• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

Elixir said:
Pro tip: to preserve credibility, don’t start lecturing people on stuff you don’t know much about and haven’t paid much attention to. Lessons you have not learned are not a solid basis for making policy recommendations to others who know more about it.
Click to expand...
Did I comment on something that happened in WWII?
Elixir said:
Repetition does not make you right. If you’re wrong, it makes you stupid.
Click to expand...
The other possibility is that the others are being stupid.
 
steve_bank said:
I read a translation of paper by a Russian officer. He said it was difficult to prepare for war with the USA by studying their manual on tactics. When a battle begins they don't always follow the book.
Click to expand...
:D Islamic militants and Chinese are way ahead of others in springing surprises. In Galwan attack in Ladakh the Chinese used barbed-wire wrapped on wooden clubs (no gunfire). Of course, the attack did not go all that well for them.
 
aupmanyav said:
steve_bank said:
I read a translation of paper by a Russian officer. He said it was difficult to prepare for war with the USA by studying their manual on tactics. When a battle begins they don't always follow the book.
Click to expand...
:D Islamic militants and Chinese are way ahead of others in springing surprises. In Galwan attack in Ladakh the Chinese used barbed-wire wrapped on wooden clubs (no gunfire). Of course, the attack did not go well for them.
Click to expand...
Answer the question man from India. Should India give land claims and acquiesce to Pakisatn and China?

A yes or no question.

If Ukraine should give up the fight why not India?

Maybe this is one of those moral conundrums.
 
aupmanyav said:
ZiprHead said:
You just don't get it, do you. It makes no difference who was the president. It was the economic ties with the west that Putin objected to.
Click to expand...
Not the economic ties, but the military ties that may have worried Putin.
Click to expand...
JFC! There were no military ties in 2014.
 
Last edited:
steve_bank said:
I an wondering if there are more than one person posting under Barbos.

Just with my cursory knowledge of militray history the invasion was ridiculous

A convoy in the open with unprotected flanks and no coordinated air support. A stunning blunder.

Wide open to hit and and run attacks which the Ukrainians used. Apparently the Russians were not equipped with good maps and GPS, or the Russian version of GPS.

Right out of a WWII movie Ukrainians changed road signs and blew up bridges..

When I was at Lockheed there were always militray journals laying around. The Cold War Soviets kept the lower levels in the dark. No maps or briefings, just given a direction to advance.

After the failures in North Africa Eisenhower initiated headship training down to the lowest ranks.

I read a translation of paper by a Russian officer. He said it was difficult to prepare for war with the USA by studying their manual on tactics. When a battle begins they don't always follow the book.

Initiative.
Click to expand...
You are still talking about things which happened 2.5 years ago
 
aupmanyav said:
steve_bank said:
I read a translation of paper by a Russian officer. He said it was difficult to prepare for war with the USA by studying their manual on tactics. When a battle begins they don't always follow the book.
Click to expand...
:D Islamic militants and Chinese are way ahead of others in springing surprises. In Galwan attack in Ladakh the Chinese used barbed-wire wrapped on wooden clubs (no gunfire). Of course, the attack did not go all that well for them.
Click to expand...
Of course it is different. That is what Netanyahu says about the death and destruction in Gaza...

I see, India has agreements with Pakistan and China but once in a while you shoot at each other. Makes sense to me. What's a few artillery shells among friends, right?

Still the question regardless of any agreements why not just give Pakistan and China the Indian land they want?

If it is the right thing for Ukraine certainly it must be the right thing for India.
 
barbos said:
Let me answer for him - No, they shouldn't. In fact India should go and do to pakistan what Russia did to to Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Oh, thanks for your kind thought. Should we do the same to China too? But Modi does the thinking for us at the moment. Whatever he decides.
 
aupmanyav said:
ZiprHead said:
JFC! There were no military ties in 2014.
Click to expand...
Russia was afraid that they would come. Ukraine did not do enough to remove this conception from Putin. It talked of war to free Crimea.
Click to expand...
CIA chief had a long term apartment lease in Kiev.
They were running the whole thing. NATO was coming to Ukraine officially, there was no question about that.
Unofficially they were there already.
 
Last edited:
steve_bank said:
Makes sense to me. What's a few artillery shells among friends, right?
Still the question regardless of any agreements why not just give Pakistan and China the Indian land they want?
If it is the right thing for Ukraine certainly it must be the right thing for India.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it does not matter. It is practice, assessment of preparedness, etc. Chinese attackers in Galwan were not expecting Indian reinforcement so quickly in the last skirmish.
That is not the agreement. The agreement is to discuss and find what is acceptable to both sides.
Ukraine is not talking. It is trying to defeat Russia. Good luck to them.
 
barbos said:
steve_bank said:
I an wondering if there are more than one person posting under Barbos.

Just with my cursory knowledge of militray history the invasion was ridiculous

A convoy in the open with unprotected flanks and no coordinated air support. A stunning blunder.

Wide open to hit and and run attacks which the Ukrainians used. Apparently the Russians were not equipped with good maps and GPS, or the Russian version of GPS.

Right out of a WWII movie Ukrainians changed road signs and blew up bridges..

When I was at Lockheed there were always militray journals laying around. The Cold War Soviets kept the lower levels in the dark. No maps or briefings, just given a direction to advance.

After the failures in North Africa Eisenhower initiated headship training down to the lowest ranks.

I read a translation of paper by a Russian officer. He said it was difficult to prepare for war with the USA by studying their manual on tactics. When a battle begins they don't always follow the book.

Initiative.
Click to expand...
You are still talking about things which happened 2.5 years ago
Click to expand...
It is relevant to today and the poor performance pf the Russian army. Communism,Stalinism, and Putinism has bred out the kind of independent thinking that we have in the west.

The main reason IMO why the Soviets failed, communism bred out peronal initiatve nd creativty. War u a cretve effort as brutal as it is.

Many of us over here consider government mostly a necessary evil. We question it all the time. We value independence of thought over monolithic thinking forced by the likes of Putin. That is why people like me see Trump andh js followers as very dnagerous to our freedoms.

2 years, 5 months, and counting......very day another dead or crippled Russian. Is it worth it?
 
steve_bank said:
It is relevant to today and the poor performance pf the Russian army. Communism,Stalinism, and Putinism has bred out the kind of independent thinking that we have in the west.
Click to expand...
looks like you are unaware that USSR won war with Nazi Germany.

And no, it's utterly irrelevant. But if you insist then Ukraine Nazi NATO planned offensive utter failure is even more relevant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom