Russian special military operation in Ukraine #24

owais.usmani wrote:

https://twitter.com/ivan_8848/status/1570332809826271232

So what did he say?

I wonder if there will be a collection for Bandera troops?
I think I've got one inflatable armband for them from when I was learning to swim at age 5.

Altho the Neoliberals do seem to find a lot of dinghies. Invariably full of cheap labour Islamists flooding(excuse the pun) into Europe.

Now this is beginning to look like a war. https://twitter.com/mdfzeh/status/1570337708740055041 and it seems the river has cut off some ukrainian forces from the rest of their groups. looks like it was a well layed trap.

https://imetatronink.substack.com/p/fall-like-a-thunderbolt

The last part of the article:

And no one seems to be asking the most pertinent question: What will the Russians do next?
There seems to be a pervasive assumption that this apparent battlefield “victory” has been so humiliatingly complete that the Russians have been ruined; psychologically broken; that they are no longer capable of operations; that they are now a beaten, trembling mob of frightened “orcs” nervously awaiting the next train back to wherever it was they came from.
Those cheering as the victory parade rolls down the streets of Kiev, London, and Washington appear to have forgotten that Russia’s “special military operation” up to this point has employed a minor fraction of its military capability, and that the Russian objective, from the beginning, has not been to conquer territory, per se, but to comprehensively destroy Ukrainian military capabilities.
I think the Ukraine supporters might be engaging in an orgy of premature exultation.
I am persuaded the events of the past few weeks have been largely orchestrated pursuant to Russia’s ultimate objectives.
I am convinced the Russians remain masters of the art of maskirovka, and that the masters of empire in Brussels, London, and Washington – as they always have – continue to underestimate Russian strategic acumen, operational capabilities, and clever resourcefulness.
Even as NATO commanders in Kiev clink champagne flutes filled to the brim with looted Dom Perignon, and congratulate each other on a brilliantly conceived and expertly executed plan, I strongly suspect the other shoe is about to drop – and when it does, I expect it to fall like a thunderbolt on their unjustifiably inflated heads.

I understand that there is an economic dimension to this war and that mobilisation would only put unnecessary strains on the Russian economy... but why can't Russia deploy at least 300k troops?

Cyrus the great wrote:I understand that there is an economic dimension to this war and that mobilisation would only put unnecessary strains on the Russian economy... but why can't Russia deploy at least 300k troops?

How do you know Russia haven't done that? It's not like Russia publishes how many troops they have in Ukraine.
People just sit on social media and make wild guesses on the strength of the Russian forces. just so other people on social media can respond to them.

Cyrus the great wrote:I understand that there is an economic dimension to this war and that mobilisation would only put unnecessary strains on the Russian economy... but why can't Russia deploy at least 300k troops?

If the plan is to kill most of Ukraine's most nazified forces in their tens of thousands and defend only a very limited amount of territory, DPR, LPR (who will mostly be local militias reinforced by Russian mercs, counter terrorism specialists, and Russian regulars), Kherson and Zaprozhiye (a land bridge to Crimea and protecting Crimea's water supply might be the primary goal in the south) then only 70 to 100,000 forces in theater using rocketry, artillery, and air power are enough to do the job.

Putin did state that the SMO was to denazify and demilitarize Ukraine, protect the Sovereignty of the DPR and LPR. He, Shoigu, Peskov, and Lavrov also said they had no desire to occupy Ukraine. So for those of you getting mad at him for yielding back territory, keep in mind he never said he would occupy Ukraine.

Don't get me wrong, I would love a mass artillery, rocket, and bombing campaign that would last about a month that would destroy Ukraine's bridges (especially those over the Dniepr), power plants and oil pipelines (especially those that go to EU nations), airports and airfields, rail yards and rail tunnels (and government buildings and homes of Oligarchs as well as power plants and I would all but shut down Ukraine's internet. During this or following this, I'd love a drive to the Dniepr that would bypass towns and take half the country as this (combined with airstrikes on Kiev and Zelensky and the Nazis in the RADA and Oligarchs who back them) would lead to a capitulation.

However, such a war costs a lot of money, would require a lot more troops, possible economic and social disruption, and is not what Putin wants as the longer the SMO goes on the more Ukes die, the more the EU experiences winter and the more it is that calls for new governments opposed to NATO happen. The US can call for NATO to stick together all it wants but if nations quit NATO then it's forces and logistics systems get kicked out.

At the end of the day Putin is sticking to his plan and is so far doing exactly what he said he was going to do. Denazify and demilitarize Ukraine, protect DPR and LPR, protect Russian Sovereignty (especially in Crimea) and force Ukraine to stay neutral. He categorically said Russia had no intent to occupy Ukraine and by and large he fully means what he said. I think at most Russia maybe takes Nikolayevsk and Odessa, keeps Kherson and Zaprozhiye, and that's it. Meanwhile, Ukronazis die, Ukraine and NATO get denazified and demilitarized, and (as the Ukes die) the DPR and LPR get shelled less and less.

For the TLDR crowd, Putin is doing exactly what he said he was and is keeping his word that Russia has no intent on occupying Ukraine. Those complaining that he won't defend liberated territory are needlessly echoing western propaganda and clearly ignored Vladimir Vladimirovich when he said what his aims were and when he said he had no intent to occupy Ukraine. The war is going as planned.

The plan will be to split the Ukraine in 3 or so.
Novorossiya will inc Dnipropetrovsk, Nikolaev, Kharkov, Zap, Kherson, Odessa, Donetsk, Lugansk etc. This could all be reabsorbed into Russia pretty quicky.
Malorossiya will centre around Kiev.
Rump Pukraine will be around 5 oblasts in the West.



The bullshit reported in Ameri-fag/Euro-fag media hasnt changed a single thing.

Firebird wrote:The plan will be to split the Ukraine in 3 or so.
Novorossiya will inc Dnipropetrovsk, Nikolaev, Kharkov, Zap, Kherson, Odessa, Donetsk, Lugansk etc. This could all be reabsorbed into Russia pretty quicky.
Malorossiya will centre around Kiev.
Rump Pukraine will be around 5 oblasts in the West.



The bullshit reported in Ameri-fag/Euro-fag media hasnt changed a single thing.

As much as I would really love to see Russian seizure of Ukraine up to the borders that existed from 1919-1939, I really don't see it happening. It's not what Putin wants, but again no complaints if it did happen.

ucmvulcan wrote:

As much as I would really love to see Russian seizure of Ukraine up to the borders that existed from 1919-1939, I really don't see it happening.  It's not what Putin wants, but again no complaints if it did happen.

And how is demilitarization/denazification/ neutrality maintained with 4 raions/oblasts?

You cannot maintain it with only Lughansk Donetsk Zaporizhia, and Kherson

makes no sense, and this is pretty much disregarded after Kharkov

Russia , in order to fulfill those very goals set by statesman , must occupy Ukraine , or at the very least take the leadership out and force the collapse of Ukraine

Flooding the Ingulets and having some tactical defensive victories does not fulfill objectives of SMO

Whatever those may be, and if they really want denazification and demilitarization,

Well they must send more troops in to the regions like Kharkov and such

Arkanghelsk wrote:

ucmvulcan wrote:

As much as I would really love to see Russian seizure of Ukraine up to the borders that existed from 1919-1939, I really don't see it happening. It's not what Putin wants, but again no complaints if it did happen.

And how is demilitarization/denazification/ neutrality maintained with 4 raions/oblasts?

You cannot maintain it with only Lughansk Donetsk Zaporizhia, and Kherson

makes no sense, and this is pretty much disregarded after Kharkov

Russia , in order to fulfill those very goals set by statesman , must occupy Ukraine , or at the very least take the leadership out and force the collapse of Ukraine

Flooding the Ingulets and having some tactical defensive victories does not fulfill objectives of SMO

Whatever those may be, and if they really want denazification and demilitarization,

Well they must send more troops in to the regions like Kharkov and such

The plan is not long term occupation. Don't get attached to territorial gains. Those are temporary. They are taken to get the Ukes to bait the Ukes to amass forces, then the Russian army melts away with few losses, the Ukes take photo ops, the western press acts like Ukraine won some massive victory and meanwhile the Ukrainian forces occupying that territory get bombed, shelled, and rocketed out of existence. Sure, some dig in, but then Russia starts an operation somewhere down the line and the Ukes have to take those troops out, Levy more troops and prepare to recapture that territory. They do, or in the case of Kherson -which seems to be a main Russian aim- they attack and get eviscerated.

ALAMO wrote:




Inspector General of the Bundeswehr, Eberhard Zorn, quoted by Focus, claimed that there are no signs of any Ukro "counteroffensive".

The actions they have made are good enough to fight and reclaim a village rather than push the Russian army away.

Oh my oh my, who would consider such zrada

By the way, the guy holds the highest position in the german armed forces, there is no higher rank.

Public apologies or sacked in 3...2...1..

Cyrus the great wrote:I understand that there is an economic dimension to this war and that mobilisation would only put unnecessary strains on the Russian economy... but why can't Russia deploy at least 300k troops?

Everyone including Putin himself and his economics team under estimated the economy themselves. They were expecting a 10-12% reduction in GDP.

There's no way 300,000 troops (calling up 220,000 more troops) is going to damage the economy.

ucmvulcan wrote:

Firebird wrote:The the West.



The bullshit reported in Ameri-fag/Euro-fag media hasnt changed a single thing.

As much as I would really love to see Russian seizure of Ukraine up to the borders that existed from 1919-1939, I really don't see it happening.  It's not what Putin wants, but again no complaints if it did happen.

They need to go to the Dniper and preferably past it a bit. The current territories don't look that impressive on a map and it still leaves a huge border that NATO will try and claim the other side of. It's not doable that way

Mir wrote:

ArgentinaGuard wrote:
Pinochet was a patriot. Of course he deserves respect. Except for the communism of his country.

Pinochet was a brutal Nazi dictator - period. He murdered, tortured, persecuted, sexually abused and made a lot of people disappear - all against his own people that did not quite like his brutal oppressive ways. Yes very nice patriot he was - just like Stalin and Hitler.

Btw Stalin was not a Communist - he was a Stalinist. It was either his way or no way. Even Lenin thought Stalin was not a good idea.

Guess what - Argentinians suffered the very same fate from their own military dictator during the 70's and 80's, but I am 100% sure you support this kind of shit.

Pinochet was not a Nazi, ignorant. He was a neoliberal.
And Stalin was stubborn. I appeal to nationalism when Germany was on the brink of Moscow. And after killing millions of ethnic Russians (when he was a Georgian) All wrong.
Stalin is a communist, as was Lenin and all the Jews who ended the Russian Empire.

Ask Chileans what they think of Pinochet. They have just ratified their constitution despite the efforts of the communist Boric.
Brutal methods against terrorists and reds lol. It makes me tender that you say it.
And you think that Russian opponents and enemies of the state have been treated well? The pro-Western journalists who have been eliminated by the services. It seems very good to me.
You have to defend the nation, everything goes.



And I would like to make a clarification for the readers and so that they understand the context of the reference to Pinochet.
In war you have to be willing to do anything because you are betting on the survival of Russia as a historical entity.
I see Putin as careful, but care is one thing and shyness is another.
You have to raze Ukraine and give a message to the West.

Ukraine Delenda Est.

ArgentinaGuard wrote:

Mir wrote:

ArgentinaGuard wrote:
Pinochet was a patriot. Of course he deserves respect. Except for the communism of his country.

Pinochet was a brutal Nazi dictator - period. He murdered, tortured, persecuted, sexually abused and made a lot of people disappear - all against his own people that did not quite like his brutal oppressive ways. Yes very nice patriot he was - just like Stalin and Hitler.

Btw Stalin was not a Communist - he was a Stalinist. It was either his way or no way. Even Lenin thought Stalin was not a good idea.

Guess what - Argentinians suffered the very same fate from their own military dictator during the 70's and 80's, but I am 100% sure you support this kind of shit.

Pinochet was not a Nazi, ignorant. He was a neoliberal.
And Stalin was stubborn. I appeal to nationalism when Germany was on the brink of Moscow. And after killing millions of ethnic Russians (when he was a Georgian) All wrong.
Stalin is a communist, as was Lenin and all the Jews who ended the Russian Empire.

Ask Chileans what they think of Pinochet. They have just ratified their constitution despite the efforts of the communist Boric.
Brutal methods against terrorists and reds lol. It makes me tender that you say it.
And you think that Russian opponents and enemies of the state have been treated well? The pro-Western journalists who have been eliminated by the services. It seems very good to me.
You have to defend the nation, everything goes.

Holy shit you are dumb.

I know someone, directly face to face, who suffered under Pinochet. A Chilean who was a socialist. He was a university student at the time. Ended up in prison when he told his goons that he was a proud socialist that applied for schooling in Leningrad. He was thrown in jail then exiled.

Don't talk about events you neither understand. By sounds of it, you don't understand much

[quote="sepheronx"][quote="ArgentinaGuard"]

Mir wrote:

ArgentinaGuard wrote:
Pinochet was a patriot. Of course he deserves respect. Except for the communism of his country.

Holy shit you are dumb.

I know someone, directly face to face, who suffered under Pinochet.  A Chilean who was a socialist. He was a university student at the time. Ended up in prison when he told his goons that he was a proud socialist that applied for schooling in Leningrad.  He was thrown in jail then exiled.

Don't talk about events you neither understand. By sounds of it, you don't understand much

It must have been a red propagandist. Allende was useless who led Chile to poverty and hyperinflation, who gave shelter to the terrorists who planted bombs in my country. A bastard that I only recognize one thing: he had the honor of committing suicide.

I ask your student friend. If in the Soviet Union you made propaganda for the return to the Church and the Russian empire, what happened? Did they take you out for coffee?