ChicagoExpat

Mr. Dinsdale, you're really fixated on Kursk. No one else has talked about it in the entire thread but you. The real discussion is not about tactics -- the theme of the video -- but strategy. That's the better platform for analysis, if you can find anyone interested. Maybe start a new thread? (Reminder: At any time you can dispel the universally held impression that you are a Putinphile by, you know, denouncing the invasion. Just a suggestion.)

Comparing it to WW1 isn't the worst analogy, but what broke the stalemate was the infusion of fresh troops fighting by different rules altogether (American in that case). That's not going to happen for either side, though Russia's North Koreans seem to have finally made a difference in Kursk after horrific losses. Here's the thing -- just like for the Germans in WW1, nearly all their gains happened early on with little progress despite the enormous loss of life and treasure. (Hint: At any time you can dispel the universally held impression that you are a Putinphile by, you know, denouncing the invasion. Just a suggestion.)

It really comes down to someone knowledgeable about the subject talking to someone who is not only completely ignorant, but will continue to argue despite knowing nothing and being unwilling to do even the slightest research. The problem with living with such a delicate mental framework is you're either a buffoon, disrespected by everyone and despised by most, or eventually a little tiny bit of truth and light slips in and the whole rotten edifice crumbles, which can be difficult to handle. But not to worry! We're all confident you'll remain forever in your current place, the former camp. Enjoy your fact-free day, Frank. Keep labeling anything that frightens you "ThE LaMeStReAm MediA!"

"It's useless to teach a pig to dance -- it just wastes your time, and annoys the pig." I think we're done, Frank.

Amigo, I've never argued that Ukraine is "winning" the war. I've argued that Russia is losing the war, or at best is not winning. I've argued it's been a strategic disaster for Putin, and given you a list of reasons why. I've argued that in most respects it's been a tactical disaster for Putin, and given you a list of reasons why. And I've argued that morally, no one should support Russia. But even if I had evidence Ukraine is "winning" (I put that in quotes because while they are losing ground very slowly, this war was supposed to be over in days, and 3+ years on, it's not even close), that shouldn't be the basis of your not supporting Russia. You shouldn't support Russia because 1) it's morally bankrupt to do so 2) the reasons you've used have been falsehoods, or ignorant of key information (such as the "peaceful" handover of Crimea to Russia) 3) it's not in anyone's interest except some really bad people -- unless you actually want the world to be more authoritarian, Russia/China/North Korea/Iran to exert more influence in the world, etc.

"Go away! This clearly disproves my cherished opinions that had no basis in fact." Frank -- one of the signs of an intelligent person is the ability to admit they're wrong (at least to themselves) and adjust their opinions in the light of new evidence.

Because the only guy you trust is "Vlad." Got it. And you refuse to look for yourself. Got it. This was really easy -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_green_men_(Russo-Ukrainian_War) In8] March 2014, Putin continued to maintain that there was no pre-planned intervention,[20][21] but that "the heavily armed, tightly coordinated groups who took over Crimea's airports and ports at the start of the incursion – they were merely spontaneous 'self-defence groups' who may have acquired their Russian-looking uniforms from local [military] shops (voyentorg)".[22][23] According to the Ukrainian Association of Gun Owners, Ukrainian law does not allow the selling or carrying of firearms other than for hunting.[24] On 17 April 2014, President Putin admitted publicly for the first time that Russian special forces were involved in the events of Crimea, for the purposes of protecting local people and creating conditions for a referendum.[25][9][10][26][27] Later, he admitted that the Russian Armed Forces had blocked the Armed Forces of Ukraine in Crimea during the events.[2 In response to the question of the presence of Russian troops in Crimea, Russian Minister of Defence Sergey Shoigu said, "Regarding the statements about use of Russian special forces in Ukrainian events, I can only say one thing – it's hard to search for a black cat in a dark room, especially if it's not there," and added cryptically that searching for the cat would be "stupid" if the cat is "intelligent, brave, and polite".[29][30] In April 2015, retired Russian Admiral Igor Kasatonov [ru] said that the "little green men" were members of Russian Spetsnaz special forces units. According to his information, Russian troop deployment in Crimea included six helicopter landings and three landings of Ilyushin Il-76 with 500 troops.[31][32][33][34]

Every argument you make serves the Russian narrative. You reject any evidence that does not fit the Russian narrative. You refuse to condemn ANY ASPECT AT ALL of Russia's invasion -- not to mention the invasion itself. One of the most enduring tropes of guys like you is the "Honest Broker" disguise -- "I'm not pro-Russian, just pro-peace! Pay no attention to the fact that I always argue the Russian side, always argue against pro-Ukrainian points, and refuse to ever criticize Russia's war!"

As no one is arguing with you that Russia hasn't taken back all or nearly all of Kursk, your posting this sure looks like... cheering. Oh -- here's a good way to show you don't support Russia -- condemn the invasion, or their consistent targeting of civilians. Or something. Third request. Hard to draw any other conclusion than you do in fact support Russia.

It did, and Putin admitted it. Literally no one on either side of the argument disputes this... but you. At least rouse yourself from your Cheeto-induced stupor long enough to Google something like "Putin admits little green men were Russian" or something before commenting on something that's indisputably true.

To show us you're NOT cheering on Russia, and that your only stance is a "neutral observer recognizing Russia's inevitable victory" -- go ahead and condemn the war Russia started. Or the latest civilians killed intentionally. Or anything, there's so much to choose from. We'll wait patiently.

It is a war crime to fight on behalf of a state outside of uniform. The fact that you don't know this is reflects badly on you, not Ukraine. Best not to comment on issues you don't understand.

This is 100% true. However, it does seem to be changing.

Little man, I would match my understanding of ANY aspect of this issue against yours anytime, and I'd win. Oh, wait, I've already been doing that. Huzzah for me, beating an unarmed man in a war of intelligence. If you want to show you're NOT cheering on Russia, and just want peace -- go ahead and condemn the invasion itself, even if your only point is that Russia's victory is inevitable. Or condemn that DAILY missiles fired into apartment buildings. Or any of the many examples of Russian brutality and aggression. We'll wait.

On this, at least, you are 100% correct. And it is one of Russia's many blind spots, perhaps its worst. China has been robbing Russia blind in resources for decades through corrupt local officials allowing the Chinese to mine and take timber illegally, all while building up a military many times more powerful than Russia's. The idea that China will not lay a claim to much of Russia's east at some point is a fantasy, and they will take it.

He deserves the same fate as Saddam, Ghaddafi, or Mussolini.

A weird comment to make as you have also been going on for hours. You're either incredibly stupid or purposefully obtuse as to why we who oppose fascism aren't swooning for Trump -- "HE'S TRYING TO END THE WAR" on Russian terms. Are you really that dumb to think that peace at any price is a worthwhile goal? I can't believe you are. "Syndrome"? "Virus"? Those words describe people who cheer on Russia in its mindless quest to kill and add land to the Empire, who love and support a man who poisons his enemies, pushes them out of windows, crushes all personal liberties, and sentences hundreds of thousands to death for his own hubris.

As with EVERYTHING, you are totally unaware of how Crimea was "peacefully handed" over. It was an invasion by, as Putin called it, his "little green men" -- i.e. soldiers with no insignia (which is a war crime). There was nothing "peaceful" about it. If a bunch of armed thugs surprises you in your house so completely, you don't have time to react, is the fact that they have thrown you out of your house a "peaceful takeover"?

Yes, it is. Because the subject was whether the U.S. tried to avert the war. It did.

This referendum: Was conducted in a militarily occupied territory In buildings manned by Russian troops excluded outside observers is unrecognized by all civilized countries was tallied by Russia violated all international norms It's incredible you consider that legitimate in any sense. But if you do, you'll REALLY consider Chechnya's similar actions legitimate. They too wanted independence and conducted a referendum. The response? Russia invaded twice and in the end installed the Kadyrovs as satraps.

What is it about "consistency of their claims" that is so persuasive to you? That confers legitimacy? And at the rate they're going, assuming nothing changes, Russia will conquer all of Ukraine by around the year 2080. That is not a winning argument.

What I love about Russian narratives, as spouted by the faithful, is both the oversimpflication and the ignoring of inconvenient facts. What was ACTUALLY happening was both Russian and the West were jockeying to sway the Western-leaning Ukrainian populace to one side or the other. And you can bet Russian invested far more than $5 billion in the effort. What is it that bothers you here? That the U.S. spent money to influence Ukraine? Because if that is the problem, as with literally any issue, Russia is far worse and you should be criticizing them.

Quick! Change the subject!

Literally, Frank, USA tried to avert the war. You really can't just change the historical record and think no one will notice, do you?

Again, speaking some Russian, having lived there for years, having studied Russian history... I'd put up my knowledge and understanding against all of you combined. Latecomers to the subject, sitting behind your keyboards in Pattaya, deluded by Russophile websites. You guys literally know nothing about anything of substance on the issue.