The sheer amount of cope in the comments. Apparently Ukraine has already beat Russia.
The sheer amount of cope in the comments. Apparently Ukraine has already beat Russia.
old.reddit.com
So, when is Russia going to lose?
124 comments
-
-
It comes down to blood. Which side can bleed more. And the answer is Russia. Someone can correct me on this story, but it goes like this… A country goes to war agains China. Every day the Chinese lose one million fighters. After 100 days the enemy surrenders to China. Suffering and dying is part of the Russian psyche. They will bleed their own country dry and consider it a patriotic gesture.
They actually still believe they are dying in droves, just naruto running into the bullets in human wave attacks.
-
"The slavic brainpan is predisposed towards human wave attacks and death" is...certainly a take to have
-
I hear chuds parrot that line, inserting Russia instead of Slavic brainpan, and people including libs nod along because they saw Jude Law in Enemy at the Gates in the early oughts.
-
This dude's definition of Slavic is anywhere east of Prague. Chinese Slavs, amazing.
-
Libs sure do love their literal Nazi propaganda.
-
Just waiting for them to call us candle-eaters at this point.
-
-
-
You mean that's not how it works? Why would Nazis lie...
-
Every war is literally a sacrifice lol. Whether the war is cynical or for defense or for revolution, your purpose as a soldier is to sacrifice yourself if necessary, and your purpose as a commander is to efficiently sacrifice your soldiers.
-
-
These deeply unserious people managed to find an old bottle of vintage N*zi Germany era anti-Slavic racism and have been gulping it down heavily. It's literally the "superior Western Europeans cannot be defeated by the inferior and stupid
Slavic hordesRUZZIAN ORCZ. Operation Barbarossa will be a success!" all over again.-
When you kick in the door but the whole rotted structure doesn't collapse
-
Well the rotten structure collapsed, but it wasn’t the one the Nazis believed.
-
-
-
Russia won’t pull out, Putin has to appear powerful. It doesn’t matter if it ruins Russia economically, he won’t ever stop.
Russia is the fastest growing economy in Europe.
They have a birth rate well below replacement and are bordering on demographic collapse. They can't afford to lose millions of men like they could in WW2.
Once about 32 million Russians die (probably early 2025) then the door will be locked in and the whole rotten edifice will fall down.
What I hate is most people don't seem to realise it's not only about Ukraine. Letting Russia win opens a whole other can of worms. Do we really want authoritarian powers with imperialistic ambitions around the world to think they can just invade what they want and wait until the West gets tired?
The west is the vanguard of anti-imperialism.
Meanwhile, Russia has had to sell oil at loses, has had assets frozen, has suffered heavy sanctions meaning lack of materials and equipment/technology, and has had to switch to a war time economy. Meanwhile, it has barely made a dent in the wests finances.
Russia the fastest growing economy in Europe.
-
Meanwhile, it has barely made a dent in the wests finances.
How long do you think it'll take liberals to figure out that derivatives and oil futures don't translate into ammunition and rations if you outsourced all your factories?
-
They never will, the signs are already bad for the Ukrainian side.
In March 2023, the EU made the historic decision to deliver a million artillery shells to Ukraine within 12 months. But the number that has actually been sent is closer to 300,000.
According to the armed forces of Ukraine, over the summer of 2023, Ukraine was firing up to 7,000 artillery shells a day and managed to degrade Russia’s logistics and artillery to the point where Russia was firing about 5,000 rounds a day. Today, the Ukrainians are struggling to fire 2,000 rounds daily, while Russian artillery is reaching about 10,000.
Russia is likely to be able to fire about 5m rounds at Ukraine in 2024, based on its mobilised defence production, supply from Iran and North Korea, and remaining stocks. Despite the flippant observation – often made by European officials – that Russia’s economy is the same size as that of Italy, the Kremlin is producing more shells than all of Nato.
This is not to say "Russia stronk, victory imminent", but that there's a rising tide on the Russian side which has, amusingly, more stable allies, that can actually ship war supplies on time. Even this lib commentator is not shying away from noting the Ukrainian counter-offensive floundered. The closer you get to the actual details, the less gung-ho you are about the war, funny that.
-
-
What I hate is most people don't seem to realise it's not only about Ukraine. Letting Russia win opens a whole other can of worms. Do we really want authoritarian powers with imperialistic ambitions around the world to think they can just invade what they want and wait until the West gets tired?
WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU THINK THE LAST THIRTY GODDAMN YEARS OF MILITARY CAMPAIGNS BOMBING AND OCCUPATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST WERE -- IF THERE IS A STANDARD
WESET IT -
imperialistic ambitions
Libs always say this about Russia but Putin has been at the helm for a long time, like 25 years. In that time the war in Ukraine is really the only major conflict Russia has been involved in - the rest has been operations in places like Dagestan or Chechnya which may or may not have been justified, idk. Russia has displayed zero “imperialistic ambitions”.
Now compare that to totally not imperialist USA, who had started unprovoked, major wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya in that same time frame.
-
Russia has mercenaries in Africa and the Middle East, but even then it has very limited success compared to the WOT led by the US.
-
-
Russia is the fastest growing economy in Europe.
Source? I couldn't find anything that backs this up
-
Do we really want authoritarian powers with imperialistic ambitions around the world to think they can just invade what they want and wait until the West gets tired?
Biden said the same thing during a UN speech. I cannot and will not take these people seriously, even if i truly wanted to.
Meanwhile, it has barely made a dent in the wests finances.
… what? This entire comment has to be a joke right.
-
-
You can't keep people down like the Russians are trying after what Ukraine has experienced of even fledgling democracy and freedom.
-
Pure vibes, stated wrongly and with supreme confidence
-
-
Well, Putin...
Exactly. Also...
I completely agree. Then there's...
Exactly. The USSR...
THIS. He doesn't...
Exactly. The sheer number...
Exactly.
You know when the thread has this structure that meaningful discussion is ongoing
-
One of the worst aspects of places like R*ddit is their use of political analogy in the place of political analysis.
Obviously some of the most egregious offences are when people do like Harry Potter fanfic or whatever (e.g. Joe Biden is Harry Potter, Kamala Harris is Hermione, and Trump is Voldemort... that kind of bullshit) but the second worst is when they do pop-history political analogy.
No, Napoleon doesn't have any direct bearing on the current war in the Ukraine and no matter how closely you retcon major political or military figures into a superficial match with major figures today it won't make your analysis any more sound, let alone any more true.
This isn't the Soviet intervention into Afghanistan. This isn't one of the wars in Iraq. This isn't the same as a box office smash hit movie which you love and have seen half a dozen times.
If you want to draw upon history for some analysis of the war in the Ukraine, I would point you to the Syrian civil war because there you will see Russia's modern military tactics on display and this would be a sound basis for developing an understanding of Russia's military tactics in the Ukraine. It's not a surefire 1:1 match and it's never going to be but it's where I think any credible person would start (aside from any fairly recent Russian war game tactics.)
But that's nowhere near as compelling and it doesn't have the aura of gripping narratives and silver screen treats in the way that this cheap political analogy has. Discussing troop movements and artillery positions and the names of contemporary Russian generals is dry af and almost nobody is actually going to listen if you're talking about that stuff.
I know the whole "Reddit hivemind" trope is completely played out by now but there's a grain of truth to it. Mainstream Reddit subs are particularly bad at this alt-present narrative scripting as a stand in for reality that gets elevated into something widely celebrated across that site (and all those sycophantic comments that come to bask in the upvotes are a part of this phenomenon.)
-
There'd also be slightly more explanatory potential if they weren't dogmatically ignoring United States history. Like, we're funding and arming a group of people with the idea of locking Russia into a costly conflict -- now why does that sound so familiar? This is the preamble to consequences that are going to define the next few decades, if not the rest of the 21st century, for both the United States and the European Union. And yet we're still talking about it in a --"Home in time for Christmas, by Jingo!" -- sorta way. It's already been two years!
-
This isn't the Soviet intervention into Afghanistan. This isn't one of the wars in Iraq. This isn't the same as a box office smash hit movie which you love and have seen half a dozen times.
They can't even point to the Chechen War or the Russo-Georgian War, which is much more recent and has Putin playing a role in those conflicts. I suspect they don't want to point to those conflicts because Russia more or less accomplished all of their strategic objectives lol
-
-
this is why i try to disagree on here when i see something i disagree with
-
What's that old pre-wojak meme, Like a Sir? Whenever redditors talk about a Designated Bad Country, I always imagine like 6 or 7 of those guys sitting around a table
-
-
-
Is this like glimpsing into an alternate universe?
-
-
Any peace that does not guarantee Ukraine won't join NATO and becomes a demilitarizated neutral country will not be accepted by Russia. This war started because of that, Putin would have left the russian in the donbass to die if he could have had that.
-
perhaps an absolute greater loss as well.
There’s no perhaps. Russia has had air superiority and 10:1 shell advantage for over a year. Russian losses are around 40,000 while Ukrainian losses are around 400,000. Russia retreats and gives up territory to preserve lives, Ukraine clings to every bit of territory and lost more in their suicidal offensive than Russia has lost during the whole war
-
They claim in that thread that RU is losing 1k people on the front daily. I think they've learned statistics from the VoC foundation.
-
Russian losses are around 40,000 while Ukrainian losses are around 400,000
Where are you getting these numbers? I can't find anything that seems reliable, and as I far as I know neither side is releasing their own casualty numbers. A ten to one ratio does not seem like it reflects the mostly frozen lines of the war over the last year, even if Russia is pursuing the strategy you describe.
-
-
Like the goal of toppling the midan regime fell flat
I'd say this is between "jury's still out" and "yet." Assuming an independent Ukrainian government makes it through the war at all (likely, but not guaranteed), it's going to see massive changes as a result of (1) losing a bunch of territory and a war, and (2) having the Zelensky government "lose" the foreign military support on which it is entirely dependent.
It also seems the primary goal was not necessarily to topple the Maidan regime, but to keep Ukraine out of NATO. Russia negotiated with the current government at the start of the war, and absent NATO intervention would have seemingly reached a peace agreement with it.
-
This is a fact that I think gets overlooked.
By taking the territory in the east, Russia has created a poisoned chalice for the Ukrainian government.
The choice now is to relinquish claims over those territories in order to accede to NATO, which would be an outright political disaster domestically - like coups and civil war tier political instability, or to fight on under the conditions of lukewarm and waning support from the NATO axis but in doing so making them ineligible to accede to NATO.
I could imagine that NATO might consider bending the rules and allowing the Ukraine entry into NATO (anything is possible) but it would almost certainly be under strict conditions that NATO isn't about to trigger a WWI-style disaster where suddenly everyone gets dragged into a regional conflict against Russia via treaty. (Anything less would likely mean the breakup of NATO because I cannot imagine a world where a country like Turkey is simply champing at the bit to get stuck in a forever-war against Russia.)
So either the Ukrainian government gives up and the Ukraine likely ceases to function as a viable state or the Ukraine fights on against Russia under adverse conditions as domestic and international support for the war declines, gradually making the government buckle under the strain.
The Ukraine has serious political and military hardliners and they have already shown just how much appeasement they can extract. Those factions will continue to exert their influence unless they get happen to ground up by the war machine entirely. They won't be satisfied until there's a complete victory and a total reclamation of lost territory (along with the cleansing of ethnic Russians.)
You've got the moderates and the average citizens who want to see an end to the war and a Ukrainian victory, but not at any cost.
Then you've got the opposition types, who have essentially been silenced and neutered.
Capitulating to the moderates when they begin to tire of the war would likely trigger an insurrection by the hardliners who are a hardened, well-armed military force by this point. But continuing to prosecute the war in the face of growing discontent amongst the moderates is going to cause major problems and ultimately destabilisation for the military and civil society in the Ukraine, which will only gain momentum over time.
They can't win this war yet they can't afford to lose it, they can't back down and yet they can't maintain the current tempo for too much longer (especially without anything to show for their efforts and the loss of life.)
The only ways that I can see an exit from this situation with the current Ukraine intact would be by somehow acceding to NATO, by direct intervention from an external country, or by Russia calling it off (which would almost certainly only occur on their preferred terms unless there's a black swan event like a coup in Russia, but then we're going way off into wild speculation - it's not outside the realms of possibility but I wouldn't pin my political objectives on the chances of something like Putin being deposed).
Either the Ukraine fights on and Russia gets what they want, namely to keep the Ukraine out of NATO (Russia wins), the Ukraine fights on and buckles due to internal pressures and lack of external support (Russia wins), or the Ukraine backs down and implodes politically (no NATO accession and Russia is likely positioned to take more territory -> Russia wins).
I'm just not seeing any other probable outcome here. I guess the big irony here is that all of the things that liberal pundits have been prophesying about Russia - military collapse, demographic collapse, economic collapse, collapse of political support - are projection and I see it being far more likely for the Ukraine than for Russia.
-
-
-
This war isn't great for Russia, I highly doubt they were like "Yeah! We want a 2 year long slog that has serious trade ramifications for us!!!" But the idea that are losing or lost is silly.
I doubt that this is their ideal scenario but I also doubt that this isn't inside their reasonable range of expectations. Military planners are by nature pessimists because the optimists end up planning shit like Barbarossa and then having to shoot themselves in disgrace.
-
-
-
Getting the sinking feeling that they're straight up never going to acknowledge any kind of Ukrainian defeat
-
I'm thinking about the "Government in Exile" industry and I'm thinking you're right.
-
The real Vietnam Syndrome
"We killed [made up number of Russians] but lost the land and any strategic goal, you call that a loss???"
-
I wonder if the CIA will kill Zelensky and liberals and Ukrainian refugees will still worship the US like they did with Ngo Diem lol
-
-
I came to terms with this a year ago tbh
-
They've been planning for this eventuality since the beginning. Remember that "Kiev in 3 days" was made up by an American general from the start of this armed conflict. The Western media will simply say that Russia wanted to take over all of Ukraine and overrun Europe but the brave sacrifice of your tax dollars (and hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians.... Whatever) stopped the Russian horde with on the sacrifice of a small amount of Ukrainian territory.
It's essentially the Finnish Winter War myth writ large.
-
-
Dear god it's worse than I imagined
-
Is the 3rd comment wrong tho
-
Yes
-
-
-
So you think Ukraine is losing?
Well, my 4-year-old just did the Hitler salute and said "Ukranda forever" so take that, Putler.
-
They also think it's a guarantee that Trump loses, China is collapsing from its own economy, and Biden is the second coming of FDR.
-
These people are gonna become Qanon style cultists when Russia wins the war
They're already straight up posting geopolitical fan fiction
-
I'm here for it
-
-
Ukraine dorks and anti-China dorks need to be thrown into the Lake of Fire.
-
Lmao bonus Vietnam cope.
-
There will be Russian brigades on the Polish border before the NATO stooges admit they might be wrong
-
"As the Russian Army approaches Lvov, here's how Ukraine can still win."
-
-
Kinda me, I remember watching Lazerpig videos and stuff about how smelly big bad Russia is and slava ukraini and stuff like that, before I went all the way left... now I'm sitting here, thinking about how badly Russia is totally for real legitsies I promise losing.
-
You'll become accustomed to this playbook and you'll get jaded very quickly.
As a rule of thumb, the best default position is to take the opposite of whatever the US tells you about other countries. It's not guaranteed to be the correct position but you'll be on a better footing than if you go with it.
Anyway back to the playbook thing, you see the US State Department issuing their ideological positions - these are the bad guys, these are the good guys, this is a threat to peace/democracy/the gays/America, this is our ally.
This message filters down to political pundits and think tanks and news outlets and similar organisations that are effectively ideological apparatuses of the state.
This then filters down to commentators (e.g. Lazerpig, China watchers, R*ddit armchair experts).
Finally, this filters down to the long-form cultural content like movies and TV shows which take longer to produce than some shitty opinion piece or a dudebro yakking into a mic while livestreaming a video game.
The order that this flows in can change somewhat but that's how it typically goes.
The intensity of the messaging also determines how much gets filtered down to the lower levels. For example, not that I keep up with modern gaming or movies or TV, but I'd be really surprised if we saw much in the way of Venezuela/Maduro being posed as the bad guy in media (or stuff coded to be Maduro/Venezuela). China, on the other hand...
So if you look back over media from history you'll get little tips of the hand to whoever was the current villain of the hour. Sometimes it's coded fairly heavily (e.g. the original Predator movie being about SE Asia, and specifically Vietnam) and sometimes it's blatant (e.g. Back To The Future [the first one, I think?] where Libya is posed as a minor antagonistic force and a major nuclear and terroristic threat to the entire world - in a scene previous to the one linked I think there's discussion about how they acquired plutonium from the Libyans.)
Obviously games like Call Of Duty and shows like Homeland are really heavy-handed with it and so it's much easier to identify the messaging but even in comedy movies and stuff like children's TV shows you'll find these messages peppered in. But basically it's just one long chain of stenograghy that spans the breadth of western media consumption.
When you see the same message across US government press releases, newspapers, TV shows, commentators, games, movies etc. then it's a really good indication that this is coming straight out of the stenograghy apparatus.
One thing that's bitterly funny to watch in this, as this same pattern repeats over and over again, is when you get those moments where there's a big inversion or reversal of the good guys and the bad guys.
One of the most obvious examples is Reagan in the whitehouse pictured meeting with the Mujahedeen, many of whom would later go on to form the Taliban, Rambo being dedicated to the Mujahedeen, and that infamous New York Times article touting Osama Bin Laden as a freedom fighter. Obviously somewhere along the way, things took a sharp turn.
I wasn't alive for it but there would almost certainly have been the same media flip-flopping with Saddam Hussein back around the time of the first Gulf War because he was actually once considered to be somewhat of a US puppet - Bill Hicks touched on this in one of his routines. I would expect the same sort of thing happened with Noriega back in the day as well.
Of course, in recent times we have the small blips on the media radar about the Azov Battalion and Right Sector et al., who were represented accurately as fascist paramilitaries but then suddenly when the Ukraine war started that narrative was dropped and all of that stuff disappeared down the memory hole and suddenly these fascist (often former) paramilitaries who openly wear Nazi symbols and fly the UPA flag are actually just noble freedom fighters now.
Of course the villain is always weak and destined to lose while also carrying out outrageous atrocities (that the US and its allies definitely aren't carrying out themselves at the same time, promise!!) but you'll see it switch - it's Hamas at the moment and it's very likely we'll see more attention on Hezbollah/Lebanon and especially Iran because of this but Yemen is also going to be in the sights too. Of course yesterday it was Russia, and the day before that it was Syria, and the day before that was Belarus, and the day before that it was Venezuela... China is a mainstay these days and over time I only expect that to trend upwards overall but there will need to be a lull in the interrupting villain of the moment before we will resume our scheduled program of Chiner Bad!!
-
Oh I have learned that much, it's to the point where when someone in an imperial core country says some shit about, say, an AES country, I reflexively disagree, totally sound in the knowledge that even if they aren't wrong about it, it will have been mischaracterised.
Good to know about the structure of how propaganda trickles down, though. The narrative flipping is kind of hilarious at times. Was also surprised today to see some mainstream western media reporting on Ukraine has flipped from "BRAVE FREEDUMB FIGHTERS BATTLE BACK VICIOUS RUSKIES" to just straight up reporting how fucked the counteroffensive is. Guess they're not interested anymore.
-
I appreciate the breakdown - I knew how all of this worked in a vague way but I haven't given much thought to the actual details.
-
-
-
Lol. Lmao even.
-
It was a big moment of radicalization for me when I first became aware that the US was actually the worst side in the revolutionary war, a very great feat of evil considering their enemy was the fucking British Empire.
-
The Anglo-French war of 1778 with military assistance from the Spanish and diplomatic assistance from the Russians was what helped ultimately cinch victory for the American revolutionaries as it was an opportunity for the other less strong imperial powers to stomp of England's foot and pull out one of the colonial gems from the English crown.
Also comparing the 13 colonies to Ukraine is backwardly saying it's a colonial subject of Russia that's been settled by Russian colonials who eventually developed their own national culture distinct from Russia, backwards liberal ass.
-
"TrumpedBigly".
Individiual who's received their political education on twitter as of Trump's election and also by hanging around on r/cheetointhewhitehouse
-
-
Reminder that we've been hearing that Russia has one (1) week left of ammunition since March last year. It's been a long week.
-
Remember that OSINT guy who said that Russian military vehicles are 3 weeks from completely breaking down because he saw some photos of Russian trucks and concluded that they forgot to rotate their cheap Chinese tires?
-
124 comments
holy shit holy shit someone should drop this fucker in a warzone
Neither were cowards, both corrupt war machines started to break down when the flow of US money dried up. It has nothing to do with individual bravery, everything to do with a puppet state being cut off after it proved insufficient for our needs
These motherfuckers need materialism
These are the people who call themselves the adults in the room and say you're only left-wing because you don't have enough life experience.
the taliban offensive lasted 3 months and the result was the complete control of afghanistan and the seizing of billions of dollars worth of american equipment by the taliban
we're over 6 months into the hyped ukrainian counteroffensive and all they have to show for it is some miniscule dots on a map and huge casualties on their side
I'm bad a geopolitics, someone help me out with which side had popular support in these conflicts??
Do they still hold any of the dots that were Russian controlled 6 months ago? They wont in another 6 months.
"Freedom" once again just means "Western rule".
Pretty sure it makes very little difference for the average Ukrainian whether wholesome100 Cpt Zelenskyy or evil Putler is in charge of their government. Russians are not any less "free" than Ukrainians, if anything, their freedoms are limited by Western sanctions and being banned from participating in international competitions.
Freedom for Donetsk and Luhansk, right?
...right?
They'd probably die after their nearest Supermarket closed down and they could no longer use their phone or computer.
Cowardice is when you don’t get down and grovel for your American masters
Wow this rivals "an outbreak of gratitude among the Iraqi people" as one of the things someone can say to get themselves Disney fastpassed instantly to the front of the wall line
Jesus christ
or just like a big hole in the ground
I don't know how you could look at the modern history of Afghanistan and not think that Afghan people are brave to the point of insanity.
I love how they conveniently ignore there has been mass emigration of Ukrainians to the rest of Europe (and I'm not blaming them to be clear, it's a war, I probably would too).
Hell, a German MP recently said there are around 200k able Ukrainian men (as in able to fight) in Germany and they need to fuck back off to Ukraine and fight (apparently, Europe and the West in general has decided to fight to the last Ukrainian, Ukrainians' opinion about the whole thing be damned).
https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/innenpolitik/ukraine-unterstuetzung-kiesewetter-100.html