Yes, it is just your (and ZeroHedge's) opinion, nothing more.
[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2813500]My point in showing this was that if you look at both sides there is an issue with munitions. The key to me is if the West continues to supply Ukraine. I think JM has the idea that the West's goal was Ukrainian victory but I think it really was to weaken Russia. Hell, the Dems are still convinced that Putin was responsible for Trump and the 2016 victory. Yeah, Russia has North Korea, and North Korea buys from China so while the Chinese say they are not helping Russia too much, this could be a way around that.
Yeah, that Atlantic article is terribly wishful thinking IMO and love that pic of the ladies. LOL.
This is just my opinion but the Western nations seem to be getting a bit desperate:
[URL]https://www.zerohedge.com/political/murdochs-spoke-zelenskyy-weeks-firing-anti-war-host-tucker-carlson[/URL]
Both Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch spoke with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy shortly before firing Fox News' anti-war host Tucker Carlson, who has repeatedly asked why the United States is sending vast resources to one of the most historically corrupt nations on the planet while neglecting its own citizens.
I think Carlson had a good point. We are on the verge of a debt crisis, and I am still not seeing much value for the USA in this war.
And this: [URL]https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/kirby-claims-whopping-100000-russian-casualties-bakhmut-alone[/URL].
In a Monday press briefing National Security Council spokesman John Kirby issued a surprisingly high estimate of Russian casualties which he said took place since December fighting in the contested Donetsk city of Bakhmut.[/QUOTE]And, when it comes to opinion, there's no way to say 100% whether it's right or wrong. Actually, let me qualify that a bit. You can judge opinions using 20-20 hindsight, but upcoming events are a different matter. A good track record is a positive thing, but it's no guarantee that future predictions will be correct. And a bad track record is a negative thing, but it's no guarantee that future predictions will be wrong.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion but, unless and until what they "think" and "predict" is reflected in facts on the ground, all that opinion = exactly zero. And aggregating opinion on top of opinion doesn't change that calculus.
And it's also fair to point out how many of the pundits you cite are pro-Russia, anti-Ukraine, or both. Larry Johnson, for example, has a track record of appearing on Russian and Chinese propaganda outlets. He's entitled to his opinion but it's worth observing that he's arguably not exactly a neutral observer.
That's not to say there aren't a number of pro-Ukraine analysts and pundits, such as retired generals Ben Hodges and Mark Hertling. And, while their military expertise is head and shoulders above most, that's still no guarantee.
All the focus on opinion is completely wrongheaded, IMO (pun intended), as the war will be decided on the battlefield. And I'll take an ounce of factual info over a ton of opinion any day.
P.S. About mud being an excuse, if you follow any of the channels that show video of areas near the frontlines, you'd see the reality of the rasputitsa. There's a reason this season has a specific name. It was a factor in WW-II campaigns and weather has always been a key factor in battle. Assuming a Ukrainian offensive would rely heavily on the use of tanks and vehicles, they'd be foolish to attack prematurely. Bottom line, you don't know, I don't know, and opinions are a dime a dozen.
P. P.S. Your opinion as to what I think is even less relevant than all the BS above. I don't give a fuck about the West's agenda. I back Ukraine because they're defending themselves against aggression, and the right of self-defense is a moral absolute. And I oppose Russia because they are the aggressor. And, building on that latter fact, I DESPISE Putin and his Orcs because they're pursuing their aggression in a depraved, atrocity-laden way. If I merely opposed them, I would simply wish for them to fail and leave Ukraine. But, because I despise and hate them for the cruelties and atrocities they've committed, my wish for every perpetrator is that they die horribly (at least as horribly as their victims) and burn in lowest circle of hell. Is that clear enough for you?
Starting off with a false premise is beneath you
[QUOTE=WyattEarp;2813645]Our heated exchange started with a discussion about Crimea as a must-have Ukrainian objective and Crimea's ties to Russia or lack thereof.[/QUOTE]No, the "heated" part of the exchange started with you presuming to tell me that I was taking things too personally. And that led me to challenge you, repeatedly and directly, to take that geopolitical stick out of your ass and respond to Russia's atrocities on a strictly personal and moral plane. I even provided you with an example of a particularly heinous act, the cold-blooded shooting of a young girl in the head, in hopes of knocking you out of your detached, navel-gazing mode.
Even now, after a cursory acknowledgement of Russian atrocities, presented as though you're viewing them through a long-distance, indifferent lens, you rush to take refuge under your abstract geopolitical comfort blanket. I guess that stick up your ass must be surgically attached, huh?
Oh, and if you're wondering why I edited out all the ancillary geopolitical BS you posted, you'll find the answer in the paragraph below. I used it in my response to Elvis but it's equally applicable here.
"I don't give a fuck about the West's agenda. I back Ukraine because they're defending themselves against aggression, and the right of self-defense is a moral absolute. And I oppose Russia because they are the aggressor. And, building on that latter fact, I DESPISE Putin and his Orcs because they're pursuing their aggression in a depraved, atrocity-laden way. If I merely opposed them, I would simply wish for them to fail and leave Ukraine. But, because I despise and hate them for the cruelties and atrocities they've committed, my wish for every perpetrator is that they die horribly (at least as horribly as their victims) and burn in lowest circle of hell".
That's it in a nutshell, 100% morality and 0% geopolitics. Any questions?
The Sad Saga of the Pathetic Loser
[QUOTE=Questner;2813731]When a majority of Russians hear of Putin the image of a pathetic loser comes to mind. Pathetic post-Soviet losers, like Putin, Yeltsin, and Medvedev, are characters in a series of comic books by the Russian author Havuhadinov.
Of course, we can debate if tossing one pathetic loser is enough to suppress a platoon on a hectare, or whether two or three are needed. Pulverizing every last Orc is a goal of this war. The West of course will supply until one moment it is going to shove it up Putin's ass. This type of support is laudable and inevitably will end in Russia's ignominy. The sooner the gang at the scene in Moscow will follow the fate of the current government of North Korea the better.[/QUOTE]Couldn't agree more! Keep these nuggets coming!
The I'm more enraged than you shouting is beneath you.
[QUOTE=Jmsuttr;2813720]No, the "heated" part of the exchange started with you presuming to tell me that I was taking things too personally. And that led me to challenge you, repeatedly and directly, to take that geopolitical stick out of your ass and respond to Russia's atrocities on a strictly personal and moral plane. I even provided you with an example of a particularly heinous act, the cold-blooded shooting of a young girl in the head, in hopes of knocking you out of your detached, navel-gazing mode.
Even now, after a cursory acknowledgement of Russian atrocities, presented as though you're viewing them through a long-distance, indifferent lens, you rush to take refuge under your abstract geopolitical comfort blanket. I guess that stick up your ass must be surgically attached, huh?
Oh, and if you're wondering why I edited out all the ancillary geopolitical BS you posted, you'll find the answer in the paragraph below. I used it in my response to Elvis but it's equally applicable here.[/QUOTE]I'm guessing you are here to try to persuade others that the Ukraine War is a cause we must commit to resolutely. However, I don't see you persuading. Instead, you are shouting down on someone who has been in mostly support of your posts. No one has to be in 100% agreement with your perspective to show loyalty to the Ukrainian cause.
I do think you take it too personally. So what? I don't want to here aggressive retorts that I don't care about the Russian atrocities. Or the the old social media standby "you're not answering my question" repeatedly to establish dominance over someone and the thread.
If you want to be effective at delivering your message, I would dial it down a bit. Maybe quite a bit. Let some opinions breathe without feeling compelled to suffocate anyone whose opinion doesn't conform to yours. In case you haven't noticed, this thread is the same hand full of people shouting at each other day-in and day-out on an "anonymous fuckboard."
It's an impossible task to convince the morally impaired
[QUOTE=WyattEarp;2813899]I'm guessing you are here to try to persuade others that the Ukraine War is a cause we must commit to resolutely.[/QUOTE]You guess wrong. I'm not trying to persuade anyone. I post facts and analyses I think are interesting and relevant and people are free to decide for themselves. Similarly, when people post narrative and opinion, dressed up as fact, I'm happy to point out facts that burst that bubble.
Either way, I frankly don't give a fuck what they believe, because the war will play out how it plays out. Oh, but I do enjoy making fun of the Putin FanBoy clique. That doesn't mean I'm trying to persuade them either, because they're immune to fact.
[QUOTE] However, I don't see you persuading. Instead, you are shouting down on someone who has been in mostly support of your posts. No one has to be in 100% agreement with your perspective to show loyalty to the Ukrainian cause.[/QUOTE]I don't give a fuck what you think. Especially now that you've conclusively demonstrated yourself to be morally impaired. Whether you're a moral cripple, or a moral coward, you'll have to decide for yourself. And others can read each and every moral challenge that was placed before you, and render their own judgments on your repeated evasions. I'm not trying to convince them either, the posts speak for themselves.
[QUOTE]I do think you take it too personally. So what?[/QUOTE]No problem. I do think you can go fuck yourself. So what?
[QUOTE]I don't want to here aggressive retorts that I don't care about the Russian atrocities. Or the the old social media standby "you're not answering my question" repeatedly to establish dominance over someone and the thread.[/QUOTE]If you can't stand the heat, get the fuck out of the kitchen. If YOU hadn't taken it upon yourself to play the role of "school marm," lecturing me about how I should "feel," there would have been no retort. Oh, and if this is too aggressive for you, I suggest you either drag your pussy-ass somewhere else, or maybe just STFU instead of presuming to lecture others.
BTW, you'd actually be more believable if you dropped any pretense at caring, since it's glaringly obvious you don't. Someone who at least is honest about their moral indifference is better than someone who expresses pseudo-concern.
[QUOTE]I would dial it down a bit. Maybe quite a bit. Let some opinions breathe without feeling compelled to suffocate anyone whose opinion doesn't conform to yours.[/QUOTE]Once again, go fuck yourself. Since you've conclusively shown yourself to be a moral pygmy, pretending to care (in the oh-so-comfortable abstract), why should your second attempt at lecturing meet with anything less than the same contempt merited by the first?
[QUOTE]In case you haven't noticed, this thread is the same hand full of people shouting at each other day-in and day-out on an "anonymous fuckboard."[/QUOTE]In case you haven't noticed, I much prefer HONEST exchanges, even if they involve shouting, over the kind of mealy-mouthed, weasel-worded, piss-ant contributions you offer.
I'm perfectly able to deal with robust debate, even if it crosses into shouting and nastiness. And that's because I'm confident in my ability to construct sound arguments that are based on facts and evidence.
But, when someone presumes to tell me how I should feel, especially when that person has put his moral impairment on full display, then the shotgun gets loaded and the volume gets turned up. Don't like it? Tough shit. When you choose to start something, completely unsolicited and uncalled for, you choose to reap what you've sown.
BTW, I'm more than primed for another round, are you? If you think you've seen aggressive and enraged, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Your BS is boring and tiring.
[QUOTE=DramaFree11;2813719]You guys have to stop reading and watching CNN. When is the last time they have told the truth about anything.[/QUOTE]CNN (just like all other American media) quoted Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It would take you 10 seconds to research the topic. Much less than writing that bullshit, pointless post of yours.
The only thing you're capable of is blabbering about the imminent demise of Ukraine. On and on, ad nauseum for over a year -- that's all you've been doing since the war broke out.
Pathetic!
