-
Posts
12,911 -
Joined
-
Last visited
RETAC21's Achievements

Crew (2/3)
0
Reputation
-
Nope, like I wrote, it's the Ukrainian's choice to fight or not, I don't delude myself believing they are being forced to fight by the Deep State in the West. And it's their choice to agree to cease fighting and give up their land to the Russians. You delude yourself thinking that what the US does or does not has a bearing on the war anymore, and in order to avoid facing the obvious fact that a democracy is being thrown under the bus you need to conjure elaborate explanations and fake concern for foreign lives.
-
Of course they do, the can surrender or they can desert, like the Iraqis did in 2003. If they don't care about becoming Russians like you believe, they can switch sides easily. Yet they don't, they keep on fighting conscripted or not. Just accept you have become a Russian tool, and embrace the Tsar.
-
This is surprisingly easy to do. Buy land based MdCN, build a small, U235 warhead of the gun variety and build enough decoys to swamp Russian air defence (which are not that many, as the Ukrainians show) Edited to add: 5 years or less, according to the US in 1998:
-
A Peace Settlement to the Ukraine War
RETAC21 replied to BansheeOne's topic in Military Current Events
Watch carefully and you will understand: -
It's going to be difficult to annex anything when the first thing Trump is assure everyone that US troops are not going to be sent anywhere beyond the US borders.
-
All this "care" is non-sense, if the Ukrainians decide to die to defend their homeland and their democracy, it's their choice to make, not yours or mine. But if we really believe in common principles, then the Western democracies need to provide them with the tools to defend their country. Given your concern for people dying elsewhere, I suppose you support cutting off all aid to Israel to stop the war and keep Palestinian civilians from dying. If you do not, evidently you don't give a damn about who dies where and your only concern is to do Russia's bidding.
-
Actually, and Trump has said this several times, if he had been President in 2022, Ukraine would have been thrown under the bus and we would be worse off than we are: - Germany would still be dependent on Russian oil - Sweden and Finland would be out of NATO - Poland wouldn't be allowed to rearm itself with US weapons - No presence in the Baltic countries. Just some of the things that would be impacted off the top of my head.
-
They are unrealistic today, they may not be in a year's time. In 1987 the front had been static between Iran and Iraq for 6 years, in 1988 the Iraqis trounced the Iranians. Russia is slowly wasting away economically and militarily, so just keeping the Ukrainians in the field may lead to a victory.
-
Explained here. TLDR USN doesn't use AIS, ships approach bow to bow in an anchorage full of ships, it's not clear who's giving way, end up in a glancing hit.
-
This is what Americans do not understand, these populists do not really have traction, because European politics are structured in such a way that only mainstream parties count, so, while they could have power in individual countries, they are never going to be able to tip the scales at a continental level - you murricans equate the EU to a national entity and miss the fact that it's not. Out of that, you nitpick extreme news and present a picture that is not real - which is why the VP speech flew over the delegates and is irrelevant. In short, the same shit you believe Them in Mass Media do and decry.
-
No, it doesn't either: https://www.ifw-kiel.de/publications/news/ukraine-support-after-3-years-of-war-aid-flows-remain-low-but-steady-shift-towards-weapons-procurement/ "Over the past 3 years of war, donor countries have provided a low but continuous flow of support to Ukraine, with a value of about EUR 80 billion per year. European donors have been the main source of aid to Ukraine since 2022, especially when it comes to financial and humanitarian aid. At the same time, we observe a shift towards weapon procurement. In the initial phase of the war, military aid to Ukraine mostly came from existing arsenals of donor countries, but these have emptied over time. Today, the large majority military aid is newly produced weaponry from Western defense industries—with a small but growing role of multilateral weapon procurement initiatives."
-
No, it isn't and hasn't been for quite some time, because the US stopped aid altogether last year and the Ukrainians didn't cave in, and even launched the Kursk offensive (misguided as it was) and are waging a strategic bombing campaign with no US aid at all. The problem is that the war is so filtered in US media by internal politics, that USians have missed that they had become second fiddle in 2024 and are no longer the support they believe they are for Ukraine, which is why Zelensky doesn't feel bound by anything Trump says. At the same time, the Russian Army is reaching the end of its Cold War legacy arsenal and becoming weaker by the day, so the Ukrainians can go on fighting if Europe alone keeps bankrolling them. Win would be a return to 2022, decisive win would be 2014 borders - that will surely imbalance Russia's regime so not likely.
-
An independent opinion:
-
How so? US aid has become supplemental in the best of cases. It's not going to be decisive to win the war for Ukraine (the US was unable to deliver that so far - just in case you forgot: 31 tanks delivered to Ukraine since 22) and is unable to leverage anything on Russia to get them to negotiate (more sanctions? suuure)
-
Aid has already stopped, and Vance has said that Ukraine is not Europe's security problem. So the US has nothing to negotiate about, they are not a party in the war anymore.