What's new

Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments PART 2

The US overthrew the Taliban in 2001, and occupied that country for 20+ years. It’s the Afghan Army and people who ultimately failed, not the US. We left on our own accord, because we finally understood the Afghan people don’t want to be free and prosperous. The difference between the Ukrainian and Afghan people are night and day.

Russia is suffering more casualties in a single day than the US did in the last decade in Afghanistan combined.

There’s no comparison
suffering high causalities and continuing to fight war indicates that army is stronger and more motivated. Those who fear from sacrificing their lives will never be motivated to fight war .That is reason it indicates that in direct conflict between russia and nato u.s and their allies will refuse to defend small nato countries depending on them as they will not be motivated to risk lives of their soldiers in nuclear war with russia. Russia on other hand is used to of facing death and will not fear from loss of life of their public resulting from nuclear war with u.s and its allies.
 
Ok, since the Ukrainian offensive has "started", could you Ukrainian military fans pls start tracking how many square kms Ukrainian military forces capture during its offensive? Ukraine hasn't captured much relevant territory since Kherson 6 months ago, abt half the length of the war. Ukrainian miitary backend logistics is obv fukd up...top many depots for ammunition equipment etc. Is destroyed...no magic will save any military force on earth.

Yes - Bakhmut is the turning point towards Russia's defeat !! Russia has invested bit in its Bakhmut gamble and failed to win !! Now the Ukrainian push-back is imminent, with Ukraine choosing the time and the place to their advantage. The cracks in the Russian military's facade are showing - collapse is imminent. And even more galling for Russia - they will lose Crimea, the jewel in Russia's Crimean crown. Not satisfied with Crimea, Russia became greedy and went after the whole of Ukraine. Yes - a humiliating lesson for Russia !!
 
Ja, da wird die Druckmaschine angeworfen und dann versucht über die Inflation zu zahlen.
Kennst du noch den Satz von einem früheren deutschen Politiker? „Ah ein bisschen Inflation.“
No worry, war is pain but for some people it’s a great business. Rheinmetall just signs a contract with Ukraine state weapons manufacturer to mass produce tanks, ammo and other stuffs in Ukraine.


Rheinmetall-Chef Armin Papperger und ein Soldat vor dem Kampfpanzer Panther KF51 – den Rheinmetall gerne in der Ukraine bauen will.

Rheinmetall-Chef Armin Papperger und ein Soldat vor dem Kampfpanzer Panther KF51 – den Rheinmetall gerne in der Ukraine bauen will. Bild: DPA


 
Uuuhhh...Yes...They are...

A mercenary is someone who fight for pay, whether he is paid upfront or in anticipation of pay, money is the PUBLIC statement of why he fight.

So what is that PUBLIC statement of why a person would be in a military? Patriotism, national defense, and some other philosophical and moral concepts. Of course, you must pay your soldiers because a military life is a full time position. But a mercenary is a fighter ABSENT of those philosophical and moral concepts that are the foundation of any military. The Wagner Group, or whatever their official business name, is a mercenary army.
Still, according to international treaties, you do not count as a mercenary if you are paid to fight for Your country. Even it is is in excess of normal pay.
 
suffering high causalities and continuing to fight war indicates that army is stronger and more motivated. Those who fear from sacrificing their lives will never be motivated to fight war .That is reason it indicates that in direct conflict between russia and nato u.s and their allies will refuse to defend small nato countries depending on them as they will not be motivated to risk lives of their soldiers in nuclear war with russia. Russia on other hand is used to of facing death and will not fear from loss of life of their public resulting from nuclear war with u.s and its allies.
A perfect illustration of the US Marines in the Pacific War, don’t You think.
Adopting tactics which ensures high casualties of untrained conscripts and then running out of soldiers is an indication of stupidity and incompetence.
 
suffering high causalities and continuing to fight war indicates that army is stronger and more motivated. Those who fear from sacrificing their lives will never be motivated to fight war .That is reason it indicates that in direct conflict between russia and nato u.s and their allies will refuse to defend small nato countries depending on them as they will not be motivated to risk lives of their soldiers in nuclear war with russia. Russia on other hand is used to of facing death and will not fear from loss of life of their public resulting from nuclear war with u.s and its allies.


Morale is an enormous factor in any war and the morale of the Russian forces in rock bottom. Their conscript infantry know their generals are useless and the political leadership doesn't care if they die needlessly. Their tank crews (the few that are left) know their equipment is rubbish. The sailors know their Black Sea flagship is sitting on the bottom and probably suspect why (and it's not an accidental fire). And their pilots are too few in number to achieve air superiority over Ukraine. Once there is a large withdrawal of Russian troops in one sector I suspect the whole house of cards will collapse
 
Ok, since the Ukrainian offensive has "started", could you Ukrainian military fans pls start tracking how many square kms Ukrainian military forces capture during its offensive? Ukraine hasn't captured much relevant territory since Kherson 6 months ago, abt half the length of the war. Ukrainian miitary backend logistics is obv fukd up...top many depots for ammunition equipment etc. Is destroyed...no magic will save any military force on earth.
Everyone knows that starting an offensive in winter is suicide. Ground frozen, and when it gets warmer, everything will be mud. No way forward with heave vehicles.
Second, Ukraine is getting lots of new western weapons. Soldiers need to be trained. Otherwise, it’s suicide to go in the offensive.

The offensive will come. When Ukraine is ready for it. It’s gonna be a hot summer for the Russian invadersz or Russian fascists. Nazis.
 

Colossal explosion heard at NATO supplied ammunition facility in Khmelnytskyi



How much western supplied munitions were stored in there? Judging by the size of the explosion that is going to hurt Ukraines offensive? Other reports say it’s fuel dumps.
 
after how many years did US and its allies fled Afghanistan ?

USSR stayed for 10 years and left and the US + allies stayed almost 20 years and left still couldn't take it

Russia is taking on pretty much the entire world in Ukraine, over 600 different types of weapons from over 80 countries are in Ukraine yet Bakhmut is Russian

here is reason why Russia is the largest country in the world

they know how to fight and take land

US was fighting a war in Afghanistan and Iraq at the same time. Both countries offered significant resistance to US-led forces with support of neighboring countries and volunteers from different countries.

But US stood its ground until it could find "acceptable" solutions in both countries. US-led forces dismantled Saddam regime in Iraq and rebooted its political landscape. US also eliminated perpetrators of 9/11 in AfPak and convinced TTA to not allow other groups to not use Afghanistan as a base of operations to plot terrorist attacks on American assets and interests in Doha Accords. US does have achievements to show in both fronts in the end.

Soviet Union did not fight a war on this scale in the 1980s. Soviet Union toppled Hafizullah Amin setup and replaced it with a friendly regime but left in 1988 due to mounting losses. Soviet economic situation was another issue.

Ukraine is in Russian backyard and Russia found it easy to annex Ukrainian lands next to Russian border with political engineering and support of Ukrainian separatists. Crimea fell to Russia in 2014 without much resistance.

If US seeks to absorb a neighboring country by force, do you think any country can stop it? US will absorb a neighboring country in a few months at most.

Russia is strong and can fight a war. No doubt about this.

But US is stronger and more capable in warfare. But US has not fought to colonize another country in a long time. The last war of this type was with the Mexican Empire.

I am not getting these comparisons, therefore.

I am not into celebrating conflicts either. Motive counts.

@gambit
@jhungary
@RescueRanger
@PanzerKiel
 
Still, according to international treaties, you do not count as a mercenary if you are paid to fight for Your country. Even it is is in excess of normal pay.
The definition of mercenary is being discussed in another thread.


The definition is actually a lot more trickier than just whether or not they are foreigner or they get pay to do the fighting, it is rather related to whether on the combatant role and whether or not they are non-state actors.

In this sense, any state actor, which usually mean state militaria, state paramilitary and group that represent the state, like Law Enforcement, Civil Defence and so on, are State Actor. Non State Actor is group that was not sponsored by the state, ie private security, volunteer group, partisan, insurgent are all non-state actor.

On the other hand, it does not need to be local resident. State Sponsored force can have foreigner in their rank, given if they are treated the same way as other local force member, and was offered a pathway to residency, then it's okay, example such as British Commonwealth Soldier serving with the British Military, or French Foreign Legion serving with French Army, and US Green Card holder serving US Military.

On the other hand, to be called a mercenary, you need to be engaged in combatant role, a red cross volunteer medic, for example, is not a mercenary. a non-combatant role still has inherited right to self-defence, or defence of other in need, so even a non-combatant engage in combat, may still not be class as mercenary.

In this case, Ukraine International Legion, serving under the banner of Ukranian National Guard, and is paid the same as normal Ukrainian soldier in rank, and will offer pathway to citizenship, is not considered mercenary at war. However, as a private security firm, Wagner operator is not a state sponsored militia, and the action of using them as combat troop is in violate the law of combatant via Geneva Convention. Even if these people are Russian, they would still be considered Mercenary in Ukraine.
 
The definition of mercenary is being discussed in another thread.


The definition is actually a lot more trickier than just whether or not they are foreigner or they get pay to do the fighting, it is rather related to whether on the combatant role and whether or not they are non-state actors.

In this sense, any state actor, which usually mean state militaria, state paramilitary and group that represent the state, like Law Enforcement, Civil Defence and so on, are State Actor. Non State Actor is group that was not sponsored by the state, ie private security, volunteer group, partisan, insurgent are all non-state actor.

On the other hand, it does not need to be local resident. State Sponsored force can have foreigner in their rank, given if they are treated the same way as other local force member, and was offered a pathway to residency, then it's okay, example such as British Commonwealth Soldier serving with the British Military, or French Foreign Legion serving with French Army, and US Green Card holder serving US Military.

On the other hand, to be called a mercenary, you need to be engaged in combatant role, a red cross volunteer medic, for example, is not a mercenary. a non-combatant role still has inherited right to self-defence, or defence of other in need, so even a non-combatant engage in combat, may still not be class as mercenary.

In this case, Ukraine International Legion, serving under the banner of Ukranian National Guard, and is paid the same as normal Ukrainian soldier in rank, and will offer pathway to citizenship, is not considered mercenary at war. However, as a private security firm, Wagner operator is not a state sponsored militia, and the action of using them as combat troop is in violate the law of combatant via Geneva Convention. Even if these people are Russian, they would still be considered Mercenary in Ukraine.
I think that the main issue with a definition of mercenaries is that it is defined in treaties, and not all countries have ratified those treaties.
I agree with most your comments, but my interpretation is that a Russian citizen employed by Wagner cannot be considered a mercenary.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom