I would have to say that ratings and reviews should not be incentivized in the first place.
That seems incredibly intransparent and the review will not really be worth much. If anything this is just Megapari asking for a manufactured, inauthentic review from their own gambling community. Of course they will only give a positive review, not only because those people want a bonus for their account but also because they are already biased in favor of the casino.
That's really a bit disappointing. I am not sure if I would want to trust such a casino after this.
Well, I must say, there are a few conflicting thoughts running through my mind on this one. On one hand, I can understand your point about incentivized reviews. It does raise concerns about transparency and the potential for manufactured or biased feedback. It's true that if people are solely motivated by bonuses, their reviews might not hold much value. However, on the other hand, one could argue that offering incentives might encourage more people to participate and share their experiences, leading to a wider range of feedback. Additionally, it's possible that some participants genuinely appreciate the bonuses and are willing to provide honest reviews. Take for example the review campaigns that some other casinos have organized in the past. It's hard to argue that all those reviews were fake or insincere, especially when you consider that not all of them were glowing recommendations. In fact, many participants provide genuine feedback, both positive and negative, sharing their real experiences. So before jumping to conclusions about Megapari's campaign, let's give it a fair chance and see what kind of reviews they receive. Only then can we judge the authenticity and credibility of the feedback received. People can still provide honest feedback, even if there are rewards involved. When researching a platform, it's wise to consider a range of factors beyond just reviews, such as the platform's licensing and regulation, reputation in the industry, security measures, customer support, and overall user experience, so if the site wants to pay or incentivise reviews they are only covering a part of the many requirements that users tend to have when choosing who to play with. |
|
|
|
I do not say anything when it comes to bonuses or promotions where they demand what they want, things that nobody can do, because they can do it because it is simply their promotions and bonuses, but when it comes to withdrawal I understand that they can ask for the KYC, but It seems exaggerated to me when they take more than 3 days to verify or that they demand many requirements to be able to verify, it is not something that seems good to me, a withdrawal must be approved quickly because that causes one to get angry when they ask for many things which are not necessary.
Regarding bonuses or promotions, we must check the wagering requirements so that we don't misunderstand because many of us forget about that and just deposit money and play gambling. But when we win and want to withdraw the money, we are faced with a KYC request by the casino, which makes us feel cheated by the terms behind the promotion even though it is written that other requirements are needed before we can withdraw the money. And when the casino takes 3 days, I think it's still within reasonable limits because the casino needs to ensure that its members are not involved in any illegal activity. But it is questionable if it has passed 7 days because we have waited too long for the verification process and desire to withdraw money. When I walk into a land based casino I have to hand them my ID card. They run it through a scanner, then they hand me my ID back and tell me welcome and good luck. They don't ask me where I got my money, am I doing anything illegal, or if it's ok for them to verify me for 3-7 days. I'm sure when they scan my ID they may check for warrants or something, but other then that they tell me good luck and move on to the next person. Why is it different online? Why do I need to verify my source of income? KYC is too invasive IMO. Indeed, you've touched on a topic that stirs up quite the debate. The differences in the verification process between land-based and online casinos can certainly feel intrusive. Consider this, though: online platforms don't have the advantage of physically seeing their clients, making it easier for individuals to hide illicit activities or engage in money laundering. Land-based casinos, on the other hand, can monitor their clientele more closely. Furthermore, online platforms operate globally, which brings a multitude of legal jurisdictions into play. To abide by various international laws, particularly those pertaining to money laundering, these platforms are compelled to adopt stringent KYC policies. Could there be a less invasive way to ensure compliance? Possibly! It's definitely a matter worthy of further discussion and exploration. While KYC procedures may feel invasive to some, they are intended to protect users and the sites alike. You must have a very good reason to not play along these, and yes, the fact there are many jurisdictions makes it much more difficult. Platforms typically have privacy policies in place to safeguard user information and comply with data protection laws but that is very dependent on the country. |
|
|
|
|
You are absolutely correct. It's crucial to exercise caution when providing your credit card details to any platform or service, particularly online. There are some very basic precautions that you need to take, such as checking the SSL and security information, make sure that you trust the payment platform and do not pass the data directly to the site. Even being very careful is easy to fall for scams.
|
|
|
|
Well, that is, you deliberately threw in a fake and do not deny it. And Ukraine sells American military aid in military shops. Maybe I'll quote it too.  I could answer that for Ukraine in the typical "Russian" style. We don't know how they got them, we didn't provide them, they probably stole these machines from the battlefield. Remember what Russia was saying about the Malaysian Flight 17 in 2014? We weren't there, there were no Russian BUK systems in Ukraine. The US provided satellite images of Russian BUKs, but Russia answered that those belonged to the Ukrainian separatists. Then the US provided satellite images showing the missile launchers were moved after the accident towards Russia - Russia denied again. People were posting pictures and videos of Russian BUKs with Russian flags painted on them driving on the Ukrainian roads, but Russia kept denying and repeating that there were no Russian forces there. When they catch you with your hand in the cookie jar, say it's not your hand. It is possible the Russian soldiers who fought on the Ukrainian side took some of the abandoned vehicles for themselves, the way Ukrainian forces use salvaged Russian vehicles and weapons. On the battlefield nobody cares who picks up what. If you find a tank - it's yours now. Same can be said about a hummer, or a missile launcher. . Fucking idiots, at least they would take Turkish armored vehicles. Couldn't keep Bakhmut? Let's send a suicide battalion in American armored vehicles, tell everyone that these are "Russian partisans", let them take over a village club near the border and everyone will die there. Brilliant. The RF army has taken a wasteland valley where a city called Bakhmut used to be and you seem quite happy about it. Oh, well, I like your attitude of being happy with what you can get. However, the RF still has not learned that smoking in Crimea is not a good idea. So many depots, military infrastructure and fuel burning these days, one would think that they should have learned by now. |
|
|
|
I have a plan from 2026 with no Putin on it. If he is such a fan of history, he should become history. Re peace treaty, a demilitarised zone sound like a good idea. 80 Km may be too much, I would go for 79 km. Jokes apart, peace after the invasion will mean nothing if there are not enough guarantees of this not happening again next time the oil barrel goes over 70 USD, which seems to be the RF preferred moment to create problems to everyone. |
|
|
|
Summing up the arguments:
Putin's RF - The war could be avoided by letting Putin and the current Moscow government decide what Ukraine and the Baltic Republics can or cannot do. Primakov doctrine at full throttle.
US Falcons position (and Ukraine's): No, you cannot get it your way. US relentless pressure, as usual. Go to war, do speeches, create proxy wars and ride a horse half naked, but the answer is not.
Putin does no longer get to set the conditions and if he goes to war... I guess the US is very happy about it. Revitalises the NATO (which was pretty much dead), sells weapons, creates a new ally where there was not, expands NATO and in the way gets Europe and Russia to fuckup their economies.
When things get to this point, one has to measure carefully how big can bite and how big is the other dog. I am afraid that the USSR is gone. It's might is also much reduced (if you want to consider the RF the heir to it).
But this war is also the failure of the RF to present a credible alliance alternative - a soft power incentive - for many the former USSR republics and that has a lot to do with how the RF government has done business after becoming the RF, but also about how the USSR treated these nations.
Again, you're trying to turn things upside down in a rather clumsy way, quite in your style. I remember the events of 2014 very well, the base in Sevastopol was a real bone of contention. After the successful coup d'état in Ukraine, the United States' wet dreams of turning the Black Sea into NATO's inland sea began to rapidly take on the outlines of reality and this became a trigger for the annexation of Crimea. The current conflict in Ukraine is a natural continuation of those events. The US desperately needed a proxy conflict with Russia, and it got it. The only nuance is that when Russia realized that the conflict could not be avoided, it struck first and carried it out according to its own scenario. Do not exaggerate the role of Ukraine or the Baltics here, this is a proxy conflict between the United States and Russia. All other countries are backing dancers here, including the UK (which has its own ambitions, but does not have enough strength to realize them). Well, Ukraine in the unenviable role of the stage. Seriously... If I were Russian I would not use Afghanistan as an example. You know...
In Afghanistan, they treat Russia with respect, they remember that it was an honest and worthy adversary. And the Afghans urinate on the American flag in the morning, because the United States deceived them, just as they will deceive Ukraine at the first opportunity. It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal. Finally, at least we could agree, after months and months of posting silly, that the reason for this war is Crimea. Not the "Nazis", not the "Genocide", not "Referendums"... but the sad truth: an imperialistic fight for a strategic region that has already been the reason of previous wars. I hope this clears to path for others to understand where all this comes from. On regards to the baltics, Poland, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria,... the USSR made so many "friends". Without that support it would be impossible to challenge the RF in their own backyard. The conflict could be avoided, but it is nearly impossible to do so with a despotic government, a bunch of kleptocrats and an army that needs an enemy to prove that they are needed. It would have seem impossible to prevent another war in central Europe after WW II and then the reconstruction and reunification of Germany, but as they say "where there is a will, there is a way". Again, a problem of the RF failing to use soft power with Ukraine. Oh, RE UK ambitions... well, I am afraid that you have forgotten all the rest of Europe. As individual countries, West Europe weights little, but they accepted that many decades ago and built the EU and a network of alliances in science, economy and education. Thanks to Putin, now that will extend to the military. |
|
|
|
Do you think it will be possible to sell this to Western sponsors as a successful Ukrainian counteroffensive? Ukraine needs to try harder, otherwise it will soon have to swallow the Chinese peace plan, to which Russia will add a couple of points. And it will be just a slightly sweetened pill of unconditional surrender in a different wrapper. To me it seems as though this thing has moved well beyond 'Ukraine'. I think that I would say something like this if I were Russia: - We intend to end up with a more 'sustainable' Eastern Europe which works better for all parties directly involved (especially us), and is more safe for everyone world-wide, by the time this thing is wrapped up. - Most complex things of importance take time and planning. This one will. - Everyone can see that the power structures animating the U.S. is increasingly desperate to get WW-III going. - We understand why they must instigate a broader war and the time pressures which they are working under. - We very well may decide that it is necessary to give them what they wish, but at a time and place of OUR choosing. - The process for exiting NATO is currently quite protracted. We suggest that member states start that process without delay. In early May, there was an entertaining one-hour conference hosted by the Canadian Foreign Policy Institute with Jeffrey Sachs and Ivan Katchanovski. Here are a couple of quotes from there: The war could have been avoided because the Soviet Union and then Russia said over and over: "Don't expand NATO into Ukraine." If you want to know what caused this war, here is the explanation. The rest is details. There was a detailed account with time frames in a 1997 Foreign Affairs article by Brzezinski: “The expansion of NATO and the EU must proceed in stages. By 1999 Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic will be admitted to NATO. By 2003, the EU will initiate accession negotiations for all three Baltic republics, and between 2005 and 2010 for Ukraine. All they do is play out Brzezinski's plan to encircle Russia in the Black Sea. That is the US plan. Putin said in 2008 - we want to cooperate, but don't expand NATO. In March 2022, Zelensky allowed a neutral status for Ukraine. And in Ankara, with the mediation of Turkey, negotiations began. On the basis of Ukrainian neutrality, rapid progress was made, but the US insisted on continuing the war, according to Naftali Bennett. The government of Ukraine has put everything in their country at stake with the support of the United States. This is a terrible adventure. Ask Vietnamese, Nicaraguans, Libyans, Syrians, "Isn't it great to gamble with the US as your patron?" Summing up the arguments: Putin's RF - The war could be avoided by letting Putin and the current Moscow government decide what Ukraine and the Baltic Republics can or cannot do. Primakov doctrine at full throttle. US Falcons position (and Ukraine's): No, you cannot get it your way. US relentless pressure, as usual. Go to war, do speeches, create proxy wars and ride a horse half naked, but the answer is not. Putin does no longer get to set the conditions and if he goes to war... I guess the US is very happy about it. Revitalises the NATO (which was pretty much dead), sells weapons, creates a new ally where there was not, expands NATO and in the way gets Europe and Russia to fuckup their economies. When things get to this point, one has to measure carefully how big can bite and how big is the other dog. I am afraid that the USSR is gone. It's might is also much reduced (if you want to consider the RF the heir to it). But this war is also the failure of the RF to present a credible alliance alternative - a soft power incentive - for many the former USSR republics and that has a lot to do with how the RF government has done business after becoming the RF, but also about how the USSR treated these nations. ... I am quite calm. And Ukraine has already become a laughingstock even for the Poles, who called the foray into the Belgorod region another propaganda circus. ps If "Ukraine has nothing to do with this, this is Russian citizens performing an special military operation on their own", then how did the saboteurs end up with American MaxxPro and Hummer armored vehicles? Ukraine does not control US military assistance? pps Kim DotcomIn Bakhmut a restaurant owner and 60,000 convicts destroyed an army that NATO trained for 9 years. Reminds me of the farmers in sandals that kicked the US out of Afghanistan. The US Govt spends a trillion dollars >per year< on a military that can’t win anything. What a waste. The Poles? Poland is giving Ukraine pretty much anything they ask for including Migs-29 and tanks. Relative to their size they are the biggest contributor... do not believe everything you read. Hummer and all that... oh I guess they got them in the same way that "Ukrainian Separatists" troops in the Donbas had Russian tanks and Russian military "advisors". It is just Russians fighting for their freedom with whatever equipment they can get hold of. Just like the RF Ukrainians in Luhansk. Seriously... If I were Russian I would not use Afghanistan as an example. You know... The Ukrainian troops in Bakhmut were not "elite" at all. There is ample coverage of where the well trained troops are, but you do not want to believe it anyway so... time will tell. |
|
|
|
Do you think it will be possible to sell this to Western sponsors as a successful Ukrainian counteroffensive? Ukraine needs to try harder, otherwise it will soon have to swallow the Chinese peace plan, to which Russia will add a couple of points. And it will be just a slightly sweetened pill of unconditional surrender in a different wrapper. If you can sell Bakhmut as a "victory" I guess everything is possible, isn't it? However, no need to sell anything I would say. Ukraine has nothing to do with this, this is Russian citizens performing an special military operation on their own, just like it happened in the Donbas. The RF was not in the Donbas prior to the invasion right? Or was it? No reason to worry. Ukraine has gained the ability to reach any target in the occupied areas and well into Russia, but that is no reason to worry, Europe commits even more weapons, funds and training, but there is no reason to worry. F16 jets seem to be imminent, but no reason to worry. Drink Stolichnaya and sleep well, there is no reason to worry... ever. Do you think it will be possible to sell this to Western sponsors as a successful Ukrainian counteroffensive? Ukraine needs to try harder, otherwise it will soon have to swallow the Chinese peace plan, to which Russia will add a couple of points. And it will be just a slightly sweetened pill of unconditional surrender in a different wrapper. To me it seems as though this thing has moved well beyond 'Ukraine'. I think that I would say something like this if I were Russia: - We intend to end up with a more 'sustainable' Eastern Europe which works better for all parties directly involved (especially us), and is more safe for everyone world-wide, by the time this thing is wrapped up. - Most complex things of importance take time and planning. This one will. - Everyone can see that the power structures animating the U.S. is increasingly desperate to get WW-III going. - We understand why they must instigate a broader war and the time pressures which they are working under. - We very well may decide that it is necessary to give them what they wish, but at a time and place of OUR choosing. - The process for exiting NATO is currently quite protracted. We suggest that member states start that process without delay. Yet the RF decided to simply send in the troops. What could go wrong? Many times over... Putin is going to get the Congress Medal of Honor... of the US Congress. |
|
|
|
I do not really understand your concept of "provocation". You are in a war, What provocation does anyone need?
War is only in your fantasies. Russia is conducting a special military special operation, Ukraine is also not at war with Russia. There is no exchange of appropriate notes through diplomatic channels declaring war, Russia continues to pump gas to Europe through a pipeline through Ukraine, Gazprom regularly pays Naftogaz for gas transit - what fucking kind of war is this? You again have terminological difficulties, for which you'd better consult a dictionary. Please don't disappoint me, I think you're a pretty smart conversationalist. .. Of course you are in a war! You do not need anything in written, But anyway, that is fine, let's say that Ukraine is not anyway invading Russia. It is a group of Russians doing a special military operation to de-Putinify Belgorod and free their people. So there is no provocation, it is just that Putin does not seem to be able to keep all his citizens happy enough or afraid enough to not cause problems. See... no provocation, just unhappy citizens, like in the Donbas. https://t.me/breakingmash/44237 |
|
|
|
Next, you need to separate the core of Wagner and the prisoners who temporarily joined them, who did the main work to free Bakhmut. This is a unique experiment on the socialization of former prisoners, in which approximately 35-40 thousand people took part. According to curator Vagner Prigozhin, 26,000 of them have already completed their six-month contract and demobilized, with a severance allowance of 1,200,000 rubles, combat veteran status, an extinguished criminal record (and a Wagner medal in case of injury or special merit). These people are now free, without weapons and with a good chance for a new life. I think that this experiment is quite successful.
26 000 of serial killers, thieves, pedophiles and all other kinds of worst criminals is no longer criminals and now free on Russia's streets. Offcourse it's going to end well and they're not going to repeat their crimes. Anyway, couldn't care less what's happening in RF. Do not dramatize, serial killers and the most malicious criminals are in special regime prisons, from where Wagner was not recruited. Of course, some part of those who successfully completed the contract with Wagner will go down the wrong path again, this is inevitable. They will be caught again, convicted and returned to prison. But I think that the vast majority of former Wagner stormtroopers correctly use their chance for a new life, because they have all the conditions for this - money for the first time to settle down, the status of a combat veteran giving the right to numerous benefits and increased pensions, a clean history with expunged criminal record, which makes it possible to find a decent job. I think this is a successful social experiment, but time will tell. Good that you reminded Patriot, yesterday on Russian Su-35 was downed in Black Sea and seems they did it with Patriot missile.
It's fake. Please activate the rudiments of critical thinking, the Patriot defends Kyiv, where Kyiv is and where the Black Sea is. BTW seems that some strange things happening in Belgorod oblast or I should say Belgorod People's Republic.
Some drug addicts. The usual hype at the suggestion of Budanov, all saboteurs have already been eliminated by the FSB special forces. How can someone be so stupid as to leave a border unattended when at war!!
In general, the border is well protected, it was a breakthrough of a small sabotage group through the checkpoint. Western curators do not encourage strikes on Russian territory, so Ukraine is forced to carry out provocations at the hands of small detachments of "Russian partisans" who do not pose a serious threat. There are no nuclear warheads in the nuclear warhead storage near the border for a long time, they were removed even before the conflict began. I think this is a common provocation such as landing on the islands in the gray zone near Kherson to force Russia to respond to the threat and divert attention from the loss of Bakhmut. Yes, the border is well protected, with lots of fortifications and troops and all that, this was just a point that was not. Like Belgium in WWII. As I write, there are video confirmations of explosions in Belgorod. Ukraine was not involved, just as the army in the Donbas after 2014 was not the RF army (wink wink). I think it was an special military operation of Russian citizens that feel that Belgorod needs to be de-putinified and freed from the Kleptocrats influence, so they have nothing to do with Ukraine (wink wink). Sure there is no threat... such a small group. Let's hope it does not become bigger, that could be a problem right? We would then start thinking of the Belgorod People's Republic? To put it plainly: Anyone can play denial, hybrid war, "special operations", the "insurgency game" and the "proxy war" and create a problem where there wasn't to serve their geostrategic interests. It takes however wisdom, that Putin lacks, to solve the issues without doing it. Of course... there were no nuclear material there... although some people out there point to the fact that it was removed that same day... as always, you a free to believe it was not there. As you are free to believe that an alert was not sounded in the nearby localities or may be decide that, in your mind, it was not. I do not really understand your concept of "provocation". You are in a war, What provocation does anyone need? Now, to the strategic level: Attacking the region of Belgorod, serves several purposes. First to create concern, second to require the RF to move troops there, which requires time, plenty of fuel and spreads the resources. Also these need to be proper troops, not the grunts that run towards Moscow when they see anything advancing in their general direction, and these type of troops are quite in demand. This distraction can easily become much more of a problem if the RF decides to do nothing or just send a few choppers. Militarily, it is a good move. A few posts ago I said there were news of a column of troops heading to Belgorod. Let's see what comes out. |
|
|
|
That is because Ukraine has nationalists, but no more Nazis than Russia or, for that matter, the US - so they do not worry about your imaginary friends because they are yours.
People in Ukraine fought the real Nazis in WW II. Putin is currently acting like a Nazi (e.g. 15 years of prison for anyone complaining).
I think you have a serious problem with terms and definitions that you'd better discuss with a dictionary. The main reason for this war is Crimea. Putin needs a port that the RF can use all through the year and he has decided that it is even better to have the base in Sebastopol and steal from Ukraine Mariupol and anything in between the two.
The main reason for Russia's invasion of Ukraine is the genocide of the Russian-speaking population in Donbas. The issue with Crimea was closed in 2014, it’s just that Ukraine has difficulties with the stages of accepting the inevitable, it is stuck at the stage of denial. Sure Wagner is an illegal group and Santa Claus is meeting Superman today for tea. Wagner is fighting in the front, receiving money and weaponry from the RF government and I do not see anyone taking to justice the wagnerites - in fact the RF has supplied convicts as soldiers (cannon fodder).
I cannot separate Wagner from Wagner and Wagner from Putin because they are one and the same, just cut the official bullshit seriously, you will be left will zero credibility if you have any left.
26000 have completed they contract and retired as fertiliser for the Ukrainian soil, dying as stupidly as all the rest of the young RF citizens sacrificed for nothing. From your point of view, I am sure that you consider the "experiment" very successful.
Meanwhile, the deep strikes RF people keep smoking in the wrong places deep in the occupied territories and in the RF.
All the Wagnerites who died during the liberation of Bakhmut are buried in Russia. For example, there is a Wagner cemetery in the city of Goryachiy Klyuch in the Krasnodar Territory and in the city of Berezovsk in the Sverdlovsk Region. Tens of thousands of soldiers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are fertilizing the Ukrainian land, whose bodies no one was even going to take out of Bakhmut, and there was no physical possibility. That's a good one, but if I wanted fiction histories from Russia, I would go for "Peter and the Wolf". Prokofiev was much better than you at making legends and tales fun, while Wagnerites are notoriously careless about their fallen. Now, what is happening in Belgorod? Belgorod, Russia, not Belgorod, Kentucky. I heard that Ukraine has nothing to do with a group of RF armed people called "the legion of freedom", that seem to be fighting for Ukraine without Ukrainian permission - inside Russia. It cannot be possible right? Russia is perfectly able to defend its borders and all Russians love Putin and would never attack their homeland?? Interestingly enough, they seem to have Humvees and other military equipment. What is worse, it seems they are pretty much near a storage of nuclear warheads. I think is time to evacuate but then Putin would need to recognise that he cannot even defend his borders... nah, better to leave his people there. It seems that the XXI is all about proxy wars, undeclared wars and troops that would not answer when asked "who do you fight for?". I am going to link a guy, kind of pro-Russian but not too propagandistic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCLtgrAdnq8How can someone be so stupid as to leave a border unattended when at war!!
[url=https://t.me/shot_shot/51738]https://t.me/shot_shot/51738 https://t.me/Tsaplienko/32273https://t.me/bazabazon/17864... The main reason for this war is Crimea. Putin needs a port that the RF can use all through the year and he has decided that it is even better to have the base in Sebastopol and steal from Ukraine Mariupol and anything in between the two.
The main reason for Russia's invasion of Ukraine is the genocide of the Russian-speaking population in Donbas. The issue with Crimea was closed in 2014, it’s just that Ukraine has difficulties with the stages of accepting the inevitable, it is stuck at the stage of denial. ... Nope, the issue has never been "closed" (certainly not for Ukraine an seem that nor for Putin). Crimea's water supply is in Ukrainian territory (now occupied, soon to be liberated). Crimea was fully dependant on the Kerch bridge for ground supplies (which has proven to be veeery vulnerable). Russia just could not accept that their naval base in the Black Sea (Sebastopol), which is also geopolitically super-important to have sea access in winter, was under one threat or another (no water, no access, no leasing...). And the last straw was obviously Ukraine deciding, very rightfully, not to play ball with Russia and potentially joining NATO which would end up with Sebastopol as a NATO base or under permanent NATO threat (in Putin's mind of course). The "genocide", the "culture", "the Nazis" ... all that is for simple minds. Politics in the RF care little about any of it. |
|
|
|
What I am "saying" is that how come no one in the RF seem to be worried about having an irregular army waging war in Ukraine, I mean, they are in Ukraine now, they can be in the streets of Moscow tomorrow - we are talking thousands. Or is the way Putin protects himself from a coup, by having two competing armies?
It is more strange to me that Ukraine is not worried about Nazi armed formations like Azov and Kraken, or Luftwaffe aerial reconnaissance units, but I understand what you mean. That is because Ukraine has nationalists, but no more Nazis than Russia or, for that matter, the US - so they do not worry about your imaginary friends because they are yours. People in Ukraine fought the real Nazis in WW II. Putin is currently acting like a Nazi (e.g. 15 years of prison for anyone complaining). The main reason for this war is Crimea. Putin needs a port that the RF can use all through the year and he has decided that it is even better to have the base in Sebastopol and steal from Ukraine Mariupol and anything in between the two. Wagner is an illegal armed group in Russia, it's no secret that Wagner's commander Dmitry Utkin is an ideological Nazi. Therefore, they are thrown into the most difficult combat missions, the more they kill Ukrainian Nazis and the more they themselves die in battle, the more successfully denazification is moving forward in Ukraine. It's ironic that denazification happens at the hands of the Nazis themselves, isn't it? Next, you need to separate the core of Wagner and the prisoners who temporarily joined them, who did the main work to free Bakhmut. This is a unique experiment on the socialization of former prisoners, in which approximately 35-40 thousand people took part. According to curator Vagner Prigozhin, 26,000 of them have already completed their six-month contract and demobilized, with a severance allowance of 1,200,000 rubles, combat veteran status, an extinguished criminal record (and a Wagner medal in case of injury or special merit). These people are now free, without weapons and with a good chance for a new life. I think that this experiment is quite successful. ps Excellent speech by Zelensky in the US Congress on December 21, 2022, about the role of Bakhmut and the importance of the Patriot air defense system. Sure Wagner is an illegal group and Santa Claus is meeting Superman today for tea. Wagner is fighting in the front, receiving money and weaponry from the RF government and I do not see anyone taking to justice the wagnerites - in fact the RF has supplied convicts as soldiers (cannon fodder). I cannot separate Wagner from Wagner and Wagner from Putin because they are one and the same, just cut the official bullshit seriously, you will be left will zero credibility if you have any left. 26000 have completed they contract and retired as fertiliser for the Ukrainian soil, dying as stupidly as all the rest of the young RF citizens sacrificed for nothing. From your point of view, I am sure that you consider the "experiment" very successful. Meanwhile, the deep strikes RF people keep smoking in the wrong places deep in the occupied territories and in the RF. |
|
|
|
The amount of Reddit tier cope that's going to justify how losing Bakhmut is actually a good thing.
The reality is, it was a very strategically important city because it now gives them access to a lot of roads a geographically significant areas. Over the coming weeks/months, expect Russia to take a lot of territory pushing up to the next/final cities in the Donbass region.
There is nothing good about loosing Bakhmut, but it does not change much the strategic map nor possibilities. As of now, the RF fails in all that is not shelling cities and using cannon fodder to take them. It has been months since they cannot make any significant advance outside that type of dirty battle that leaves you with lots of losses and basically a flat land. Now they are trying to make Bakhmut a big thing, like a great victory or the like, but it is not, is in fact a very minimal progress.
~
You are not offering "the unofficial truth", you are not linking to "an alternative better information", you are simply blurting information that is detached from reality to the point that is basically fake. This might or not change, but NATO does not want the RF to show any kind of credible victory simply because after this war they will wage another, and another,...
All the things you talk about in your post that I have partially quoted, are save-face operations for the US and Nato getting out of Ukraine....  No, 2.8 billion and sending fighter jets, latest generation cruise missiles and training thousands of troops is not save-face sorry, it is proper help. In my view, much more could be done, but this is real. You of course will not recognise any of this, but it does not matter - the Storm Shadows and HIMARS destroy depots without your help. Speaking of which... there seem to be some clouds of smoke in Mariupol. I wonder if the RD recruits are still smoking near weapons depots and using telegram 600 at the time? $2.8 billion, you say. Did you notice that the amounts are slacking off? Soon it will be $2.8 thousand. The Russians and Wagner are sitting back and chuckling about how dumb Ukrainians have become since the smart ones left Ukraine like a year ago. No, I do not "say", I link. This discussion is gone, the support from NATO is so evident that there is no need to further proof. politico.eu/article/urkaine-war-germGermany approves new €2.7B package of arms for Ukraine What I am "saying" is that how come no one in the RF seem to be worried about having an irregular army waging war in Ukraine, I mean, they are in Ukraine now, they can be in the streets of Moscow tomorrow - we are talking thousands. Or is the way Putin protects himself from a coup, by having two competing armies? |
|
|
|
The amount of Reddit tier cope that's going to justify how losing Bakhmut is actually a good thing.
The reality is, it was a very strategically important city because it now gives them access to a lot of roads a geographically significant areas. Over the coming weeks/months, expect Russia to take a lot of territory pushing up to the next/final cities in the Donbass region.
There is nothing good about loosing Bakhmut, but it does not change much the strategic map nor possibilities. As of now, the RF fails in all that is not shelling cities and using cannon fodder to take them. It has been months since they cannot make any significant advance outside that type of dirty battle that leaves you with lots of losses and basically a flat land. Now they are trying to make Bakhmut a big thing, like a great victory or the like, but it is not, is in fact a very minimal progress.
~
You are not offering "the unofficial truth", you are not linking to "an alternative better information", you are simply blurting information that is detached from reality to the point that is basically fake. This might or not change, but NATO does not want the RF to show any kind of credible victory simply because after this war they will wage another, and another,...
All the things you talk about in your post that I have partially quoted, are save-face operations for the US and Nato getting out of Ukraine.... No, 2.8 billion and sending fighter jets, latest generation cruise missiles and training thousands of troops is not save-face sorry, it is proper help. In my view, much more could be done, but this is real. You of course will not recognise any of this, but it does not matter - the Storm Shadows and HIMARS destroy depots without your help. Speaking of which... there seem to be some clouds of smoke in Mariupol. I wonder if the RD recruits are still smoking near weapons depots and using telegram 600 at the time? |
|
|
|
Meanwhile, Bakhmut is taken.
By meanwhile you mean that a 17.000 habitants city, not too far from the RF borders, has been flattened to the ground to the point that is no longer a city and that has only taken... 1 week? 1 month? half a year?.... no, it has taken 1 year, since May 2022! If that is how the Pyschos intend to keep waging war in Ukraine, I forecast what is basically a suicide for the current regime. The amount of money, men, resources and political capital employed make this war an economic suicide for the RF. BTW... watch your flanks... it may take 1 year to get it, but it may take 1 week to run from it. I am thinking of it. Why would Ukraine choose to defend Bakhmut? Why did Ukraine need one more year to keep the RF busy in what is a not very strategically significant area. What did happen during that year? - EU and US committed billions in additional aid. - Ukrainian troops have been trained in a variety of systems. Notably in the Patriot, but not only in the Patriot. - A number of Ukrainian pilots have been trained in F-16, which are going to be "freed" by the US so that allies can send them to Ukraine. - A number of MBTs, IFV, artillery and other vehicles have arrived to Ukraine with their crews trained. It seems to me that the cost of taking Bakhmut is not just the dead and the equipment lost. We will see along the summer. Why complicate things? Look at it in a simple way... like this. Russia is much larger than Ukraine. The Russian military is much larger than Ukraine's military. So... Just to throw out some example figures, imagine that Ukraine's military was 10,000, and Russia's was 100,000. Let's say that they were killing each other off 1 to 1. This means that when Ukraine has killed off 10,000 Russians, there won't be any Ukraine military left... but there will still be 90,000 Russians left. The fact is more like Russians are killing 6 or 7 Ukrainians for each Russian dead. Get the picture? Ukraine is being played... by the US, Nato, and Russia. The smart Ukrainians left months ago, by the millions. Blab all you want. The fact of the matter is that there won't be any Ukrainians left in a very short time from now. Your numbers are incorrect and the concepts on which it is based are incorrect and your conclusion do not match anything remotely close to reality. Your approach is not simple, it is simplistic because you are someone who likes simple yet wrong answers to real but complex to solve problems. You want also a simplistic yet wrong argument? Here it goes: It took the RF 1 year to conquer a 17.000 pre-war population city. Thus it will take around 500 years to conquer Ukraine. As stupid as your calculation, see. You want another simple yet wrong answer: Here it goes: The military budget of the RF is not even 1/10 of all the countries supporting Ukraine. Thus the RF has 1 in 10 chances of achieving a military "victory". Russian was larger a year ago and had, in theory, a larger army, yet here we are. The RF and Ukraine are not even close to a full mobilisation, being the RF on an offensive imperial war and Ukraine simply defending their homeland, the political will to accept losses is very different. Thus, the ratios you mention are meaningless. Let me educate you: nearly 99% of wars are economic, and this is not exception. The governments tend to say other things (religion, rightful government, revolutions, and for Putin "Nazis and Zionists, etc...) The war in Ukraine only works for the RF if it is economically beneficial, and that is no longer the case no matter what they do, unless they basically take all the territory of Ukraine and install a puppet. (e.g. you cannot be waging war for 500 years). If Ukraine losses it ceases to exist. If the RF looses (whatever "loosing" means") it is likely that nothing will change (except if it is such a defeat that leaves the country in shambles, which is not going to happen). The RF is being played, Europe is being played and Ukraine has been left with no option but to fight thanks to Putin's clumsiness. I know who the winners, no matter what, are on this one: US, Saudis, Turkey, Israel and all weapons producers. The "smart Ukrainians who left" and nothing compared to the "smart Russians who left" and are actually willing to go back - not the case for Russians, who probably can't anyway without risking jail. Actually, it is your numbers that are wrong... as be.open is continually showing you one way or another. be.open has just explained why Wagner didn't simply overrun Bakhmut. Ukrainian solders were ordered to stay and fight to the end. Did they? If they did, they are dead... just reinforcement for the things that I have been saying. If they didn't, an Ukraine loss. All the while you consider the failing US/Nato banking system as support for Ukraine, we are seeing growth in BRICS and BRICS ideas and nations. At the rate the US and Nato are helping Ukraine win, BRICS will have overcome them long before a Ukraine win can happen. Half the Ukrainian population left Ukraine. Russia might have lost a small percent of her people, but she gained a whole lot more in Crimea and the whole Donbas area... to say nothing about other lands that have joined Russia. You can talk about 99% of wars that act this way or that way, but there are other people who explain it all differently. The point is, Ukraine has already lost militarily. And their loss is causing the US and Nato to quietly back off. It can be seen that trade in Russia has gone right around the sanctions; they were a failure. Even trade in Ukraine is starting to act like there isn't any war going on. The war will soon end, and Russia will absorb a whole big bunch of Ukraine... economically if not in formal land acquisition. This is NATO quietly backing off: https://www.politico.eu/article/urkaine-war-germany-new-arms-package/Germany approves new €2.7B package of arms for Ukraine https://edition.cnn.com/2023/05/18/politics/us-allies-f-16-jets-ukraine/index.htmlUS signals to allies it won’t block their export of F-16 jets to Ukraine https://edition.cnn.com/2023/03/16/europe/poland-fighter-jets-ukraine-intl/index.htmlPoland becomes first to pledge fighter jets to Ukraine https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-patriot-missile-system-4c79f9110899ca1880a61f2d1f328179US-made Patriot guided missile systems arrive in Ukraine You are not offering "the unofficial truth", you are not linking to "an alternative better information", you are simply blurting information that is detached from reality to the point that is basically fake. This might or not change, but NATO does not want the RF to show any kind of credible victory simply because after this war they will wage another, and another,... |
|
|
|
Meanwhile, Bakhmut is taken.
By meanwhile you mean that a 17.000 habitants city, not too far from the RF borders, has been flattened to the ground to the point that is no longer a city and that has only taken... 1 week? 1 month? half a year?.... no, it has taken 1 year, since May 2022! Verdun is also a small city, but a serious battle broke out there a century ago. Wagner took Bakhmut for 9 and a half months, which is a long time, but there was no goal to take the city quickly, the goal of the "Bakhmut meat grinder" was to deplete the Armed Forces of Ukraine on the conditions imposed by Russia. Now Ukraine says that the position in Bakhmut is unfavorable, but who forced it to defend a disadvantageous position for so long? If that is how the Pyschos intend to keep waging war in Ukraine, I forecast what is basically a suicide for the current regime. The amount of money, men, resources and political capital employed make this war an economic suicide for the RF. BTW... watch your flanks... it may take 1 year to get it, but it may take 1 week to run from it.
I am thinking of it. Why would Ukraine choose to defend Bakhmut? Why did Ukraine need one more year to keep the RF busy in what is a not very strategically significant area. What did happen during that year?
- EU and US committed billions in additional aid.
- Ukrainian troops have been trained in a variety of systems. Notably in the Patriot, but not only in the Patriot.
- A number of Ukrainian pilots have been trained in F-16, which are going to be "freed" by the US so that allies can send them to Ukraine.
- A number of MBTs, IFV, artillery and other vehicles have arrived to Ukraine with their crews trained.
It seems to me that the cost of taking Bakhmut is not just the dead and the equipment lost. We will see along the summer.
Pleases your optimism and faith in magic by the next Western wunderwaffe. Russia also did not sit idle during these 9 and a half months: - carried out partial mobilization, eliminated the numerical superiority of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, carried out a rotation and gave rest to the most combat-ready units. - erected many defensive structures, including a 70-kilometer trench in Zaporozhye, in all directions except for Bakhmut, several rows of layered defense with dense mining. - launched the mass production of planning and control kits that turn ordinary high-explosive bombs into guided bombs - this has become a real headache for the Armed Forces of Ukraine, for which there is still no cure. - launched the mass production of loitering ammunition Lancet, which became a real headache for the Armed Forces of Ukraine, for which there is still no cure. - Too lazy to type. Have you heard about the Maginot line? It was not a 70 kilometre trench, it was an "impregnable" line of defence of bunkers, fortifications, artillery positions and concentrations of troops that the French built to defend against the possible attack from the Nazi regime of Hitler. You know how long did it take for the German army to run past it? Zero days, they did not, they went through Belgium. Based on France's experience with trench warfare during World War I, the massive Maginot Line was built in the run-up to World War II, after the Locarno Conference in 1925 gave rise to a fanciful and optimistic "Locarno spirit". French military experts believed the line would deter German aggression because it would slow an invasion force long enough for French forces to mobilise and counterattack. It is said that "generals are always fighting the previous war", your Psychos have taken this to a new level by fighting wars that took place 75 years ago. The cure to gliding bombs is the F-16. These bombs are being launched taking advantage of the limited airforce and detection range of Ukrainian planes. That ends when the US decides it end. Lancets? They are stopped by a simple net you know? But agree, they cause some problems but will not win you the war. Too Lazy to type... well, too lazy to answer. Now, I am not downplaying the difficulties of recovering territory, what I am saying is that there are strategies that can deliver that objective with the means that Ukraine has and will have at their disposal. |
|
|
|
Meanwhile, Bakhmut is taken.
By meanwhile you mean that a 17.000 habitants city, not too far from the RF borders, has been flattened to the ground to the point that is no longer a city and that has only taken... 1 week? 1 month? half a year?.... no, it has taken 1 year, since May 2022! If that is how the Pyschos intend to keep waging war in Ukraine, I forecast what is basically a suicide for the current regime. The amount of money, men, resources and political capital employed make this war an economic suicide for the RF. BTW... watch your flanks... it may take 1 year to get it, but it may take 1 week to run from it. I am thinking of it. Why would Ukraine choose to defend Bakhmut? Why did Ukraine need one more year to keep the RF busy in what is a not very strategically significant area. What did happen during that year? - EU and US committed billions in additional aid. - Ukrainian troops have been trained in a variety of systems. Notably in the Patriot, but not only in the Patriot. - A number of Ukrainian pilots have been trained in F-16, which are going to be "freed" by the US so that allies can send them to Ukraine. - A number of MBTs, IFV, artillery and other vehicles have arrived to Ukraine with their crews trained. It seems to me that the cost of taking Bakhmut is not just the dead and the equipment lost. We will see along the summer. Why complicate things? Look at it in a simple way... like this. Russia is much larger than Ukraine. The Russian military is much larger than Ukraine's military. So... Just to throw out some example figures, imagine that Ukraine's military was 10,000, and Russia's was 100,000. Let's say that they were killing each other off 1 to 1. This means that when Ukraine has killed off 10,000 Russians, there won't be any Ukraine military left... but there will still be 90,000 Russians left. The fact is more like Russians are killing 6 or 7 Ukrainians for each Russian dead. Get the picture? Ukraine is being played... by the US, Nato, and Russia. The smart Ukrainians left months ago, by the millions. Blab all you want. The fact of the matter is that there won't be any Ukrainians left in a very short time from now. Your numbers are incorrect and the concepts on which it is based are incorrect and your conclusion do not match anything remotely close to reality. Your approach is not simple, it is simplistic because you are someone who likes simple yet wrong answers to real but complex to solve problems. You want also a simplistic yet wrong argument? Here it goes: It took the RF 1 year to conquer a 17.000 pre-war population city. Thus it will take around 500 years to conquer Ukraine. As stupid as your calculation, see. You want another simple yet wrong answer: Here it goes: The military budget of the RF is not even 1/10 of all the countries supporting Ukraine. Thus the RF has 1 in 10 chances of achieving a military "victory". Russian was larger a year ago and had, in theory, a larger army, yet here we are. The RF and Ukraine are not even close to a full mobilisation, being the RF on an offensive imperial war and Ukraine simply defending their homeland, the political will to accept losses is very different. Thus, the ratios you mention are meaningless. Let me educate you: nearly 99% of wars are economic, and this is not exception. The governments tend to say other things (religion, rightful government, revolutions, and for Putin "Nazis and Zionists, etc...) The war in Ukraine only works for the RF if it is economically beneficial, and that is no longer the case no matter what they do, unless they basically take all the territory of Ukraine and install a puppet. (e.g. you cannot be waging war for 500 years). If Ukraine losses it ceases to exist. If the RF looses (whatever "loosing" means") it is likely that nothing will change (except if it is such a defeat that leaves the country in shambles, which is not going to happen). The RF is being played, Europe is being played and Ukraine has been left with no option but to fight thanks to Putin's clumsiness. I know who the winners, no matter what, are on this one: US, Saudis, Turkey, Israel and all weapons producers. The "smart Ukrainians who left" and nothing compared to the "smart Russians who left" and are actually willing to go back - not the case for Russians, who probably can't anyway without risking jail. |
|
|
|
Meanwhile, Bakhmut is taken.
By meanwhile you mean that a 17.000 habitants city, not too far from the RF borders, has been flattened to the ground to the point that is no longer a city and that has only taken... 1 week? 1 month? half a year?.... no, it has taken 1 year, since May 2022! If that is how the Pyschos intend to keep waging war in Ukraine, I forecast what is basically a suicide for the current regime. The amount of money, men, resources and political capital employed make this war an economic suicide for the RF. BTW... watch your flanks... it may take 1 year to get it, but it may take 1 week to run from it. I am thinking of it. Why would Ukraine choose to defend Bakhmut? Why did Ukraine need one more year to keep the RF busy in what is a not very strategically significant area. What did happen during that year? - EU and US committed billions in additional aid. - Ukrainian troops have been trained in a variety of systems. Notably in the Patriot, but not only in the Patriot. - A number of Ukrainian pilots have been trained in F-16, which are going to be "freed" by the US so that allies can send them to Ukraine. - A number of MBTs, IFV, artillery and other vehicles have arrived to Ukraine with their crews trained. It seems to me that the cost of taking Bakhmut is not just the dead and the equipment lost. We will see along the summer. |
|
|
|
If they had the 500km range version then yes, but there's another one, with shorter range of only 250km and I believe that one was supplied to Ukraine, to prevent them from striking deep into Russia. In a straight line, there's only 450km between Ukrainian border and Moscow  I don’t understand why you drag this rotten shit from Ukrainian propaganda here?
What is the propaganda you're talking about? The Russian tactic is not admitting to any losses and when someone actually counts their wrecked machines, it's propaganda. The pictures of t-62 in Ukraine are also propaganda, just as Iranian drones were propaganda because Iranians said they weren't selling any to Russia and we could keep counting. This is not a tank conflict. Tanks are the second most deployed military unit of this war, right after IFVs. That's a fact, not propaganda. Artillery has third place. The superiority in tanks could have been decisive, but it was not - thanks in large part to the large number of hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers in early NATO deliveries to Ukraine. A couple of hundred Western tanks from late NATO deliveries will not help Ukraine much either.
The problem is Russians barely have any good hand held anti-tank launchers. That's why a Western tank that can take out numerous Cold War era Russian tanks and take a hit from an RPG, or a drone, can make a difference. Russia's superiority in artillery, aviation and missiles plays a much larger role at the current stage of the operation. In the autumn of last year, a temporary superiority in numbers played well into the hands of Ukraine, due to this, it was possible to achieve success near Izyum. Now Ukraine has no significant advantage in any aspect.
They are slowly running out of cruise and hypersonic missiles. Artillery doesn't take ground, especially the one Russia uses, as it's not mobile and not accurate enough. It can be used to shell defenses or towns and act as a deterrent. It buys time, but doesn't allow Russians to advance. Sure, Russia has air superiority, but Ukraine doesn't try to fight them in the air. I've read today that Ukrainians shot down an aircraft with a patriot missile. What's going to happen in a year? Will Russia sacrifice it's air defense forces to attack Ukraine and open itself for a possible attack from the East? As much as I would like to agree, artillery plays a pivotal role in this war, much more than hand-held AT or SAMs and drones. These two get lots of attention, but these systems are more about providing infantry a fighting chance and keeping tanks more concerned and crews more afraid. You will not win the war with any of them, as the RF cannot win the war just launching missiles. Artillery and properly supported tanks play the main roles, perhaps along the Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFV) like the RF BMPs and, my guess at this point, the Bradleys and other that have high mobility, speed, a decent gun able to deal with anything except a modern tank and a couple of antitank missiles for anything else crossing their path. As said, drones, Javelins, missiles and limited air platforms come second, unless you can do a brilliant combined weapons tactic. ... I have said before that DU munitions is not something I would sent to an ally if I were there US, but I am not an "Analyst"  so what do I know. ... The only reason I waste my time with you is to see if one day you'll recognize that the West is NOT a friend of Ukraine. Or Poland. At all. Ironically, I'm probably more 'friendly' than most of the people in the West because I believe that the world is big enough for a contingent of neooldo-Nazis and inbred chicken-swingers. I just happen to believe that it is not ethical to use them as tools, but that it proper and ethical to make sure that they don't threaten normal people who are not into their brand of ethics. The appearance of the DU cloud was spot-on to impact the center-mass of aforementioned miscreants. As if these groups needed any more genetic misfortunes! Oh well. BTW, I found another solid gold animation, but it is attached to a longer bunch of content which is not interesting enough for me to spend time on. At least it is the first segment: Ukraine: Russian Update May 19, 2023 https://www.bitchute.com/video/EL5wPLvDTsyP/--- Edit: Unrelated, except insofar as it's funny. 'Za-Luuu-zhny?!?' Wagner and Prigozhin Asked Where General Zaluzhny Is https://www.bitchute.com/video/aqCk5XjEywPa/"No nation has friends only interests." - Charles de Gaulle, What you call the West, does not have friends at state level (people can feel friendship or empathy for people in other countries), they do have allies and adversaries, common interests and common objectives. I said that a million posts ago. Thus I repeat, I would not send DU to an ally (not a friend, an ally) , it is just not a good idea. Oh... regarding your time, that's fine, I really appreciate your dedication and all that... but feel free to use it somehow else. Seriously, no problem at all. |
|
|
|
Putin's Palace and bunker nearby.
A modest residence for someone who likes just usual stuff like fishing, riding horses half naked and has the true spartan tastes of the "true Eastern Culture". BTW... I wonder if this is in the range of a Storm Shadow and if Ukraine could decide to carry a "special military operation" on this.
I do not agree. Ukraine is now fighting at the maximum of its military potential, for Ukraine it is a matter of life and death. Russia has used its military potential, I think by 15%, for Russia this is a military special operation.
Here's what they were saying 2 months ago: Russia’s army is estimated to have lost nearly 40% of its prewar fleet of tanks after nine months of fighting in Ukraine, according to a count by the specialist thinktank the International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS).
That rises to as much as 50% for some of the key tanks used in combat, forcing Russia to reach into its still sizeable cold war-era stocks. Ukraine’s tank numbers are estimated to have increased because of the number it has captured and supplies of Soviet-era tanks from its western allies.
Its headline count is that Russia’s number of tanks in its army have reduced by 38% from 2,927 to 1,800, while there have been particularly heavy losses of its workhorse T-72B3, an upgrade first delivered to its army in 2013.
Heavy losses on the battlefield have meant that Russia had lost “around 50% of its pre invasion fleet” of the tank and a related variant
Ukraine could fight better with more NATO military support, but firstly, NATO military support for Ukraine already has unprecedented volumes, and secondly, it is not profitable for NATO to inflate the conflict too much so that it does not get out of control.[url]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/15/russian-army-has-lost-up-to-half-of-key-battle-tanks-analysts-estimate-ukraine[/url] At the beginning of its full-scale invasion in Feb., Russia had around 3,330 operational tanks (2,840 with the ground forces, 330 with its naval infantry, and 160 with its airborne forces), according to the Military Balance 2021 database.
The database includes all tank types currently employed by Russia’s military, notably T-72s, T-80s, and T-90s, and their modifications.
According to Oryx, an online investigative project documenting equipment losses in Russia’s war, Russia has lost at least 994 tanks as of Sept. 1.
The estimated total Russian loss of 1,300 machines in Ukraine roughly corresponds to 14 full-fledged armored brigades or 42 battalion tactical groups (BTGs). This amounts to more tank fleets than the U.K., France, Germany, and Italy combined.
[url]https://kyivindependent.com/how-many-tanks-does-russia-really-have/[/url] Saying that Russia has used 15% of its potential is an understatement, unless you count all the scrap tanks from the 50s and 60s, like Russian propagandists do, but most of these tanks will never be restored. Russia is a strange country where on paper there's 10k tanks in reserves, but in reality half of these have been in storage for over 50 years. They don't run, cannot be restored, and even if they are somehow restored, are useless on the modern battlefield. The reality is, Russia has used maybe 20% of its total tank reserves (on paper), but more than 50% of working, fairly modern tanks. I say fairly modern because t72 has been in use since the 70s and Russians just can't let it go. They're just adding more electronics and reactive armor and calling it a modern tank because it's cheaper than making a new one. So, it's possible a grandfather was using a T72 in the Soviet Union, and now his grandson is using it in Ukraine  It's really easy to prove that they're running out of tanks, since they've started to deploy T-62s. These are tanks that were used by Russia in Afghanistan and were already outdated in the 80s. [url]https://mil.in.ua/en/news/ukrainian-military-captured-first-russian-t-62-tank/[/url]  These Russians have a sense of humor. Look at the name of the tank "fury" written on the barrel. Also the state of the tank, as it's a version with no reactive armor. As much as I would like to agree with you, the RF has still some reserves. We are looking at an army that does not plan strategically too well in term of the doctrines that they use and how they adapt these to the different situation. To put it plainly, if they have a stone, they will throw the stone to the enemy and if they have a shoe... they will throw the shoe at the enemy. What does the RF have in abundance: - Artillery. Not state of the art nor modern nor specially far reaching, but plenty of it, even from WW II. It is not accurate, it is not as useful, but they have piles of munitions, so they shell. - More planes and better than Ukraine's. They cannot really fly them close to the front nor support localised combat operations, but they can still send a glide bomb and do some limited sorties. Ukraine cannot really until the get the F16 (BTW, there in 4 months I recently read). - Drones an missiles. Not in unlimited quantities, particularly the really good ones and with limited capability to produce more. Still, you cannot stop everything with a Patriot. - Lots of crappy equipment from the 60s. A tank is a tank and they can refurb much easily than build new ones, so they are doing it. Attrition of tanks, artillery and shells, IMO is not going to play a defining role. The ability to use combined arms with western equipment on weak spots and zones where the RF soldiers are not well equipped and low on morale is a much better strategy, |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
