LOL! There's no way it was 1:1 during the blitzkrieg. Are you really that stupid to believe that? Russia was throwing away troops like black people throwing dollar bills at a strip club. Now, they are much more disciplined so the K:D ratio is significantly improved. Look, I know you want Russia to win more than anyone besides chopsticks, but you need to come back to reality. Don't get me wrong, Russia is capable of occupying Donetsk, Luhansk, and Crimea indefinitely. It's possible that Ukraine may eventually cede territory all of those territories. The question is, will it be worth it?

We should all pray for the war to end ASAP. Russia needs to go home and recover. The longer they stay, the worse it will be for everyone. Russia no longer has anything to prove because we all see Russia for what it is now.



There are other options such as Putin ignoring the attack like he's done with attacks on other ships. Putin may have made a miscalculation regarding Ukrainian resistance, but that doesn't make him an idiot. Russia will take losses because they don't really have any other choice. Why would you start a world war when you're struggling against your neighbor?

Feel free to post a source that's at least somewhat objective to say otherwise?

What I want is for the war to end, because I don't want people dying, not 20 year old random poor Russians who couldn't pay their way out of military service and certainly not innocent Ukrainians. That's my goal. Regime change in Ukraine would of been literally least costly lives wise.

As a Christian I value lives, I'm not some piece of shit cheering on a war because our geopolitical enemy might come out of it weaker because a bunch of their people died.

You know what would have cost even LESS lives? Russia not invading in the first place
You know what would cost the least amount of lives now going forward? Russia leaving immediately. Notice how there are less people dying in the Kiev region, Kharkiv region, etc.
Seriously, you're not fooling anyone with your fake Christian values. Just admit that you want Russia/China to be a counterbalance to America.

What do you consider "objective" sources regarding losses?

This post was edited by thundercock on May 23 2022 05:51pm

As a Christian you should value democracy over authoritarianism.

Okay let me get on the call with the Kremlin and tell Putin and company to go home.

Obviously them never invading would be ideal but here we are. We can either be naïve children yelling that the world is not fair and they should leave immediately or be adults and realize that the resolution here is concessions, you know, like the French, Germans, etc are talking behind closed doors.

What I want is for us to focus on our selves, we have enough issues, not be setting up military bases and rocket systems on other countries door steps cuz defense. That's a world view that's consistent with Biblical dogma unlike garbage like "well the longer this war goes on and people die we benefit cause our enemy weaker".



I value life and peace over death and geopolitical hegemony.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on May 23 2022 06:15pm

doublepost

This post was edited by ofthevoid on May 23 2022 06:11pm

Its their sole navy with access to Ukraine. Its how they control the sea for reinforcements and supply lines and how they launch cruise missiles. Ending the blockade and forcing the fleet back means opening it to hostile reinforcements and weapons shipments and cutting their supply lines. And right at its first an most direct impact, it means lots of dead Russian sailors and a major fleet taken out. Its like asking why America would go to war after Japan sunk our pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor.

This is one of the most direct stepping stones to a nuclear war. Putin will not retreat and cannot allow the black sea navy to be destroyed. And the Russian navy is so decrepit and using old enough technology that it certainly cannot fend off proper NATO missile attacks while stuck like sitting ducks in the black sea, I still sincerely doubt even our Navy would really hold up with the benefit of carrier strike groups, at least in a real all-out war. So where does that leave Russia? In a corner.

At that point, what are Russia's options? It would mean Harpoons are already staged in Ukraine, too late to scare NATO into refusing to commit them. To try to intimidate NATO into ceasing their use or withdrawing them would require significant retaliatory escalation, and that would be a gamble. If they tried to be proportional and have some proxy state like Iran launch missiles at the US navy, it both gets bogged down by their allies unwillingness to join in, and the potential failure of limited strikes short of all-out war. Shooting a few missiles that get intercepted would just embolden NATO. Conventional bombing Harpoon launching sites would be a losing battle, the Danish ones are fire and forget truck mounted launchers. Russia would lose its navy and Ukraine might lose a couple trucks or nothing at all. So that leaves the one direct option that is guaranteed to change the dynamics of the war and send a message: Dropping a nuke on Ukraine. Whether that gives NATO cold feet and we rethink our escalatory approach, or whether it leads to nuclear holocaust.

We can't just blow up the Russian navy and expect no reaction. This is batshit insane. We're talking about plunging headfirst into world war 3.

I think the only reasonable concession Ukraine could make is to go back to the 2014 borders and have all occupied Ukrainian territory be demilitarized. The 3 regions would be autonomous and maybe we can talk about selling Crimea back to Russia. In addition, Ukraine would need to have security guarantees i.e. be a member of NATO given that Russia has proven to be an existential threat to Ukraine. We'll have to see though. Ukraine is already in a significantly stronger negotiating position than it was a month ago. The situation is very fluid.

I'm not sure if we should listen to the French or Germans because they are incredibly weak and selfish. They couldn't care less about the number of Ukrainians killed as long as they get their energy needs met.

Out of curiosity, would you have supported the Soviet Union ceding all land west of the Urals to the Axis powers? After all, tens of millions of lives would have been saved if Russia did that. Perhaps you might have supported Soviets simply pushing Germany out instead of going on the offensive all the way to Berlin? I want to understand where you draw the line when it comes to your holy, righteous beliefs.

Regarding focusing on ourselves, that's not really biblical at all. We should be doing everything in our power to spread Christianity throughout the world (converting Muslims, atheists, Hindus, etc.) We should be helping 3rd world nations build sustainable infrastructure, affordable food, etc. America has so much excess relative to the rest of the world that it doesn't make sense to focus on ourselves over the truly poor and needy. God isn't buying your justification for your selfish world view and neither am I.

Also its got to be pointed out how very vulnerable the black sea fleet is right now. Besides it being really outdated tech with point defense that cannot fend off sea skimming missiles, its trapped in the black sea and cannot be reinforced with more naval vessels. Russia is using civilian flagged transports for its supply lines to appease Turkey and pass ships through the Turkish straits, but that means the supply ships are even more vulnerable than normal. They could retreat beyond the range of harpoons into the eastern black sea past Sevastopol, but lose their blockade and supply lines and thus the war, and still be vulnerable

Russia isn't about to let NATO start sinking its navy, this is the most direct path to nuclear escalation

It only means a lot of dead Russian soldiers if the Russian high command refuses to retreat its fleet after the first Russian ship is sunk like a rubber duck in a tub by the much more technologically advanced NATO missiles.

The reinforcements and supply are a non-factor. Arms shipment has to be transported from either the Western land border of Ukraine, or in this scenario from the ports of Odessa, to the battlefront in the East. It is during this transport that it is most vulnerable and can be picked off by Russian missiles. Geographically, it doesn't really matter if these missiles are fired from their ships while they are anchoring in the port of Sewastopol or off the shoreline from Odessa.

Now, attacking the Russian port in Sewastopol would indeed be akin to Pearl Harbor and a huge escalation, that would indeed risk a nuclear response. But imho, merely pushing the Black Sea Navy away from Odessa would not.
What unblocking Odessa would enable, however, is for Ukraine to finally ship the crop that's stacked up in their silos right now, bringing much needed relief to the food situation in many poor countries and opening up fresh storage for this year's harvest.




Would you be willing to trigger an economic downturn on the level of the Great Recession in your own country, just to defend a foreign people or to stick it to the Russians? Because that's what immediately giving up any energy imports from Russia would mean for Western Europe. Also, just one page ago, you have more or less advocated for dragging this war out longer than it needs to be, so that Russia can be weakened as much as possible.

You are in no position to complain about "the French and Germans not caring about killed Ukrainians".

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on May 23 2022 07:36pm