame on each other.
At the same time, however, Ukrainian troops have unleashed a series of attacks in several parts of the front that so far have made only marginal gains against multi-layered Russian defences.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said last Saturday that counteroffensive and defensive actions are underway against Russian forces, asserting that his commanders are in a “positive” mindset about its success. Ukrainian authorities have stopped short of announcing the start of a full-blown counteroffensive.
A day earlier, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that it had begun, but that Ukraine failed to make any headway and suffered “significant” losses.
Richard Barrons, a retired general who led the U.K. Joint Forces Command, said the Russian military has built “textbook” defensive lines and adjusted its tactics following its hasty retreat from wide swaths of the Kharkiv and Kherson regions last fall under the brunt of a swift Ukrainian campaign.
He pointed at the improved Russian ability to both counter and use drones and also noted that Moscow has learned to keep key assets like command headquarters and ammunition dumps out of artillery range.
“And they have sharpened up how they can fire at Ukrainian artillery and tanks when they spot them,” he said.
“So if you add all that together, everybody knows this will be a harder fight than for Kherson or Kharkiv in the autumn of last year.
“People are still using those two successes, and they were successes, as benchmarks, which I think is unfair, unreasonable in the circumstances,” he said.
Russia has fielded more troops to protect the long front line, even though many of them could be poorly trained, he said.
At the start of the war, Russian military convoys stretched for kilometres to become easy prey for Ukrainian artillery and drones during a failed attempt to capture Kyiv, in what was seen as a major blunder.
Ukrainian missiles then sank the Russian cruiser Moskva, the flagship of its Black Sea Fleet, in a major blow to Moscow’s pride; Kyiv’s rockets pummelled Russian ammunition depots and command headquarters; and Kremlin forces hastily pulled back from large areas in the east and the south in the fall.
Despite those setbacks, Russia dug in to defend broad parts of Ukrainian territory it captured early in the invasion. Last month, it claimed control of the eastern city of Bakhmut after the war’s longest and bloodiest battle.
Fundamental Russian weaknesses remain.
Russian troops continue to suffer from low morale, there are shortages of ammunition, and co-ordination between units has remained poor. Vicious infighting has erupted between the military brass and the Wagner private military contractor, which has fielded tens of thousands of mercenaries to the battlefield to spearhead the battle for Bakhmut.
A major factor still limiting Russia’s capability has been its decision to keep its air force from forging deep into Ukraine after it suffered heavy losses in the war’s initial stages. Its attempts to knock out Ukraine’s air defences have failed. Thanks to supplies of western weaponry, Ukraine now poses an even more formidable challenge to Russian aircraft.
Barrons emphasized it’s essential for military leaders in Kyiv to continue keeping its adversary’s warplanes at bay so that “the counteroffensive isn’t the moment the Russian air force suddenly finds its capability and courage and romps ... all over Ukraine.”
Ukrainian military analyst Oleh Zhdanov notes that Moscow has maintained a numerical advantage in troops and weapons, despite any weaknesses.
While Russia has increasingly tapped its Cold War arsenals, deploying tanks dating to the 1950s to replenish its massive, early losses, such old weapons can still perform well, Zhdanov said.
“It doesn’t matter what tanks they have; they have thousands of them,” Zhdanov said, noting Russia put many of them to use as stationary weapons in their defensive lines, including in the Zaporizhzhia region where they proved effective.
He acknowledged Russian success in hitting Ukrainian military depots, relying on Moscow’s agents and collaborators, but said such losses were “tolerable.”
He also said the Russians increasingly use drones and improved electronic warfare to jam those from Ukraine.
Russia has stopped using battalion-sized tactical groups it deployed early in the war and shifted to smaller units, Zhdanov said.
While the Russian air force has operated in relatively small numbers, it has modernized its stock of bombs to turn them into gliding weapons that have proven efficient, he said. The 500-kilogram bombs adapted with a GPS module can inflict massive damage.
“The Soviet Union produced those bombs in uncountable numbers,” Zhdanov said, adding that the Russians drop up to 50 a day for a “major psychological effect.”
One such bomb accidentally released over the Russian city of Belgorod near the border with Ukraine in April blasted a huge crater and slightly injured one person.
Russian military bloggers hailed the punch of the gliding bombs and their ability to hit targets up to 70 km away. One former military pilot said in his blog that work is under way to convert 1,500-kg bombs into gliding munitions.
These conversions let the Russian air force ramp up strikes on Ukrainian forces without risking its warplanes.
The Royal United Service Institute, a London-based think tank that focuses on defence and security issues, listed these gliding bombs along with other improvements in Russian weapons and tactics.
“Although they only have limited accuracy, the size of these munitions poses a serious threat,” RUSI said in a recent report, adding Russia was working to improve their accuracy.
Russian engineers have shown prowess in building field fortifications and complex obstacles along the front line, including concrete-reinforced trenches and command bunkers, wire-entanglements, ditches, anti-tank hedgehogs or “dragon’s teeth” and complex minefields, the report said.
Extensive placement of sophisticated mines for use against tanks and infantry poses “a major tactical challenge to Ukrainian offensive operations,” the RUSI authors said.
Other Russian improvements noted in the report include better thermal camouflage for tanks; nimbler deployment of artillery into multiple positions, including integration with drones to avoid losses; and attacking Ukrainian artillery with loitering munitions — drones that hover until they acquire a target.
Such responsive Russian fire represents “the greatest challenge to Ukrainian offensive operations,” the RUSI report said.
Improved Russian electronic warfare systems have destroyed about 10,000 Ukrainian drones a month, while they also have been able to intercept and decrypt Ukrainian tactical communications in real time, it added.
They also have learned to intercept GPS-guided rockets fired by western-supplied launchers like the U.S.-made HIMARS, which embarrassed the Russians and inflicted major damage, the report said.
Russia’s military “is able to improve and evolve its employment of key systems,” RUSI said, but noted it could struggle to respond to similar quick adjustments by Kyiv that could make Moscow’s units “likely to rapidly lose their co-ordination.”
Yes very much so.
Scott Ritter - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Police said that he exposed himself, via a web camera, after the officer repeatedly identified himself as a 15-year-old girl
Getting caught once is pretty bad, but getting caught twice means you are just incapable of learning.
Also
In April 2022, he posted a tweet claiming that the National Police of Ukraine is responsible for the Bucha massacre and calling U.S. President Joe Biden a "war criminal" for "seeking to shift blame for the Bucha murders" to Russia
and
The U.S. Department of State and Polygraph.info described Ritter as a frequent contributor to Sputnik and RT during the war.[48][49] Polygraph reported that he compared Ukraine to “a rabid dog” that needed to be shot.[49] He has also compared Ukraine's treatment of Russians to Nazi Germany's treatment of Jews
His very accurate predictions on the Iraq war
"The United States is going to leave Iraq with its tail between its legs, defeated. It is a war we can not win ... We do not have the military means to take over Baghdad and for this reason I believe the defeat of the United States in this war is inevitable
Because that totally happened. NOT!
And let's look at the owner of the channel Douglas Macgregor
After Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Macgregor appeared on three Fox News programs in February and early March to speak in support of Russia's actions. Three days after the war began, he said "The battle in eastern Ukraine is really almost over," and predicted "If [Ukraine] don't surrender in the next 24 hours, I suspect Russia will ultimately annihilate them.
Well that didn't happen
"In his second appearance, he revised his prediction: "The first five days Russian forces I think frankly were too gentle. They've now corrected that. So, I would say another 10 days this should be completely over..."
Opps wrong again
"In a fourth appearance in early March [2022], Macgregor said a ceasefire was close as Ukrainian forces had been "grounded to bits. There's no question about that despite what we report on our mainstream media""
Which is of course why they are still fighting over a year later and even taking back clay like at Kherson and Loserchance.
"He also defended Russia's invasion in an interview on The Grayzone, saying Putin had taken great care with civilians and this was delaying his victory"
And Paul Bernardo is a strong feminist voice who cares about women. I mean fuck, does anyone outside of Russia actually believe this shit
"In September 2022, he again predicted on Carlson's show that “this war may be over soon”[67] and later in the month "the Ukrainian army is bled white, tens of thousands of Ukrainian troops have been killed or wounded, Ukraine is really on the ropes"."
More lies.
Thing is they probably don't even believe what they are saying, bought and paid for shills don't. The question is, considering how unreliable these people are, why do you.
I am pretty sure our local expert in Ape Law has mentioned the problems with using these sources before and yet you still do it. Much like Ritter and his inability to resist underage girls, it seems you also have an issue.
Also after we have shit on your sources [over and over] why do you keep using it. You remind me of the local Jebus cultist who keeps trying to convert me with the bible and when I point out that it's full of contradictions and evil, her reaction is to not address those issues but to keep quoting the same fucking book I told her I think is sus.
You sir are clown shoes. What you posted is is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point, in your rambling, incoherent response, were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
Maybe try quoting someones opinion who isn't clown shoes.
There is nothing "shocking and eye opening" about you endlessly trolling on this board feebly armed with Russian war crime state propaganda laced videos, links and articles with discredited information from discredited sources.
Last edited:
