Russia begins invasion of Ukraine

[hometeam]

There will be another wave of mobilization. I kind of read in the media that Putin denies this?

This is where I'm getting this from:

Institute for the Study of War

This page collects ISW and CTP's updates on the conflict in Ukraine. In late February 2022, ISW began publishing daily synthetic products covering key events related to renewed Russian aggression against Ukraine.

www.understandingwar.org

"Russian officials are preparing for further covert mobilization efforts even as the fall conscription cycle is underway, likely further flooding the already overburdened Russian force generation apparatus in such a way that will be detrimental to the development of mobilized and conscripted servicemen. Russian Telegram channels actively discussed indicators on November 18 that the Kremlin is preparing for a second mobilization wave and circulated an image of a draft summons received by a citizen of St. Petersburg who was reportedly told to appear for mobilization in January 2023 despite Russian President Vladimir Putin’s announcement of the formal end of partial mobilization on October 31.[1] Nationalist milbloggers additionally circulated claims that general mobilization will begin in December or January.[2] An independent Russian outlet published an investigation on November 18 showing that state structures and enterprises are continuing to prepare their employees for mobilization by sending them to various training programs and mobilization-related educational courses.[3] Another Russian outlet noted that the Odintsovo garrison military court in Moscow Oblast inadvertently confirmed that mobilization is continuing despite its formal end.[4] The court reportedly accused a mobilized soldier of beating his commander on November 13 “during the performance of his duties of military service or in connection with the performance of these duties during the period of mobilization,” which indicates that the court is operating on the legal basis that mobilization is still very much underway.[5] The Kremlin has said that Russian President Vladimir Putin has no need to sign a decree formally ending the mobilization period, as ISW has previously reported.[6]

The continuation of covert mobilization efforts and potential preparations for another mobilization wave in tandem with the current fall conscription cycle are likely adding substantial strain to an already over-burdened Russian force generation apparatus. As ISW previously assessed, Putin likely ordered the end of partial mobilization in order to free up bureaucratic and administrative capacity for the November 1 conscription class.[7] However, it is evident that Russian authorities never fully halted mobilization efforts, which means that a limited number of mobilized recruits are still being forced through the training system at the same time as conscripts are going through their own training cycle. This will likely lead to even lower quality training for both mobilized recruits and conscripts as they compete for insufficient training capacity. Another wave of mobilization in the coming months will only worsen the situation and likely degrade the overall quality of the Russian troops that will be funneled to the frontline in Ukraine."

It seems likely to me. If they're going to stay on the defensive the Ukrainians will never go to the negotiation table. If they're going to go on the offensive they'll need more than the 200k coming (about 100k have already arrived.) And the first round of mobilization went pretty poorly. But it could just be that these Russian milbloggers are just hoping that something drastic will be done to change the momentum.

Probably the worst thing is the unpredictable actions of Mr. Putin. After all, what can he do next if he continues to suffer bad luck in Ukraine. I don't want to think about the nuclear button.

I think I read that President Xi called Putin up and basically said "so far we've been neutral but if you start launching nukes we'll have no choice but to join the Europeans and Americans on this." I'm pretty sure he would become a modern day Hitler at that point.

edit: here's a link:

China’s Xi warns Putin not to use nuclear arms in Ukraine

Chinese leader makes the call during a visit by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz.

www.politico.eu

 

[Hughinn]

Outspent Russia 5 to 1:
Ukraine spent $8B of it's own money according to Reuters (Ukraine's 2021 military budget ~$6B.)
As of October 3, more than $37B in military aid was given(from all countries not including pledged). (From KIEL institute for the world economy)
Total ≈ $45B

Russia's official military budget for 2022 is $75B.
Russia is spending ~ $900M a day as of May causing them to go into severe debt.

Please tell me where you got the 5 to 1 ratio and them spending more than Russia's military budget from.

Outnumbered 3 to 1:
Russia has just under 1.5 million armed forces personnel (2 mil reserves) while Ukraine has around 300k with 900,000 reserves (pic). Please tell me where you are getting that ratio from. I am eager to hear your answer.

I'm impressed by the amount of copium the Russian supporters seem to be sniffing to keep believing all the retreats are just feints or moving to more advantageous positions. I will also be impressed if Russia has the number of active nukes they say they do. US spends 44.2B on maintenance per year while Russia spends 8.6B. I am also impressed with how Russia didn't clean the salts off their weapons before putting them in long-term storage causing them to be the misshapen piece of garbage you see.

I agree with you about how the working class shouldn't be solely paying for the war but that's an issue with businesses such as Amazon not paying enough in taxes. It's only 5.6% of the US military budget that is going to Ukraine as of Nov, 21.

You lost me at "I agree with you about how the working class shouldn't be solely paying for the war but that's an issue with businesses such as Amazon not paying enough in taxes"

Because I don't see any legitimate reason for any American citizen to pay for a war between two corrupt Eastern European ogliarchies when there is not one legitimate national security concern for American citizens.

And I still don't understand why your surprised that Ukraine, with a blank check of American taxpayer dollars armed to the teeth with best weapons around and supported by mercenaries from virtually every western country has this far survived somehow.

The absolute surprise in reality is that Russia, with a fraction of the budget and outnumbered from the beginning had still been able to destroy the Ukrainian army and NATO weaponry almost as fast as it can be deployed.

The nonsense needs to stop, and stop now before the entire world pays the price

 

[Hughinn]

This is where I'm getting this from:

Institute for the Study of War

This page collects ISW and CTP's updates on the conflict in Ukraine. In late February 2022, ISW began publishing daily synthetic products covering key events related to renewed Russian aggression against Ukraine.

www.understandingwar.org

"Russian officials are preparing for further covert mobilization efforts even as the fall conscription cycle is underway, likely further flooding the already overburdened Russian force generation apparatus in such a way that will be detrimental to the development of mobilized and conscripted servicemen. Russian Telegram channels actively discussed indicators on November 18 that the Kremlin is preparing for a second mobilization wave and circulated an image of a draft summons received by a citizen of St. Petersburg who was reportedly told to appear for mobilization in January 2023 despite Russian President Vladimir Putin’s announcement of the formal end of partial mobilization on October 31.[1] Nationalist milbloggers additionally circulated claims that general mobilization will begin in December or January.[2] An independent Russian outlet published an investigation on November 18 showing that state structures and enterprises are continuing to prepare their employees for mobilization by sending them to various training programs and mobilization-related educational courses.[3] Another Russian outlet noted that the Odintsovo garrison military court in Moscow Oblast inadvertently confirmed that mobilization is continuing despite its formal end.[4] The court reportedly accused a mobilized soldier of beating his commander on November 13 “during the performance of his duties of military service or in connection with the performance of these duties during the period of mobilization,” which indicates that the court is operating on the legal basis that mobilization is still very much underway.[5] The Kremlin has said that Russian President Vladimir Putin has no need to sign a decree formally ending the mobilization period, as ISW has previously reported.[6]

The continuation of covert mobilization efforts and potential preparations for another mobilization wave in tandem with the current fall conscription cycle are likely adding substantial strain to an already over-burdened Russian force generation apparatus. As ISW previously assessed, Putin likely ordered the end of partial mobilization in order to free up bureaucratic and administrative capacity for the November 1 conscription class.[7] However, it is evident that Russian authorities never fully halted mobilization efforts, which means that a limited number of mobilized recruits are still being forced through the training system at the same time as conscripts are going through their own training cycle. This will likely lead to even lower quality training for both mobilized recruits and conscripts as they compete for insufficient training capacity. Another wave of mobilization in the coming months will only worsen the situation and likely degrade the overall quality of the Russian troops that will be funneled to the frontline in Ukraine."

It seems likely to me. If they're going to stay on the defensive the Ukrainians will never go to the negotiation table. If they're going to go on the offensive they'll need more than the 200k coming (about 100k have already arrived.) And the first round of mobilization went pretty poorly. But it could just be that these Russian milbloggers are just hoping that something drastic will be done to change the momentum.


I think I read that President Xi called Putin up and basically said "so far we've been neutral but if you start launching nukes we'll have no choice but to join the Europeans and Americans on this." I'm pretty sure he would become a modern day Hitler at that point.

edit: here's a link:

China’s Xi warns Putin not to use nuclear arms in Ukraine

Chinese leader makes the call during a visit by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz.

www.politico.eu

You think you read?

The copy and paste idiot "thinks he read".

I doubt you've read half the bullshit you copy and paste here.

In other words, in your own article, xi and Putin want to negotiate before deployment of nuclear weapons, but Washington will not give zelensky permission.

Likely because enough stupid people like you think we're trying to "liberate the Ukrainian people"

Just like you did so many others

 

[Hughinn]

By "you", I don't mean you.

We both know you don't have the balls to participate in a junior high school yard fistfight.

Much less open war.

Cunts like you prefer talking shit from the sidelines, or well behind the protected barrier.

Because spitting in someone's face isn't provoking them to knock your teeth out when they should've been as much as much of a cunt as you are and cried to the teacher

Because you're a good little punk and your not afraid of a scolding from the teacher, but you piss on yourself over the kid who'd knock your teeth out for spitting in his face... because he won't ask permission from the teacher to knock your teeth out.

 

[hometeam]

Because spitting in someone's face isn't provoking them to knock your teeth out when they should've been as much as much of a cunt as you are and cried to the teacher

Yes I know, because when Russia spits in the face of NATO and invades a European country who was no threat to Russia, we should just sit back and let it happen because "think of the Ukrainian bloodshed if they defended themselves like they wanted to" and who cares about the Ukrainian bloodshed that happened as a result of Russia invading, right? They were provoked, Ukraine shouldn't have chosen the West. Such a hypocrite.

Because I don't see any legitimate reason for any American citizen to pay for a war between two corrupt Eastern European ogliarchies when there is not one legitimate national security concern for American citizens.

If left unchecked, Russia would absorb Estonia, Latvia, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan doubling their population and doubling their economy, make Russia great again and matter again, and then we would have another cold war. But NATO won't let that happen.

Whether or not Putin's intentions truly are to absorb these former states doesn't really matter because you can't read Putin's mind and after his '07 Munich speech and after attacking Georgia in '08 (and especially today after attacking Ukraine twice) the West can reasonably see it as a possibility, something to contain.

In 2007 he said that United States' monopolistic dominance in global relations, and its "almost uncontained hyper use of force in international relations ... stimulates an arms race."

And in 2014 after annexing Crimea he said that "domination by one country and its allies" had created a "unilateral diktat" producing the "opposite result" as intended. And "We are sliding into the times when, instead of the balance of interests and mutual guarantees, it is fear and the balance of mutual destruction that prevent nations from engaging in direct conflict."

And in 2015 he said of the US: "the end of the Cold War the world was left with one center of dominance, and those who found themselves at the top of the pyramid were tempted to think that, since they are so powerful and exceptional, they know best what needs to be done" and that since the Cold War "they have never abandoned their policy, which is based on arrogance, exceptionalism and impunity.”

This is indeed a national security threat.

 

[Hughinn]

Yes I know, because when Russia spits in the face of NATO and invades a European country who was no threat to Russia, we should just sit back and let it happen because "think of the Ukrainian bloodshed if they defended themselves like they wanted to" and who cares about the Ukrainian bloodshed that happened as a result of Russia invading, right? They were provoked, Ukraine shouldn't have chosen the West. Such a hypocrite.


If left unchecked, Russia would absorb Estonia, Latvia, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan doubling their population and doubling their economy, make Russia great again and matter again, and then we would have another cold war. But NATO won't let that happen.

Whether or not Putin's intentions truly are to absorb these former states doesn't really matter because you can't read Putin's mind and after his '07 Munich speech and after attacking Georgia in '08 (and especially today after attacking Ukraine twice) the West can reasonably see it as a possibility, something to contain.

In 2007 he said that United States' monopolistic dominance in global relations, and its "almost uncontained hyper use of force in international relations ... stimulates an arms race."

And in 2014 after annexing Crimea he said that "domination by one country and its allies" had created a "unilateral diktat" producing the "opposite result" as intended. And "We are sliding into the times when, instead of the balance of interests and mutual guarantees, it is fear and the balance of mutual destruction that prevent nations from engaging in direct conflict."

And in 2015 he said of the US: "the end of the Cold War the world was left with one center of dominance, and those who found themselves at the top of the pyramid were tempted to think that, since they are so powerful and exceptional, they know best what needs to be done" and that since the Cold War "they have never abandoned their policy, which is based on arrogance, exceptionalism and impunity.”

This is indeed a national security threat.

Oh yeah, we get it

"Putin is a megalomaniac cartoon supervillain bent on world domination"

Except he's"losing miserably in Ukraine with no chance of victory"

If America has the best nuclear arsenal in the world, then there's absolutely no threat to American citizens, by your own definition, from Putin or Russia.

You're a fool, you make yourself look stupid and contradict yourself at every turn.

"Putin" and "Russia" present no threat whatsoever to the liberty of American citizens. None at all. 'putin" could not threaten American Liberty in any sense of the word, even if he wanted to.

But who can?

 

[hometeam]

Oh yeah, we get it

"Putin is a megalomaniac cartoon supervillain bent on world domination"

Except he's"losing miserably in Ukraine with no chance of victory"

If America has the best nuclear arsenal in the world, then there's absolutely no threat to American citizens, by your own definition, from Putin or Russia.

You're a fool, you make yourself look stupid and contradict yourself at every turn.

"Putin" and "Russia" present no threat whatsoever to the liberty of American citizens. None at all. 'putin" could not threaten American Liberty in any sense of the word, even if he wanted to.

But who can?

View attachment 175776

Yes, we know. Biden is bad, Biden is a "megalomaniac cartoon supervillain bent on world domination," right? Here's what you said about him:
"is the same one Joe Biden and the DNC are telling us now is worth WW3 and mutually assured destruction"
"Stop trying to rule the whole goddamn world It would be a better place without Joe Biden too."
"But I know enough about them, and Joe Biden to tell them all to kiss my fuckin ass. As I'd rather cut their necks than shake their hands.
Because Joe Biden doesn't get to decide where I live, what I believe and where my grandchildren will die. I won't bow before the idols of wokeness and empire"
"Joe Biden and the DNC need a Pearl harbor, and they just might stage one"
"What about Joe Biden and his group of thieves and ogliarchs? "
""Joe Biden is far more likely to be thrown out of office for this mess than Putin, and before it's all over, he just might"
"Who here thinks for one second any of the cowards in our current administration would stay in Washington while it was shelled?
Joe Biden would certainly be in a bunker somewhere eating smashed peas and shitting himself in a diaper."
"the lying corrupt bastard Joe Biden would have to admit his own fault in this situation and he won't do that. "
" Joe biden has done more damage to this country than any president since Bush. "
"Have you seen Joe Biden speak? The sack of shit has so much contempt for American people who disagree with his garbage policies"
"This shit is beyond ridiculous at this point. Joe Biden is a fuckin moron. Anybody still supporting him is a brainless, witless fuckin idiot. "
"You think Putin is the problem? Joe biden could've prevented this before it even got started"
If you haven't painted the picture of a cartoonish supervillain here with Biden I'm not sure how else to take it.

Putin is not bad, here's what you said about him:
"Well, Putin isn't wrong is he? Because the US has invaded multiple countries with arrogance, exceptionalism and impunity. Never facing consequences. How is what he said not the truth dumbass?"
"This guy is not Satan or Stalin.
And he does make sense"
"western banks and the international monetary fund created the environment that led to the ogliarchy in Russia, they made it legal not Putin. He came well afterwards The real thing Putin did was expel those ogliarchs that wouldn't get on board with the Russian national interests."
"You're basically making the exact stupid ass argument I told everyone here you would eventually make "Putin is a megalomaniac cartoon supervillain bent on world domination"
Because that's literally all you've got. It's stupid and childish.
Putin is a ruthless dude, but he's not Joseph Stalin."

It's big bad Biden who made Putin invade, right? It's the one who invaded a sovereign country wanting to rule them, murders and jails his rivals so the people essentially have no one else to lead them, and allows no freedom of press or freedom of speech that we shouldn't have a problem with, right?

 

[Note5464]

You lost me at "I agree with you about how the working class shouldn't be solely paying for the war but that's an issue with businesses such as Amazon not paying enough in taxes"

Because I don't see any legitimate reason for any American citizen to pay for a war between two corrupt Eastern European ogliarchies when there is not one legitimate national security concern for American citizens.

And I still don't understand why your surprised that Ukraine, with a blank check of American taxpayer dollars armed to the teeth with best weapons around and supported by mercenaries from virtually every western country has this far survived somehow.

The absolute surprise in reality is that Russia, with a fraction of the budget and outnumbered from the beginning had still been able to destroy the Ukrainian army and NATO weaponry almost as fast as it can be deployed.

The nonsense needs to stop, and stop now before the entire world pays the price

Are you going to tell me where you got the ratios from or will you just keep pulling numbers out of your ass?

 

[Hughinn]

Are you going to tell me where you got the ratios from or will you just keep pulling numbers out of your ass?

You're really that stupid huh?

If Russia has a stated annual military budget of 66 billion.

They could not have spent a bit over half of it in 8 months.

Ukraine has already received over 60 billion from the US alone courtesy of the American taxpayers.

That's not even close to what they've already received from 30 plus other countries

Total bilateral aid to Ukraine by country & type 2022 | Statista

And that's still not figuring in the training, intelligence and strategy advisors all being provided to them by the American taxpayers.

You'd have to be a goddamn idiot not to see that Ukraine has grossly outspent Russia in this war.

As far as manpower, Russias initial invasion was about 150k troops.

Weigh that against Ukraine 700k initial defense.

The real question is, what the fuck has you so impressed?

 

[Zebedee]

You're really that stupid huh?

If Russia has a stated annual military budget of 66 billion.

They could not have spent a bit over half of it in 8 months.

Of course they could. Military budgets aren’t like grocery shopping budgets, where you’ll consume what you bought before going shopping again.

They didn’t procure all the artillery shells, small arms ammo, missiles & bomb etc they’ve expended in Ukraine so far from just one annual defence budget.

Same again for the trucks, APC’s, IFV’s, tanks, helicopters, planes & even warships that they’ve lost in action so far.

This equipment was procured over decades & will take decades to replace.

Then there’s the cost of training. I’m not talking about the conscripts, I’m talking about officers, senior NCO’s, & personnel with specific technical skills.

Whether you agree with the war or not, what’s beyond question is that Ukraine & the West have decimated Russia’s fighting ability & it’s been helped all the way by Russian incompetence.

What’s also not in doubt is Russia is going to lose considerable trade in weapons exports, a key part of their economy. Not only are they going to have to retain much of their production for domestic use, but very few countries are going to be interested in buying Russian kit that’s been shown to perform extremely badly in combat.

 

[Hughinn]

Of course they could. Military budgets aren’t like grocery shopping budgets, where you’ll consume what you bought before going shopping again.

Exactly the point.
Ukraine is getting a steady supply of the best and most advanced artillery on the planet, doled out as needed, with free training and target location provided by US defense department satellite surveillance free of charge. Right along with the advice and training necessary to take the most advantage possible.

Russia, is on it's own. Metering out stockpiled artillery they've made themselves using intelligence they've accumulated by themselves and with satellite surveillance they own.

So why are you surprised?

They didn’t procure all the artillery shells, small arms ammo, missiles & bomb etc they’ve expended in Ukraine so far from just one annual defence budget.

Ukraine didn't procure anything they're using by themselves.

Russia did.

Your point?

Same again for the trucks, APC’s, IFV’s, tanks, helicopters, planes & even warships that they’ve lost in action so far.

This equipment was procured over decades & will take decades to replace.

It won't take years to replace for Ukraine, billions are pouring in every day from the US taxpayer

Then there’s the cost of training. I’m not talking about the conscripts, I’m talking about officers, senior NCO’s, & personnel with specific technical skills.

Yes, all provided by the US state department for Ukraine.

Russia, is by itself

Whether you agree with the war or not, what’s beyond question is that Ukraine & the West have decimated Russia’s fighting ability & it’s been helped all the way by Russian incompetence.

"Incompetence" my dear fool, is not the same as disadvantage.

Russia is not facing a group of camel herders wearing sandals and carrying old bolt action rifles like the Iraqi or Afghanistan tribal people the US government has been killing at will.

But a full fledged, equipped and trained NATO militia. With best weapons available and guided by the foremost war masters in the world today.

So what the fuck has an idiot like yourself so "impressed"?

What’s also not in doubt is Russia is going to lose considerable trade in weapons exports, a key part of their economy.

Says who?

The sanctions are causing American working people and any other non elitist group of people in the spheres of influence of the cartel on the Potomac to suffer far more than Russian citizens.

The sanctions Joe Biden has imposed has European countries freezing and starving. Protesting in the streets.

Are Russian people starving?

Not only are they going to have to retain much of their production for domestic use, but very few countries are going to be interested in buying Russian kit that’s been shown to perform extremely badly in combat.

In other words, you think the US government has baited Russia into an arms race they cannot win, in order to weaken them and orchestrate the fall of the Russian federation.

How can you understand that, so clearly and yet still cheer on the human suffering and carnage it's causing when it has no benifit to the American people?

Are you stupid?

 

[Zebedee]

@Hughinn

I’m not wasting my time responding to any points you’ve made, seeing that you’ve resorted to petty insults when I was quite polite to you,

You’re just an ignorant cunt & a gobshite, so I’ll leave you to your ranting & raving about Biden & the Democrats.

 

[Note5464]

You're really that stupid huh?

If Russia has a stated annual military budget of 66 billion.

They could not have spent a bit over half of it in 8 months.

Ukraine has already received over 60 billion from the US alone courtesy of the American taxpayers.

That's not even close to what they've already received from 30 plus other countries

Total bilateral aid to Ukraine by country & type 2022 | Statista

And that's still not figuring in the training, intelligence and strategy advisors all being provided to them by the American taxpayers.

You'd have to be a goddamn idiot not to see that Ukraine has grossly outspent Russia in this war.

As far as manpower, Russias initial invasion was about 150k troops.

Weigh that against Ukraine 700k initial defense.

The real question is, what the fuck has you so impressed?

$66B:
Why are you using their 2021 budget and not their 2022 budget of 75B? It's almost as if you are using out-of-date information to falsely prove your point.

Russia to spend $600 billion on defence and security by 2025

Russia is planning to spend a total of 34 trillion roubles ($600 billion) on national defence, security and law enforcement between 2022 and 2025 under its latest expenditure plan, a source familiar with finance ministry calculations told Reuters on Friday.

www.reuters.com

Total Bilateral Aid to Ukraine:
That figure includes humanitarian aid such as relocation $ for civilians. Again, you are choosing the larger number when it has no application to the militaristic situation. (pic) Even if you are talking about the TOTAL $ provided by the USA, your number is still wrong. I'm sorry to say this but $52.3B doesn't round up to 60B. Read your source.

Let's say, for argument's sake, the military aid $ includes the humanitarian and such aid. The total aid given to Ukraine including humanitarian and such is $94.58B. In total, the amount spent was 104.58 including Ukraine's military $. You failed to answer where you got the 1/5 ratio from so please tell me this time where the extra 270.42B is (I highly doubt $270.24B was spent on training). Or did you just come up with it in a dream?

 

[Note5464]

"Incompetence" my dear fool, is not the same as disadvantage.

Russia is not facing a group of camel herders wearing sandals and carrying old bolt action rifles like the Iraqi or Afghanistan tribal people the US government has been killing at will.

But a full fledged, equipped and trained NATO militia. With best weapons available and guided by the foremost war masters in the world today.

So what the fuck has an idiot like yourself so "impressed"?

In this situation, Russia is the one using old(1891) bolt-action rifles. I am impressed how a country without a navy destroyed the flagship Moskva.

 

[hometeam]

As far as manpower, Russias initial invasion was about 150k troops.

Weigh that against Ukraine 700k initial defense.

No Ukraine had about 200k to 250k troops in Feb when Russia invaded. I told you this already. But you do need 3x the attackers as defenders to take a city, probably 5x in the case of Kiev. Russia retreated from Kiev in April and it wasn't until May that Ukraine mobilized to 700k.

General Bakshi of India tries to give a fairly balanced unbiased view of what happened, including troop numbers and strategy. As someone from India who has military partnerships with Russia he tends to give Russia more credit than an American General would:

View: https://youtu.be/DoOZF5hJmpo

 

[Hughinn]

$66B:
Why are you using their 2021 budget and not their 2022 budget of 75B? It's almost as if you are using out-of-date information to falsely prove your point.

Russia to spend $600 billion on defence and security by 2025

Russia is planning to spend a total of 34 trillion roubles ($600 billion) on national defence, security and law enforcement between 2022 and 2025 under its latest expenditure plan, a source familiar with finance ministry calculations told Reuters on Friday.

www.reuters.com

Total Bilateral Aid to Ukraine:
That figure includes humanitarian aid such as relocation $ for civilians. Again, you are choosing the larger number when it has no application to the militaristic situation. (pic) Even if you are talking about the TOTAL $ provided by the USA, your number is still wrong. I'm sorry to say this but $52.3B doesn't round up to 60B. Read your source.

Let's say, for argument's sake, the military aid $ includes the humanitarian and such aid. The total aid given to Ukraine including humanitarian and such is $94.58B. In total, the amount spent was 104.58 including Ukraine's military $. You failed to answer where you got the 1/5 ratio from so please tell me this time where the extra 270.42B is (I highly doubt $270.24B was spent on training). Or did you just come up with it in a dream?


View attachment 175804

"Outdated information"

Fact of the matter is, Ukraine has spent vastly more money this war, courtesy of the American taxpayers, and had many more troops available at all times.

So what the fuck is so "impressive"?

This isn't a rag-tag group of goat herders in Afghanistan. These are neo Nazi militia groups, mercenaries and recruits armed with the best technology, weapons and intelligence American taxpayers money can buy.

Why is that "impressive'?

 

[Hughinn]

No Ukraine had about 200k to 250k troops in Feb when Russia invaded. I told you this already. But you do need 3x the attackers as defenders to take a city, probably 5x in the case of Kiev. Russia retreated from Kiev in April and it wasn't until May that Ukraine mobilized to 700k.

General Bakshi of India tries to give a fairly balanced unbiased view of what happened, including troop numbers and strategy. As someone from India who has military partnerships with Russia he tends to give Russia more credit than an American General would:

View: https://youtu.be/DoOZF5hJmpo

Horseshit.

You can't stop lying and bullshitting.

Most of what you sow is lies and bullshit. It's pathetic.

Ukraine was projected to have 780k troops available, before the mercenaries and massive recruiting drive.

Ukrainian Ground Forces - Wikipedia.

The numbers of ukranian troops have vastly outnumbered the Russian forces from day one.

Ukranian media is rife with lies, bullshit and disinformation. All the way from bogus stories like the ghost of Kiev, down to lying about casualties they've suffered and inflating the ones they've dealt.

It's almost like your repeated claims that "Putin wants to rule all of Ukraine" is as stupid as it sounds.

Because they could never commit enough troops to do that. Even if they wanted.

Much less "take over all of Europe and the world" like your childish bullshit talking points spew out repeatedly

 

[hometeam]

Horseshit.

You can't stop lying and bullshitting.

Most of what you sow is lies and bullshit. It's pathetic.

Ukraine was projected to have 780k troops available, before the mercenaries and massive recruiting drive.

General Bakshi says 200k a few minutes into his video and the associated press said: "Ukraine had about 250,000 men and women in uniform before the war" here:

As Ukraine loses troops, how long can it keep up the fight?

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said that Ukraine is losing 60 to 100 soldiers each day in combat.

apnews.com

The European Council on Foreign Relations said this "Putin’s wishful thinking about the power of the Russian military is reflected in his apparent expectation that it could conquer Ukraine with only 150,000 military personnel. This is significantly less than the 250,000 soldiers in the Ukrainian armed forces and far off the ratio of offensive to defence forces traditionally needed for a successful campaign – 3:1."

Lessons for the West: Russia’s military failures in Ukraine

Ukraine has proven that it can counter Russian military tactics and strategy. To continue to do so, the country will require greater support from the West.

ecfr.eu

And there's other sources but the fact is you're wrong about that. And it says something about your character when you're quick to call someone a liar and pathetic though you're clearly wrong you just don't know what you're talking about and unwilling to learn.

 

[MR_Midas]

I still can't accept this reality. The feeling that this is in the cinema, and not outside the window is happening. I was recently on a business trip to Poland. Of course, it is very scary to see live, the pain of people on their faces and eyes. Their faces seem to scream in pain and fear...

 

[Hughinn]

I still can't accept this reality. The feeling that this is in the cinema, and not outside the window is happening. I was recently on a business trip to Poland. Of course, it is very scary to see live, the pain of people on their faces and eyes. Their faces seem to scream in pain and fear...

And cocksuckers here cheering it on like petulant little children.

All for greed