Nice insults, something triggered you ? Never said you are russian, btw can't know since you are hidding your own country while criticizing other's.

So:

- You linked a document where NATO is saying it accepts ex-ussr countries to join in - at their own request - . Excuse me i don't see any kind of agression here.

- Nato is a defensive alliance (against some historical threat, lets find out which one lol) and represents the most advanced and free countries in the world.

If you expect people to believe your "Putin's Russian Empire is getting oppressed by NATO" joke... Well lol good luck with it.

https://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=92094408&f=119&p=641041040
https://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=92094408&f=119&p=640873956
https://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=92094408&f=119&p=640862883
https://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=92094408&f=119&p=640605400
https://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=92094408&f=119&p=640554967
https://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=92094408&f=119&p=640246139
https://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=92094408&f=119&p=639419336

WTF ? Really sad, i feel ashamed for you.

This post was edited by Meanwhile on Mar 4 2023 07:54am

Whenever the same countries abstained on any UN resolution regarding Ukraine, you and your ilk celebrated it as evidence for "the third world aligning with Russia", "Russia not being isolated" or "Western diplomacy failing and its international clout declining at warp-speed".

Russia has artillery superiority due to sheer numbers. Technologically, they're using ancient systems from the 60s and 70s. In terms of precision and burn rate, Ukraine's artillery should be far more efficient. They also have access to superior Western intelligence and satellite data etc. Therefore, the actual efficacy of the respective sides' artillery fire will not favor Russia by nearly a 10:1 ratio.

The truth is that we don't know the exact casualties on both sides. For propaganda reasons, each side has an incentive to exaggerate their enemy's losses and downplay their own. In any case, we can safely assume the Russian losses during their frontal assaults on fortified positions in Wuhledar, Bakhmut etc to be gigantic. Which is the very reason why they're sending their lowest ranking orcs (prison recruits, ethnic minorities from the most backward provinces of Russia) for this task.



The refugees from Ukraine skew heavily toward women and children because fighting-age men are not allowed to leave the country. So unless either side gets so desperate they're sending women and children to fight, Volkssturm-style, this will not be a major factor.



Of course they can, I never claimed otherwise.
My point was that things get dicey for Russia if they trade 4:1 or 3:1 - there is an upper limit to the inefficiency Russia can sustain while still ultimately winning the war of attrition.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Mar 4 2023 08:10am

NATO has been expanding for decades as you know



NATO has no business whatsoever in Ukraine, NATO is well aware of crossing Russia's red line (plenty warnings were given).

So YOU KNOW what's going on, which is a blatant provocation, namely



Do you not understand how things work in international politics? --> provocations could result in counter action taken

Telling Russia that your provocations are not provocations (calling it Russia's unprovoked war against Ukraine) aint gonna do shit because in their view there's only one solution and that's war --> You can thank NATO

I wrote all that here already, several times. The usual 3:1 ratio for the attacker and the Ukrainian artillery precision.
Btw I would not be suprised if the ratio was like 5 or 7:1 (considering russians military "performance")

What's mostly exposed here is the fail of russian army to adapt, especiall after the recent battle where they lost more than 100 armed vehicles, doing the exact same mistakes that last year.
IMHO we have a double effect: lack of internal reporting & initiatives (afraid to get punished for just that) + rampant corruption and nepotism in a deprecated army structure.

While the majority of their systems are older ones, likes grads, TOS-1, Russian version howitzers, etc, they have fielded modern MLRS like Tornado-S that are just as advanced as HIMARS. 60s, 70s and on weapons systems are also not as stone age tech as you want to believe, they are still highly effective, especially when being paired today with modern drones that can scout out target and relay back firing positions.

You pretend as if Ukraine is using state of the art systems when in reality the vast majority of their arsenal is soviet era hand me downs from central Europe peppered with a sparingly used HIMARS and other systems like howitzers that Russia also has. Russia has superiority in artillery hands down, just by sheer quantity, there really is no technological advantage for Ukraine, that's cope.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Mar 4 2023 08:52am

I never said the first thing. In fact it is the highest diplomats and warmongers of the West who have made that claim.

https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2023/02/20/west-global-south-neutral-ukraine/

So, no, that is a sentiment of your side and "ilk", not mine. I have said that some countries are aligning with Russia, which is obviously true of many of those nays and abstentions there. Mostly, though, and this is true of the majority of the yeas as well, most countries and people around the world look at this war and say 'looks like a you problem, I got my own shit to deal with'. That's neutrality.

The latter two, that Russia is not being isolated and that Western diplomacy is failing, are just obviously true. It was you who cited Brazil, completely unprompted, as a diplomatic success for this vote that carries no material consequence. What actually happened? Pathetic cuck Scholz, whose country was attacked by America in a brazen act of industrial sabotage and environmental terrorism, went to Brazil to beg Lula, a person who went to jail at the behest of an American lawfare coup against his party, to send weapons to Ukraine. While standing right next to Scholz at a presser, Lula dressed the man down, repudiated the call for more weapons, and affirmed Brazil would not send a single piece of hardware or ammunition into the conflict.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-31/lula-rejects-weapons-to-ukraine-plan-proposed-by-germany-s-scholz

Countries that represent only 13% of the world's population have sent arms to Ukraine. 87% of the world is neutral or even hostile to NATO's proxy war against Russia.

The bolded is a fair point. Still, Ukraine does have technologically superior Western artillery in their mix, which has to count for something. And like I said: Ukraine has access to Western intelligence and satellites, so they definitely have the upper hand in this regard.

Again: I don't dispute that Russia does have artillery superiority and that Russia would easily win a war of attrition if they manage to trade 1:1. What I am contending with is the extent of their artillery superiority and the extent of their numerical superiority.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Mar 4 2023 09:32am

No to nitpick a post I agree with, but American military staff have actually complained about Ukraine using HIMARS for every damn thing and burning through ammunition way too quickly. We've even seen recently that they are using their brand new GLSDBs to (what else?) take out civilian paramedics far from the front.


Logistics nightmare. Having dozens of different platforms and their different ammo needs in a country that barely has functioning railways anymore is not a good thing.

This post was edited by kusotarre1 on Mar 4 2023 09:38am

I think that the 13% of the world's population or countries that send arms, more than half of them are being held "hostage" , I am not sure if that is too harsh of a word to use, but being held hostage by the United States politicians due to influence and interference. And there are those that are American client states.
I think they wouldn't have sent if they have a choice. But they don't, as much as these are sovereign nations who are hoping to have their own foreign policies and how they treat this war or any other issues, they are being pressured and at times behind closed doors threaten to make and follow such decisions.