North Korea to send more troops, arms to front lines.

[The San Diegan]

On 12/26/2024 at 1:04 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Did you read the link?  Yes, it takes time, however we are were not prepared and many nations have less stock piles now, obviously without investing into addressing the issue.

The longer the war of attrition goes on, the worse it becomes for Ukraine.  That's why even Zelensky is wanting to bring this to a cold war now.

The soldiers overwhelmingly want to stop fighting, on both sides

Yes I did. I went looking in fact for some mention that we and our allies lack the manufacturing capability - the clause to which I took issue. Yes, it takes time to replenish drawdowns and to ramp up manufacturing capacity, especially since neither us or the EU were on a war footing going into the war.

Btw, if you watch the video I posted upthread, you can hear from Ukrainian soldiers themselves as opposed to speaking on their behalf. I guess you could say there is a remarkable difference between soldiers fighting for their homeland and conscripts and convicts fighting in a foreign land for an oligarch's agenda.

[The San Diegan]

On 12/26/2024 at 1:00 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Oh I agree it has incapacitated Russias ability to wage conventional war.  Absolutely.  

It's the PROLONGING war of attrition where the benefit is not out-weighing the cost.  Most of that damage was done within the first 8 months.

China was very, very upset with Russia in the first year.  Not so now, they have drawn closer.  And the DPRK modernizing their military with tech transfers is not a good thing.  Our allies in the region are concerned about it, even if you are not.

China/Russia/NK/Iran are all closer now than they were before.  They are all, also benefiting from intelligence gains and what works and doesn't in large conflicts, and are more assured their "spend the least for the most" doctrine is more sound than before, while seeing how more advanced platforms can be utilized in connection with that.

Yes, we should continue to support Ukraine but use our influence to wind this down to a cold war.  Allow Ukraine time to rebuild and re-prepare to more deadlier than before 

Arguably a worst-case scenario would be an operational pause that allows Russia to restock their munitions and train up fresh troops.

[The San Diegan]

On 12/26/2024 at 1:34 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

To continue on this what Ukraine needed and needs now is fucking shells.  We gave them some FANTASTIC equipment that worked amazingly, the small arms and small platforms.  We were able neutralize Russias Air and Armor superiority with these arms we supplied early on.

The more advanced and sophisticated platforms have been little bang for the buck.

They needed shells, not Abrams and F16s.  We couldn't provide them with what they needed because we didn't have it, or the ability to manufacture it in a timely manner.

We learned a lesson.  Trump needs to shove his boot up the ass of Europe and get them to actually manufacture mass use shit.

Fortunately for us, the standardization of NATO munitions (e.g., 155mm arty shells) among even our non-NATO allies means a) there are short-term options (e.g., RoK and Australia) and b) the burden of ramping up manufacturing over the longer term is spread across many shoulders. 

[The San Diegan]

On 12/26/2024 at 1:58 PM, CoachKenFTW said:

Thanks Karl Rove.

You're welcome, Temu Lindbergh.

Also, shouldn't you be laying a glaze on Putin's pole with that gaping mangina? 🤔

[halfmanhalfbronco]

On 12/27/2024 at 10:20 AM, The San Diegan said:

Yes I did. I went looking in fact for some mention that we and our allies lack the manufacturing capability - the clause to which I took issue. Yes, it takes time to replenish drawdowns and to ramp up manufacturing capacity, especially since neither us or the EU were on a war footing going into the war.

Btw, if you watch the video I posted upthread, you can hear from Ukrainian soldiers themselves as opposed to speaking on their behalf. I guess you could say there is a remarkable difference between soldiers fighting for their homeland and conscripts and convicts fighting in a foreign land for an oligarch's agenda.

Your video is in stark contrast with the soldiers and military leadership interviewed by many sources of repute and our own estimations of their dessertion rates.  The vast majority don't want to continue this war, even if some drone pilots do.

[halfmanhalfbronco]

On 12/27/2024 at 10:23 AM, The San Diegan said:

Fortunately for us, the standardization of NATO munitions (e.g., 155mm arty shells) among even our non-NATO allies means a) there are short-term options (e.g., RoK and Australia) and b) the burden of ramping up manufacturing over the longer term is spread across many shoulders. 

Well, get back to me when they are not being out shelled 10-1.  If this war drags on for several more years and NATO troops poor in...that's a disaster

[The San Diegan]

On 12/27/2024 at 10:11 AM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Well, get back to me wthen they are not being out shelled 10-1.  If this war drags on for several more years and NATO troops poor in...that's a disaster

I do not believe that ratio is accurate anymore. Can you please provide a recent link to that effect?

Also, you might want to look into RU's increasing reliance on DPRK munitions, which are of such shit quality that an estimated 50% misfire, risking injury or death to the equipment operators.

Lastly, multiple NATO partners have already gone on record stating they may very well commit troops to Ukraine, which would result in one of two outcomes: one, as per Article 5, we enter into a hot war with RU as well, or two, we withdraw from NATO and watch from the sidelines as WW3 escalates (maybe even "flipping sides" and making good on the trollish threats to 'annex' Canada and/or Greenland).

I would argue the first option is the lessor end of a shit sandwich, though I understand how some Americans lack either the spine or historical perspective to realize that the the second option is even more disastrous than the first. I am not in any way implying you fall into either category. However, I ask you - in all sincerity - had you been alive in mid-late 1930s America, do you think you have been on the appeasement/isolationist side (of the American fascist movement) of the time? 

[The San Diegan]

On 12/27/2024 at 10:02 AM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Your video is in stark contrast with the soldiers and military leadership interviewed by many sources of repute and our own estimations of their dessertion rates.  The vast majority don't want to continue this war, even if some drone pilots do.

It may, but there is no disputing the authenticity of sentiment expressed by Ukrainian rent line operators as reflected in that video.

The DIU has been open about desertion rates; as per our last discussion on the topic, Ukraine was missing its recruitment targets by 25-35%. That just means they train up 25-30K troops instead of 40K. That's still tens of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers to bolster their ranks. And the dynamic evolution of Ukrainian tactics have taken this into account (again, reflected in the video) by leaning into their ability to manufacture and equip UAVs with the objective of reducing casualty and attrition rates.

[halfmanhalfbronco]

On 12/27/2024 at 11:44 AM, The San Diegan said:

I do not believe that ratio is accurate anymore. Can you please provide a recent link to that effect?

Also, you might want to look into RU's increasing reliance on DPRK munitions, which are of such shit quality that an estimated 50% misfire, risking injury or death to the equipment operators.

Lastly, multiple NATO partners have already gone on record stating they may very well commit troops to Ukraine, which would result in one of two outcomes: one, as per Article 5, we enter into a hot war with RU as well, or two, we withdraw from NATO and watch from the sidelines as WW3 escalates (maybe even "flipping sides" and making good on the trollish threats to 'annex' Canada and/or Greenland).

I would argue the first option is the lessor end of a shit sandwich, though I understand how some Americans lack either the spine or historical perspective to realize that the the second option is even more disastrous than the first. I am not in any way implying you fall into either category. However, I ask you - in all sincerity - had you been alive in mid-late 1930s America, do you think you have been on the appeasement/isolationist side (of the American fascist movement) of the time? 

The 10 to 1 ratio was stated by a Ukrainian commander less than a month ago, can you find anything sense than showing that had changed?

We need to do everything in our power to get this wound down and prevent any NATO members from joining in direct fighting.  That ends in nuclear war more likely than not.

On 12/27/2024 at 11:49 AM, The San Diegan said:

It may, but there is no disputing the authenticity of sentiment expressed by Ukrainian rent line operators as reflected in that video.

The DIU has been open about desertion rates; as per our last discussion on the topic, Ukraine was missing its recruitment targets by 25-35%. That just means they train up 25-30K troops instead of 40K. That's still tens of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers to bolster their ranks. And the dynamic evolution of Ukrainian tactics have taken this into account (again, reflected in the video) by leaning into their ability to manufacture and equip UAVs with the objective of reducing casualty and attrition rates.

 

Not only are they missing their recruiting targets, as per multiple sources on the front lines, most new recruits lose the will to fight as soon as they enter the theatre.  Up to 300k dessertions by our estimates and that does not include the entire units that just flat out are refusing to follow orders.

 

Wind this shit down, repair their run ways so they can actually use their F16s that are just collecting rust and demand every member of NATO focus on building their manufacturing capacity to fight this type of war in the future.

Prayers to everyone fighting and suffering this Holiday Season.  Hopefully it's over soon

[The San Diegan]

On 12/27/2024 at 10:57 AM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

The 10 to 1 ratio was stated by a Ukrainian commander less than a month ago, can you find anything sense than showing that had changed?

We need to do everything in our power to get this wound down and prevent any NATO members from joining in direct fighting.  That ends in nuclear war more likely than not.

 

Not only are they missing their recruiting targets, as per multiple sources on the front lines, most new recruits lose the will to fight as soon as they enter the theatre.  Up to 300k dessertions by our estimates and that does not include the entire units that just flat out are refusing to follow orders.

 

Wind this shit down, repair their run ways so they can actually use their F16s that are just collecting rust and demand every member of NATO focus on building their manufacturing capacity to fight this type of war in the future.

Prayers to everyone fighting and suffering this Holiday Season.  Hopefully it's over soon

Yes, it was reflected in OSINT analysis, though not as recent as a month ago. I will go looking for recent figures when I have time - if you have something you can post in the meantime, I would appreciate it. I would also add that it can be expected for Ukraine to make the case for requiring more munitions by any means necessary, including the embellishment of such figures.

Re: your statement on recruiting targets, you are off by a country mile. Why the fuck do you think there are DPRK regulars in Kursk? Again, this has been flushed out ad nauseam - it is a desperation move by RU bc Putin cannot enact a general call-up and mobilization without risking being removed from power.

Curious as to what you see as a theoretical roadmap for "wind[ing] this shit down." 🤔

 

 

 

 

ETA: Still looking for recent data, but have found references estimates from earlier this year.

From a Newsweek article published Oct 31 of this year stating the ration earlier in the year had been 5:1:

 

Quote

 

"Earlier this year, Ukraine was firing an estimated fifth of the number of artillery rounds Russia was able to leverage against Ukrainian troops. Many Western countries have doubled down on efforts to produce more ammunition, but sourcing munitions quickly and consistently is still a problem for Ukraine."

 

 

From a CNN article in March that states the production ratio at the time was 3:1:

 

Quote

 

Exclusive: Russia producing three times more artillery shells than US and Europe for Ukraine

 

 

And from an October article in the defense publication The Defense Post,

 

Quote

 

Ukraine Slowly Matching Rate of Russia’s Artillery Fires: Defense Official

 

...and

Quote

Kyiv’s deputy defense minister Ivan Havryliuk informed a local media outlet that the current ratio of artillery fires on the battlefield stands at 1:3.

 

 

[InnZoneU]

On 12/27/2024 at 11:06 AM, The San Diegan said:

Yes, it was reflected in OSINT analysis, though not as recent as a month ago. I will go looking for recent figures when I have time - if you have something you can post in the meantime, I would appreciate it. 

Re: your statement on recruiting targets, you are off by a country mile. Why the fuck do you think there are DPRK regulars in Kursk? Again, this has been flushed out ad nauseam - it is a desperation move by RU bc Putin cannot enact a general call-up and mobilization without risking being removed from power.

Curious as to what you see as a theoretical roadmap for "wind[ing] this shit down." 🤔

Ukraine surrendering and giving up its land is his answer.  Unfortunately he's leaving out the part where that will just spurn Putin on to reclaim more of the past USSR territory.  If Halfman was around in the 30s and 40s he'd be leading the charge to just let Hitler have his Lebensbraum at his leisure.  The repeating of Putin/Russia disinformation is downright weird.

https://www.themirror.com/news/world-news/ww3-fears-warned-prepare-putins-878420

[The San Diegan]

On 12/27/2024 at 11:11 AM, InnZoneU said:

Ukraine surrendering and giving up its land is his answer.  Unfortunately he's leaving out the part where that will just spurn Putin on to reclaim more of the past USSR territory.  If Halfman was around in the 30s and 40s he'd be leading the charge to just let Hitler have his Lebensbraum at his leisure.  The repeating of Putin/Russia disinformation is downright weird.

https://www.themirror.com/news/world-news/ww3-fears-warned-prepare-putins-878420

I don't know about that. HMHB is both intelligent and astute; hence the question I put forth to him. IMO he more than deserves the benefit of the doubt to clarify his position.

Regarding the scaling of the Ruso-Ukrainian War into WW3, it already has - if that wasn't apparent before the deployment of DRPK sentient skinny jeans regulars to RU, it sure as shit is now. The question is where does the conflict go from here? And while I don't claim to know the answer, I am pretty damn confident that the answer does not include the use of nuclear arms - that is a red line Xi simply will not allow his Über allies (SWIDT?) to cross.

[InnZoneU]

On 12/27/2024 at 11:22 AM, The San Diegan said:

I don't know about that. HMHB is both intelligent and astute; hence the question I put forth to him. IMO he more than deserves the benefit of the doubt to clarify his position.

Regarding the scaling of the Ruso-Ukrainian War into WW3, it already has - if that wasn't apparent before the deployment of DRPK sentient skinny jeans regulars to RU, it sure as shit is now. The question is where does the conflict go from here? And while I don't claim to know the answer, I am pretty damn confident that the answer does not include the use of nuclear arms - that is a red line Xi simply will not allow his Über allies (SWIDT?) to cross.

If Ukraine surrenders, it will embolden Putin to take more.  After all, how can Estonia, etc. fight them?  They all might as well just surrender too.

That said.  I think those Eastern-Northern NATO Euros are going to jump into the fight in Ukraine before that happens.  They know what the future brings if they don't.

[The San Diegan]

On 12/27/2024 at 11:43 AM, InnZoneU said:

If Ukraine surrenders, it will embolden Putin to take more.  After all, how can Estonia, etc. fight them?  They all might as well just surrender too.

That said.  I think those Eastern-Northern NATO Euros are going to jump into the fight in Ukraine before that happens.  They know what the future brings if they don't.

I'm sure you're aware Estonia is a NATO member, and if any of the Baltic states get dragged into the conflict (all three are NATO members) then the rest of Europe does as well.

Just as a footnote, I haven't seen anything tho regarding the potential deployment of Baltic forces (or Scandinavian - covering the "Eastern-Northern" qualifier here) to Ukraine, though both France and the UK have discussed the possibility. 

[halfmanhalfbronco]

On 12/27/2024 at 12:06 PM, The San Diegan said:

Yes, it was reflected in OSINT analysis, though not as recent as a month ago. I will go looking for recent figures when I have time - if you have something you can post in the meantime, I would appreciate it. I would also add that it can be expected for Ukraine to make the case for requiring more munitions by any means necessary, including the embellishment of such figures.

Re: your statement on recruiting targets, you are off by a country mile. Why the fuck do you think there are DPRK regulars in Kursk? Again, this has been flushed out ad nauseam - it is a desperation move by RU bc Putin cannot enact a general call-up and mobilization without risking being removed from power.

Curious as to what you see as a theoretical roadmap for "wind[ing] this shit down." 🤔

 

 

 

 

ETA: Still looking for recent data, but have found references estimates from earlier this year.

From a Newsweek article published Oct 31 of this year stating the ration earlier in the year had been 5:1:

 

 

From a CNN article in March that states the production ratio at the time was 3:1:

 

And from an October article in the defense publication The Defense Post,

 

...and

 

 

Good links.

It appears to be "where" they are being overwhelmed.  Some places on the front lines are indeed still 10-1, in the South as of 30 days ago.  Other parts of the lines it is almost 1:1 per the big brains we both admire on reddit with validated high level credentials.  So the average does not mean much.  Ukraine is stretched too thin with both men and munitions.

https://apnews.com/article/deserters-awol-ukraine-russia-war-def676562552d42bc5d593363c9e5ea0 

Regarding morale and mobilization.

"Not all mobilized soldiers are leaving their positions, but the majority are. When new guys come here, they see how difficult it is. They see a lot of enemy drones, artillery and mortars,” one unit commander currently fighting

 

in Pokrovsk told CNN. He also asked to remain anonymous.

“They go to the positions once and if they survive, they never return. They either leave their positions, refuse to go into battle, or try to find a way to leave the army,” he added."

https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/08/europe/ukraine-military-morale-desertion-intl-cmd/index.html

So not only are they not meeting their mobilization targets, the majority that do end up on the front lines either abandon or refuse orders.

 

Regarding your harder question: "what does winding down look like".

That's tough.  It means acknowledging the lost territory can not be regained, right now and ceding it in practicality if not in theory.  It means ending the hot war and, tragically, admitting the territory is lost.

It also means buying us time to ramp up the manufacturing ability of the West and out South Pacific allies.  It means buying time to rebuild Ukraine so the rusting F16s can be used if Russia dares do it again.  It means turning Ukraine into a beehive.

 

[halfmanhalfbronco]

On 12/27/2024 at 12:11 PM, InnZoneU said:

Ukraine surrendering and giving up its land is his answer.  Unfortunately he's leaving out the part where that will just spurn Putin on to reclaim more of the past USSR territory.  If Halfman was around in the 30s and 40s he'd be leading the charge to just let Hitler have his Lebensbraum at his leisure.  The repeating of Putin/Russia disinformation is downright weird.

https://www.themirror.com/news/world-news/ww3-fears-warned-prepare-putins-878420

No, it doesn't.

[halfmanhalfbronco]

On 12/27/2024 at 12:43 PM, InnZoneU said:

If Ukraine surrenders, it will embolden Putin to take more.  After all, how can Estonia, etc. fight them?  They all might as well just surrender too.

That said.  I think those Eastern-Northern NATO Euros are going to jump into the fight in Ukraine before that happens.  They know what the future brings if they don't.

Ukraine doesn't need to surrender to bring this to a cold war.

And Russia can't progress further Imperial aims while that cold war exists. They don't have the resources.  They blink elsewhere and Ukraine could surge 

[The San Diegan]

On 12/27/2024 at 1:51 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Good links.

It appears to be "where" they are being overwhelmed.  Some places on the front lines are indeed still 10-1, in the South as of 30 days ago.  Other parts of the lines it is almost 1:1 per the big brains we both admire on reddit with validated high level credentials.  So the average does not mean much.  Ukraine is stretched too thin with both men and munitions.

https://apnews.com/article/deserters-awol-ukraine-russia-war-def676562552d42bc5d593363c9e5ea0 

Regarding morale and mobilization.

"Not all mobilized soldiers are leaving their positions, but the majority are. When new guys come here, they see how difficult it is. They see a lot of enemy drones, artillery and mortars,” one unit commander currently fighting

 

in Pokrovsk told CNN. He also asked to remain anonymous.

“They go to the positions once and if they survive, they never return. They either leave their positions, refuse to go into battle, or try to find a way to leave the army,” he added."

https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/08/europe/ukraine-military-morale-desertion-intl-cmd/index.html

So not only are they not meeting their mobilization targets, the majority that do end up on the front lines either abandon or refuse orders.

 

Regarding your harder question: "what does winding down look like".

That's tough.  It means acknowledging the lost territory can not be regained, right now and ceding it in practicality if not in theory.  It means ending the hot war and, tragically, admitting the territory is lost.

It also means buying us time to ramp up the manufacturing ability of the West and out South Pacific allies.  It means buying time to rebuild Ukraine so the rusting F16s can be used if Russia dares do it again.  It means turning Ukraine into a beehive.

 

That is an awfully long-winded way to retract your factually inaccurate comment, my friend. 

I never questioned the issue of desertion, and have agreed on multiple occasions that it is indeed a huge issue for Ukraine. However, again, some caveats are required to lend the issue much-needed context: First, desertion is as much of as issue within the rank and file Russian and DPRK troops (hence the reports of execution by Chechen troops or their own commanders).

Second, despite the huge issue of being undermanned, and despite the Chicken Littleing a few months ago about the same issue on the forum, notice how little additional ground has been gained by RU during that time. And of that, a fair amount of the ceded land was made due to Ukraine's stratagem of trading land for inflicting casualty rates that are unsustainable.

Returning to the incorrect claim of shelling ratios, the reality is that Ukraine is approaching parity in sustainable fire rates, and not only is the ratio of smart munitions already well in Ukraine's favor, unlike the astronomically high dud rates RU is experiencing in their desperation deployment of DRPK munitions, the shells provided by the US and our allies actually work.

Lastly, regarding a potential cessation of hostilities, anything other than a complete capitulation by Ukraine (something not tenable by Ukraine, the rest of Europe, or us), RU is not going to accept any compromise - they are already in this shit too deep and it will likely take a (partial) collapse of the Russian state (read: power structure) to end this conflict. From ISW's report published yesterday:

Quote

Russian President Vladimir Putin explicitly rejected a suggestion reportedly considered by US President-elect Donald Trump's team in early November 2024 that would delay Ukraine's membership in NATO for at least a decade as a condition for ending the war in Ukraine. Putin responded on December 26 to a journalist's request to comment on the Trump team’s reported early November suggestion to delay Ukraine's membership in NATO for 10 to 20 years.[1] Putin stated that it does not matter if Ukraine joins NATO "today, tomorrow, or in 10 years." Putin's December 26 statement is part of a series of comments he has made recently reiterating his refusal to consider compromises on his late 2021 and early 2022 demands.[2] These demands include forcing Ukraine to become a permanently neutral state that will never join NATO, imposing severe limitations on the size of the Ukrainian military, and removing the Ukrainian government.[3]

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov reiterated Putin's false claims that the current Ukrainian government is illegitimate and cannot be a legitimate negotiating partner for Russia. Lavrov claimed on December 26 during an interview with Russian and foreign media that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is not legitimate according to Ukraine's constitution and that Ukraine needs to hold presidential elections.[4] Kremlin officials have been deliberately misinterpreting the Ukrainian Constitution and Ukrainian law to delegitimatize Ukraine's government and sovereignty in recent months.[5] The Kremlin's allegations that Zelensky and the Ukrainian government are not legitimate demonstrate that the Kremlin is unwilling in engage in negotiations with Ukraine or are effectively demanding regime change in Kyiv as a precondition for negotiations. Putin and other Kremlin officials have repeatedly reiterated this false narrative about Zelensky's alleged illegitimacy in order to blame Ukraine — and not Russia — for delaying negotiations.[6] This false narrative also promotes Putin's demand for the removal of the legitimate, democratically elected Ukrainian government – one of the Kremlin's ongoing maximalist demands in the war.

Link

Until Kyiv decides to capitulate and as long as their are Ukrainian soldiers willing to continue the fight, we should continue to support them, full stop.

 

[halfmanhalfbronco]

On 12/27/2024 at 3:31 PM, The San Diegan said:

That is an awfully long-winded way to retract your factually inaccurate comment, my friend. 

I never questioned the issue of desertion, and have agreed on multiple occasions that it is indeed a huge issue for Ukraine. However, again, some caveats are required to lend the issue much-needed context: First, desertion is as much of as issue within the rank and file Russian and DPRK troops (hence the reports of execution by Chechen troops or their own commanders).

Second, despite the huge issue of being undermanned, and despite the Chicken Littleing a few months ago about the same issue on the forum, notice how little additional ground has been gained by RU during that time. And of that, a fair amount of the ceded land was made due to Ukraine's stratagem of trading land for inflicting casualty rates that are unsustainable.

Returning to the incorrect claim of shelling ratios, the reality is that Ukraine is approaching parity in sustainable fire rates, and not only is the ratio of smart munitions already well in Ukraine's favor, unlike the astronomically high dud rates RU is experiencing in their desperation deployment of DRPK munitions, the shells provided by the US and our allies actually work.

Lastly, regarding a potential cessation of hostilities, anything other than a complete capitulation by Ukraine (something not tenable by Ukraine, the rest of Europe, or us), RU is not going to accept any compromise - they are already in this shit too deep and it will likely take a (partial) collapse of the Russian state (read: power structure) to end this conflict. From ISW's report published yesterday:

Link

Until Kyiv decides to capitulate and as long as their are Ukrainian soldiers willing to continue the fight, we should continue to support them, full stop.

 

Russia gained rapid ground until winter hit. Now, it's a different war than it was even a month ago due to winter conditions.  

The Ukrainian desertion rates are not overstated here.  Ukraine can not win this war of attrition.  The longer it goes on, the worse it gets for Ukraine.  It hurts Russia too, of course but it hurts and weakens Ukraine more.

No, you have constantly over estimated Ukraine.  You were absolutely certain there was going to be a highly effective counter offensive.  When I provided you information the counter offensive had already failed, you told me I was wrong and that you believed the land bridge would be severed.  

You completely oversold the strategic value of the Kursk invasion.  It turned out to be a disaster.  It's being pummeled, most the land has been lost and it further over extended the army for no strategic gain.

 

 

[The San Diegan]

On 12/27/2024 at 3:26 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Russia gained rapid ground until winter hit. Now, it's a different war than it was even a month ago due to winter conditions.  

The Ukrainian desertion rates are not overstated here.  Ukraine can not win this war of attrition.  The longer it goes on, the worse it gets for Ukraine.  It hurts Russia too, of course but it hurts and weakens Ukraine more.

No, you have constantly over estimated Ukraine.  You were absolutely certain there was going to be a highly effective counter offensive.  When I provided you information the counter offensive had already failed, you told me I was wrong and that you believed the land bridge would be severed.  

You completely oversold the strategic value of the Kursk invasion.  It turned out to be a disaster.  It's being pummeled, most the land has been lost and it further over extended the army for no strategic gain.

 

 

it is statements like this that really do come off like RU state propaganda man. While I never claimed desertion rates were overstated, I do certainly maintain you really undersell the parity of consequence for Russia.

And the Kursk invasion was a "disaster?" Really? Lol. Is that in the same way that the rate of fire ratio is "10:1" in Russia's favor? Your gift for inaccuracy is only matched by your gift for hyperbole in this instance, friendo.