The wars deadline

silentkisser

Master of Disaster
Jun 10, 2008
5,159
6,942
113
I wonder if Biden thought that by offloading all their second hand weapons america could fund restocking the army and keep Ukraine going enough to stall and drain Russia. If this was the real goal all along, not to win but to keep Putin using up his resources.
On one hand, I think this certainly plays a part in the equation. I mean, Biden supports Ukraine, gives them the tools and other support to defend themselves, with no US troops being at risk. The benefit is it hurts Putin in several ways.

  • The Russian military gets a bloody nose, losing thousands of vehicles, artillery pieces, jets, helicopters and ships.
  • It hurts the Russian economy through sanctions and the staggering cost of waging war.
  • It will likely check future military engagements by Putin in other areas.
  • It hurts Putin's image and reputation as leader at home. This sort of reminds me (though I was young when it happened) of the Soviet misadventure in Afghanistan.
  • Finally, it exposes Russia's military ability. Anyone who was concerned about them taking on Europe or invade Canada should be able to sleep a lot better knowing they couldn't even invade a country literally on their border due to supply issues.
Now, I also believe that Biden wanted Ukraine to win, but knew he was walking a tightrope about escalating the conflict. He knows he couldn't send US troops in without the threat of nuclear war....nor would he likely get support from the American people (well, at least from the Fox News crowd).

How this will all shake out once Trump's "deadline" comes...who knows. I mean, the ceasefire in Gaza isn't exactly humming along seamlessly....
 

silentkisser

Master of Disaster
Jun 10, 2008
5,159
6,942
113
I don't see reaching a treaty to save face to be a concern of Putin. I have
a hunch he is taking the time to await the disintegration of Ukraine as well
as to sow division within NATO.
Here's the thing: Do you think Putin would remain popular if he signs a peace deal where he gives up all the Ukrainian territory he invaded? I'm not even talking about Crimea, just the Donbas and what not? After the military suffered around 1.2M casualties? Do you think people would be OK with that, basically grinding down that many troops for no reason? I mean, there is a good chance the public wouldn't say shit. After all, they do not have a free press over there, so who knows how it would be spun...And, the reality is that they did not achieve their stated goals. They likely won't see a regime change and the idiotic "denazification" of Ukraine, and there is a bigger chance that Ukraine would join NATO after all of this.

So, we'll see what a treaty actually looks like. And, since Trump is beholden to Putin, there is a great chance that any deal will favour Vlad...
 

silentkisser

Master of Disaster
Jun 10, 2008
5,159
6,942
113
I'm trying to figure out what you mean here.
Are you under the impression there were no peace negotiations under Biden?
As far as I'm aware, since the start of hostilities Biden did not negotiate with Putin to end the war. My recollection was that Biden said he was willing to talk with Putin, but not without Ukraine's involvement. I'm also aware he tried to prevent the war, but Putin seemed to be hell bent on launching it...
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
107,507
32,049
113
Here's the thing: Do you think Putin would remain popular if he signs a peace deal where he gives up all the Ukrainian territory he invaded? I'm not even talking about Crimea, just the Donbas and what not? After the military suffered around 1.2M casualties? Do you think people would be OK with that, basically grinding down that many troops for no reason? I mean, there is a good chance the public wouldn't say shit. After all, they do not have a free press over there, so who knows how it would be spun...And, the reality is that they did not achieve their stated goals. They likely won't see a regime change and the idiotic "denazification" of Ukraine, and there is a bigger chance that Ukraine would join NATO after all of this.

So, we'll see what a treaty actually looks like. And, since Trump is beholden to Putin, there is a great chance that any deal will favour Vlad...
Lets be realistic, Ukraine has no chance against the new and sophisticated Russian weapons.

 
  • Haha
Reactions: silentkisser

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
39,347
82,077
113
As far as I'm aware, since the start of hostilities Biden did not negotiate with Putin to end the war. My recollection was that Biden said he was willing to talk with Putin, but not without Ukraine's involvement. I'm also aware he tried to prevent the war, but Putin seemed to be hell bent on launching it...
How is "he was willing to negotiate but not without Ukraine" mean that he didn't negotiate?
There were direct Ukraine/Russia talks through much of early 2022.
After that, there were talks between various groups all the time.
Are you seriously trying to say that only direct Biden-Putin or Trump-Putin talks count as negotiation?
 

seanzo

Well-known member
Nov 29, 2008
571
827
93
How is "he was willing to negotiate but not without Ukraine" mean that he didn't negotiate?
There were direct Ukraine/Russia talks through much of early 2022.
After that, there were talks between various groups all the time.
Are you seriously trying to say that only direct Biden-Putin or Trump-Putin talks count as negotiation?
Russia and Ukraine had negotiated an end to the war in spring of 2022, however it was scotched after Boris Johnson went to Kiev and made a bunch of promises neither the US nor the EU were able to keep.

It's been widely rumoured that Johnson did this on behalf of the Biden administration, whether that is true or not is debatable but what isn't debatable is that from that point up till Trump took office nobody in the Biden administration made any sort of effort to negotiate an end to the war.

The position that was being pushed was between all the various sanctions imposed on Russia and near complete emptying of NATO weapons and munitions stocks, Ukraine would be victorious thus negating any need for direct talks with the Russians.

This is something that many of the higher ups in the Kremlin lamented about publically, which is why they welcomed Trump winning the 2024 election. It's a shame because in the meantime the nation of Ukraine has been shattered and will very likely be losing another four oblasts including both Odessa and Nikolaev, depriving what's left of Ukraine after this mess has come to an end of any access to the sea
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
107,507
32,049
113
This is something that many of the higher ups in the Kremlin lamented about publically, which is why they welcomed Trump winning the 2024 election. It's a shame because in the meantime the nation of Ukraine has been shattered and will very likely be losing another four oblasts including both Odessa and Nikolaev, depriving what's left of Ukraine after this mess has come to an end of any access to the sea
Seems like Russia has only been losing land lately.

 

seanzo

Well-known member
Nov 29, 2008
571
827
93
Seems like Russia has only been losing land lately.

DeepStateUA has always severely understated Russian gains and grossly overstated Ukrainian gains. Which is hardly surprising given that it's essentially part of the Ukrainian MOD.

As for Ukraine's counter attacks the past few weeks/month, a few things to keep in mind;

First, much of the ground Ukraine has regained (especially in Zaporizhzhia and Dnipropetrovsk but also in Kupyansk) was never acknowledged as being lost by DeepStateUA to begin with.

Second, these counter attacks are localized and not part of a general offensive taking place across the entire line of contact.

Third, these counter attacks cost Ukrainian lives and war materiel which Russians are more than willing to give up land they can retake after the counter attacks peter out if it means more dead Ukrainians.

In short these counter attacks are like Ukraine's ill fated excursion into Kursk, mostly desperate acts for propaganda rather than anything that would give Ukrainian forces a strategic edge on the battlefield
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
107,507
32,049
113
DeepStateUA has always severely understated Russian gains and grossly overstated Ukrainian gains. Which is hardly surprising given that it's essentially part of the Ukrainian MOD.

As for Ukraine's counter attacks the past few weeks/month, a few things to keep in mind;

First, much of the ground Ukraine has regained (especially in Zaporizhzhia and Dnipropetrovsk but also in Kupyansk) was never acknowledged as being lost by DeepStateUA to begin with.

Second, these counter attacks are localized and not part of a general offensive taking place across the entire line of contact.

Third, these counter attacks cost Ukrainian lives and war materiel which Russians are more than willing to give up land they can retake after the counter attacks peter out if it means more dead Ukrainians.

In short these counter attacks are like Ukraine's ill fated excursion into Kursk, mostly desperate acts for propaganda rather than anything that would give Ukrainian forces a strategic edge on the battlefield
Russia is not progressing in Ukraine, though. Both sides have been hitting infrastructure and the front is barely moving but it seems like Russia is the side closer to having domestic issues over the prolonged war.
 

oil&gas

Well-known member
Apr 16, 2002
16,115
3,043
113
Ghawar
Feb 14, 2026

Russia's air defenses may pose a more significant threat to NATO air forces than they would have before Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, a top air defense analyst warned in a recent report.

Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in 2022, Ukraine has been able to destroy numerous Russian air defense systems.

Justin Bronk, an air power expert at the UK's Royal United Services Institute, warned that not only does Russia still maintain a large arsenal, but it is also still producing its most powerful systems. And its ability to use these weapons has improved through combat experience.

Systems have been upgraded, crews have more experience, and Russia has become better at coordinating their use with surveillance aircraft to accurately extend their reach.

Russia's surface-to-air missile systems, Bronk wrote, "not only remain numerous, but are also likely to perform better against NATO aircraft and munitions in a hypothetical direct conflict than they would have before 2022."

Facing this challenge, NATO could struggle to sweep aside Russian air defenses in a European war to achieve air superiority — a cornerstone of Western airpower doctrine.

He told Business Insider in an interview about the report that Russia's forces are "much more experienced" and have "learned quite a lot through trial and experimentation."

A strictly air-to-air clash pitting Russian air forces against NATO aircraft likely wouldn't go well for Moscow, Bronk predicted, but a war wouldn't only take place in the air.

Before Western jets could operate freely, European air forces would likely need to suppress or destroy Russia's dense network of ground-based air defenses. Their volume and improved coordination could pose a serious challenge.
Russia still has a huge array of defenses

Ukraine has been able to achieve a "steady drumbeat" of strikes against Russian defense systems with weaponry like drones, artillery, and missiles, Bronk said, but there are still "several hundred batteries" in service, with more modern variants continuing to roll off production lines.

Bronk's analysis is based on interviews with Western air forces and ministries, data from Ukraine's armed forces, and open-source information.

He said his findings indicate that Russia's array of ground-based integrated air defence systems "remains a highly potent threat to NATO air capabilities in a European context."

The sheer volume is a problem for NATO in Europe. "The primary threat to NATO air power" is Russia's extensive ground-based surface-to-missile coverage, he said.

NATO notably doesn't have a similar arsenal.

The war in Ukraine has underscored how decisive ground-based air defenses can be. Russia began the war with the largest such arsenal in Europe, followed by Ukraine, and that scale has helped prevent either side from establishing air superiority.

NATO has committed to increasing its arsenal of ground-based air defenses in response, with alliance defense spending soaring, but it's not a problem that can be quickly solved.

Russia has experience and upgrades

Both Russia's combat aircraft crews and surface-to-air missile system operators are "significantly more combat-experienced and more capable overall than they were prior to the start of the full-scale invasion," Bronk said.

The increase in operator experience alongside hardware and software upgrades "a least partially offsets" some of the significant attrition that Russian SAM systems have suffered during the war against Ukraine.

Improvements to the force include new tactics and procedures, software updates to improve the performance of radars, better resistance to electronic warfare, and bringing new pieces of hardware into service.

New hardware includes the S-350 Vityaz, a medium-range surface-to-air missile system that first entered service in 2020.
Russia is coordinating better

Russia's forces are also getting better at working together, Bronk said.

He said that in a direct conflict with NATO forces in Europe, the threat to NATO aircraft "would be far better coordinated today than they were prior to 2022."
A large white aircraft in a grey sky with two smaller grey jets flying behind it
Russia's airborne early warning and control aircraft are working better with its air defenses and amplifying their power. ASSOCIATED PRESS

Ukraine has reported that since mid-2023, Russia's long-range surface-to-air missiles have more frequently coordinated engagements with fighter jets near the front lines and A-50U airborne early warning and control aircraft, allowing them to fire at Ukrainian aircraft "at ranges that the surface-to-air systems could not have been able to directly observe by themselves."

Russia could use similar strategies in a conflict with NATO, "to engage Western aircraft flying at low altitudes at longer ranges," Bronk said.

In Ukraine, he said, the probability of scoring a kill with one of these shots "almost certainly remains low," as they require the missile seeker to find the target without mid-course guidance.

But the evolved tactic points to how much more skilled Russia's air force and air defense crews have become, compared to their less coordinated tactics in the early months of the war.

At the same time, NATO's air forces have "access to significantly more detailed and accurate data on the strengths, weaknesses, tactics and technical characteristics of Russian SAM systems than they had before 2022," Bronk said. That can't be understated.

They understand the threat of Russia's ground-based air defenses better. And the weaponry and tactics to counter them do exist, Bronk said, "albeit not in sufficient numbers in Europe yet."

Ultimately, Bronk said, "Russian air defence capabilities have been boosted by combat lessons over almost four years of operations," and that could require more from NATO to break through in a fight.

 
Last edited:

seanzo

Well-known member
Nov 29, 2008
571
827
93
Russia is not progressing in Ukraine, though. Both sides have been hitting infrastructure and the front is barely moving but it seems like Russia is the side closer to having domestic issues over the prolonged war.
There isn't a single non partisan war mapper who states that Russia isn't making any progress. It is factually untrue. Russia has been advancing at an ever increasing rate. They are currently advancing in Sumy, Kharkov, and Donetsk. In Kharkov in particular they are currently in the process recapturing all the ground lost in Ukraine's fall of '22 counter offensive, which lies at the Northern gateway to Slovyansk and Kramatorsk, Ukraine's last bastions in the Donbass.

Speaking of Slovyansk and Kramatorsk, Siversk also recently fell to the Russians. A town on the eastern flank of Slovyansk that has held the Russians at bay since the very start of the war. In the South, Zaporizhzhia was up until very recently within 15km of Russian positions which is within howitzer range. Russian advances are not only accelerating but they are also capturing strategic ground that will be key in ending the war for Russia.

Magical thinking is literally what got Ukraine in this position to begin, hanging onto this 'Russia isn't advancing' narrative more of the same. It isn't going to end well for Ukraine
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
107,507
32,049
113
There isn't a single non partisan war mapper who states that Russia isn't making any progress. It is factually untrue. Russia has been advancing at an ever increasing rate. They are currently advancing in Sumy, Kharkov, and Donetsk. In Kharkov in particular they are currently in the process recapturing all the ground lost in Ukraine's fall of '22 counter offensive, which lies at the Northern gateway to Slovyansk and Kramatorsk, Ukraine's last bastions in the Donbass.

Speaking of Slovyansk and Kramatorsk, Siversk also recently fell to the Russians. A town on the eastern flank of Slovyansk that has held the Russians at bay since the very start of the war. In the South, Zaporizhzhia was up until very recently within 15km of Russian positions which is within howitzer range. Russian advances are not only accelerating but they are also capturing strategic ground that will be key in ending the war for Russia.

Magical thinking is literally what got Ukraine in this position to begin, hanging onto this 'Russia isn't advancing' narrative more of the same. It isn't going to end well for Ukraine
We've hear that the end is 2 weeks away for a few years now.

 

silentkisser

Master of Disaster
Jun 10, 2008
5,159
6,942
113
How is "he was willing to negotiate but not without Ukraine" mean that he didn't negotiate?
There were direct Ukraine/Russia talks through much of early 2022.
After that, there were talks between various groups all the time.
Are you seriously trying to say that only direct Biden-Putin or Trump-Putin talks count as negotiation?
Of course not. What I'm saying is there were no formal peace talks after the war started. And by that, I mean getting both Ukraine and Russia together to find a way to end the fighting. We know Biden tried to make the invasion painful for Russia by slapping sanctions on them. And, while Russia had worked before the war to mitigate that pain, they are still feeling it. I did forget the peace summit in June 2024 held in Switzerland, but again, that included Ukraine.

And regarding direct talks between leaders are not the only negotiations that count. We all know a lot of ground work is done before the big wigs get into it. But, the reality is that of note was accomplished (as far as we know). The point I was making is that Trump was totally willing to negotiate a peace deal without having Ukraine's involved. That changed, thankfully.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts