Too true, coincidentally in October 6th I passed one of my university's exams.

Obviously Putin was involved in this, I also saw a video of Hamas specifically congratulating me on passing my exam. It's probably because I'm so instrumental to the role of bringing the western hemisphere to collapse.

Get real.

Sniper elite is the only ww2 game I can think of where you fight Italians, that or I'm misremembering where you fight germans in italy.

Don't worry guys, we just need 5 more years of genocide joe Joey our friendly uncle sam, hopefully he'll listen to us instead of voting off crime bills! Or voting to send weapons to bomb & kill, Or breaking up railway strikes, or passing corporate lobbyist laws in his home state Delaware, or giving money to the MIC, or giving more subsidies to corporations, or removing all the welfare benefits after covid-19.

You know what? This gag is unfunny, fuck joe biden supporters, you middle class shits would rather have a concentration camp in your garden rather than socialist reforms

:)

Wow, another white crackkker shielding himself from the truth.

Volodymyr Zelensky is a defender & righteous warrior of the revolution. And waged his PPW against the imperialist west by draining their coffers, full support for Zelensky and his fight against western imperialism.

This is literally a south park gag, wtf are they doing?

Perhaps we'll see this dogshit system buried in the dust in the future? I hope it'll come soon.

That was surprising to me as well. Some US think tanks have recently been posting some very odd sources. I think they know their project US is dead in the water, and are desperately trying to undo the damage they've caused by under-cutting the support for the neo-cons. Too little too late I guess.

These protests were funded by agricultural corporations to fight government environmental regulations, these hogs can really go fuck themselves for all I care.

Most western european farmers are bourgeois traitors who would gladly sell their country out to blackrock if it meant they got a few hundred quid in their bank.

You can keep guessing then, even though we make it very obvious who we actually support (hint: It's commonly countries which liberate the working class for the world).

I don't expect you to get it straight away, reading is very hard for liberals. All I can say is, the community description gives off a clue, "We are Marxists-Leninists." I suggest you look this up to find out more about us :)

Egypt has been comprised since Anwar Sadat made peace with israel in the yon kippur war. Every Egyptian despot has kow-towed to american and zionist interest, they're paid to look away, 4-5 billion annual bribe money annually.

Russia isn't the soviet union unfortunately. Capitalist interests are always profit before people, the russians want to be on the israeli goodside, Plus russia has had either neutral, or cordial relations with israel under president Putin. And russia isn't fully committed to fighting imperialism unlike the USSR. I don't expect them to do much.

Iran and hezbollah I'm surprised about, I thought they would at least try to do something, but as for now they've stated they won't help Gaza.

Generic winded responses from you again. No sources, No suitable information, numbers pulled from your arse it looks like. And of course you keep freaking out and denying that the russian collapse is only just a myth, which I've shown is completely true in every way possible. Not to mention you're anti-academic Reponses as well, yeah the laser weaponry information came from the minister of defense, much more believable source than you, who has more information as of right now about this subject than him? And this paper is at least neutral to this laser development program. Your first response was that russia cannot destroy the western ISR, this article literally proves they can. Doesn't matter if its a peresvet, or the Nalina, they have the capability to do so.

That's fine, you don't engage with conversations appropriately because you simply deny everything that's currently going on. And you do keep projecting on to me, trying to back-peddle on the fact you omitted these ghoulish texts here.

They never wanted to win this war… at most they wanted a protracted ugly conflict that wasted war materials, damaged the Russian economy and reinforce sanctions, and a boogey man that would drive fence sitters into the arms of NATO.

This couldn’t have gone better for the west if you had some Brookings institute goon prentending to be Putin. Even actions like reaching out to North Korea had think tanks frothing at the mouth with homicidal glee. If North Korean shells do eventually make it to Russia, you can just about guarantee South Korea is going to be pulled into the conflict as well.

Once again, you seem delighted that this war is actually happening. And yet at the same breath, portray yourself to be a moral person. No I answered your texts in at least a well-mannered fashion, you responded with nothing but derogatory comments, probably because you have no actual information to respond back. Just accuse, accuse and accuse more until you feel better about yourself, pathetic.

And once again you conveniently ignore my other reply, which actually answers your industrial questions, but you seem to completely ignore that, how strange.

You support an organisation which has well known to commit numerous war-crimes in multiple opposing countries, yet where's the justice for them? Do you conveniently ignore their struggles yet at the same time spout you're a truly moral person who stands up with ukraine? Not once did I defend russia, not one comment, but again you cannot help yourself, anyone who opposes the bourgeoisie propaganda is simply just wrong, isn't that right?

Anyways I'm done with someone who only resorts to childish demeanor once their argument actually falls apart. I did at one point think you at least had a grasp on something, but you just deny any information presented to you. Least delusional liberal I've argued with.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_map/status/1708874955352318149

From the looks of it, the west seem barely interested in ukraine now. I suspect funding for the war will drop harshly in 2024.

And countries aren’t allowed to join defensive pacts? I wonder what would make ukraine seek a military defensive partnership? If a country being interested in joining NATO is an attack on Russia, wouldn’t have Russia invaded Latvia or Lithuania in 2004?

1. The key thing however is ukraine understood that to end the war in the donbass region, It could not join NATO. That was the ultimate outcome out of the Minsk Agreement, and Zelensky himself understood this and repeated this during the Normandy Format discussions. However, the application of NATO continued anyways, and ukraine sought membership despite literally half its population disagreeing with pivoting towards the west. Afterall these regions also had their autonomy rejected back in 2014, so they really couldn't trust the government in kiev the protection of russian-speaking peoples.

2. "wouldn’t have Russia invaded Latvia or Lithuania in 2004?" Russia wanted to join NATO around this period in fact, so no, they wouldn't have. Also ukraine in the year 2004 had some political agitation, which this guardian article talks about Meddling in Ukrainian elections? Quite undemocratic is it not? So boastful about it too.

That’s not even what your own source says… “the revelation of the atrocities, rapes, murders, massacres, looting, indiscriminate bombings and hundreds and thousands of other war crimes committed by Russian troops in the temporarily occupied Ukrainian territories…” was quoted as the largest obstacle. And “Three days after Johnson left for Britain, Putin went public and said talks with Ukraine “had turned into a dead end”.”

It was actually this quote I was talking about. 'Johnson’s position was that the collective West, which back in February had suggested Zelenskyy should surrender and flee, now felt that Putin was not really as powerful as they had previously imagined, and that here was a chance to "press him."'

Also in relation to your last sentence " Putin went public and said talks with Ukraine “had turned into a dead end”.” That's kind of weird really, I wonder what the discussion between Johnson and Zelensky were, and Johnston is never a really reliable source, so his statement about the west wanting to abandoned Ukraine does not match up at all. Also again none of this actually refutes that the Ukrainians were the ones which walked out on the negotiations.

The article says that it wasn’t as extreme, not that it was fair…

Yeah I know, I said it was fair. The deal was reachable, and was nearly signed.

Lol, do you even read what you are writing…? Of course they don’t want Putin in charge, he just greenlit the invasion of their country. And how is restoring the border agreement of 1999 chauvinist? It’s literally the agreement they made with Russia by giving up their nuclear arsenal, you know the thing that would have prevented an invasion.

There was no such agreement between russia and ukraine in the Budapest memordium

The nuclear weapons in ukraine would never have even functioned since it's all connected to moscow. How can ukraine make these missiles a deterrent if they couldn't even work without the kremlin's consent? Very expensive shitty deterrent, Ukraine wanted them gone because they did not want the expensive maintenance to facilitate them, nor decaying nuclear missiles in their country. The Lisbon protocol also stated that these nukes were not Ukrainian, they belonged to the soviet successor state, which was russia.

The irony of calling a Jewish man the Fuhrer, and then making a claim based on might makes right…

How's ukraine going to prosecute russian officials if they cannot meet their own goals in the counter-offensive? That's not a claim, its an observation. And there's nothing about 'might makes right' in that text, I suggest you actually look up that expression.

And that’s why they attacked it first? They planned to fail, as a strategic advantage? Really?

Are you imagining different words to what I wrote? Did I call it a strategic advantage? If anything it was more of an advantage to cut their losses and retreat to a more defensible position, which they did. I said that kiev was not the priority, the main priority was securing eastern Ukraine, and the land bridge.

Oh its been super clear that they’ve shifted their goal post…

Yeah I agree they shifted the 'goal post', it's how a war works, you change tactics when something fails. And their current goal post of grinding the AFU seems to be working well. Far better than the quick war they wanted back in early 2022. As I have shown in my other reply on how russia is keeping up with its losses, while the west cannot.

Oh who would have guessed that the US would make a reason to increase arms production… of course there’s a shell shortage, they’re fighting a conventional war in eastern Europe. It’s the same reason Russia is partnering with North korea. The biggest difference is that NATO and it’s allies aren’t solely relying on 40 year old weapon stocks, they actually have production capabilities.

Uh huh, Interesting about your points on production facilities, Russia actually has the biggest facilities which pump out vast quantities of equipment.

Also didn't Germany try sending leopard 1 tanks to ukraine a while ago? You do realize these tanks came out in the 1950s, and were phased out during the 1970s? 80 years ago. Why on earth would the germans send these ancient tanks when they according to you, they have plentiful new equipment which can be shipped to Ukraine.

I won't be discussing military manufacturing here, reply to my other comment then we'll discuss it.

This is the nudol, which is only rated for low earth orbit…as I said.

And yet in LEO there's still vital Western infrastructure, primarily AWACs. Which Russia knows where these planes land, where they refuel, and what their flight lanes are. And most ASAT weaponry can reach these planes effectively.

Lol, you’re not going to be able to blind a satellite from the back of vehicle with a laser. There’s too much moisture, and particles in the air for a mobile Lazer to breach the atmosphere. Plus if you look up actual specs on the device none claim it’s supposed to be able to blind satellites.

Says who, You? Because in fact they are actually able to breach the atmosphere, it really isn't that hard actually as this article goes into detail about it.

That’s quite a few… do you think Russia’s going to be able to convert and shoot off 123 ballistic missiles successfully? And do you really think the US would blink at spending a few extra hundred billion dollars on their military?

Not the ones which are in GEO and MEO, but you don't need to destroy every satellite, just enough to cripple the west's ability to accurately map out information, as this system works like a network, blinding the western ISR can be a possibility.

I do not doubt billions of dollars is nothing to the US military, yet still expensive enough to warrant the few which have been made.

So 8-9 military satellites were put into space every year. Again this doesn't count the stockpiles of US military satellites, but since these satellites are produced by military companies, and the US has to buy these stockpiles and procure them for space like any other military equipment, It'll take time, not enough time to plug the holes in the ISR in a fast manner.

Not to mention the production of these military satellites I suspect will be delayed, due to the fact that recently, the MIC have been facing critical worker shortages.

I mean you didn’t… you pointed out that Russia can destroy objects in low earth orbit.

I did, you claimed without any sources that russian laser weapons cannot breach the atmosphere, I've not seen this repeated anywhere but you.

I like how this conversation started by you accusing me of being deceitful, and then you spent several paragraphs posting article that contradicted your own claims.

None of these articles contradict my claims, I've gone over them and pointed out which part of these articles specifically supported my claims, unless you haven't properly read them. They seem to awfully contradict themselves which I'm glad you noticed.

It seems you are egging on the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people just in the chance that it will harm NATO, all while claiming that NATO wants the war to begin with…so why cheer for something they wanted in the first place?

I'm sorry are you projecting to me right now? You're the one which wrote those two ghoulish texts in your last post.

I've never wrote anything close to these intolerable texts. You seem even delighted this is happening. Don't try accusing me of being at the same inhuman level of indecency as you. I've only ever discussed the frivolously claims you've spouted, and no point I 'egged' this war on any of my texts, you however have.

I think this is a particularly silly claim. Yes, the Russian military is improving things like command and control, and overall strategic cohesiveness, but that kind of experience a natural byproduct of being engaged in a prolonged conflict. Old stagnant brass are ousted and replaced with younger sharper commanders. The links in operational communication and cooperation with other branches of the military are eventually smoothed.

What made you brought this up? I was refuting your point that Russia cannot deep-strike in Ukraine, you claimed Russia can only strike the frontlines. I pointed out that you were wrong, and multiple western sources already confirmed this long ago. To deny this is simple delusion. Don't try to divert the subject.

However, you aren’t simultaneously improving production, recruiting, or your war materials stock. The greatest advantage Russia had was a huge surplus of Soviet war materials. Stocks that took generations of production to accumulate have been spent in a year.

Who says this? Since there's multiple western sources which actually say russia is doing all 3 things simultaneously?

One report claims that Estonian intelligence found Russian 152mm shell stockpiles on the eve of the SMO were in the region of 17 million

Russia used an estimated 7-10m so far in the first year of the SMO (20-30k per day multiplied by roughly a year). If the Estonian estimates are accurate that means Russia could have ~7-10m left, which is about another year’s worth of shells.

Other estimates have Russia doing minimum 3.5M per year currently or even as high as 4-6M with the eventual goal of at least 7M if not more. Thus, given that they did 2M easily before, the 2.5M estimates seem to me as coping undercounts from the West. I’d say Russia does at least 3.5M - 4.5M currently, and it will increase drastically in 2024.

The thing is, even 4,500,000 only allows you to fire only 12,500 shells per day. Sure, Russia did 60k at its peak and ran through its stockpile, but even after that, Ukraine claims Russia still fires much more than 12.5k per day. This would seem to point to the fact that Russia already does as high as 7-8M shells per year.

As for Tanks well just look at the losses

50-70 tanks being lost per month, 600-800 total tank losses in year? That is not bad at all. Epically when western sources such as the WSJ, and the economist, state russia made over 250 tanks per year. That means over 3,000 tanks were being produced every since 1980s. In 2022 however, Shoigu reportedly ordered Uralvagonzavod to more than double the production output to 480 new tanks per year, and also ordered the construction of two new factories specifically for upgrading and repairing armor, which would increase the modernization capacity exponentially.

Fact is, Russia can credibly manufacture a minimum of 250 up to a goal of 480 new tanks per year, and upgrade an additional 600+. That means each year, Russia can deliver somewhere in the range of 800-1,100 fresh tanks to frontline service.

Not to even mention refurbs, which repair damaged tanks, as the economist gives about 1,080 tanks being refurbed around july.

This is not far off from what Putin and Medvedev proposed. Earlier this year, both of them stated Russia will produce a total of 1500-1600 tanks for the 2023 year period. Consider even the year has not even ended, and the russians have nearly hit their target goal.

That well covers the amount of losses they are sustaining, not to mention the new factories which are currently planned to be operational somewhere in late 2023 to early 2024.

Russia doesn’t have the economic and industrial ability to replace the supplies theyve wasted in this war. I still believe they have enough to potentially hold onto Crimea, but I think even taking Odessa would cost more blood than they are willing to spill.

Simply just wrong, look at my earlier sources.

Taking Odessia is more a desire from pro-russian people rather than the actual strategy going to be deployed by Military itself. The actual strategy I suspect is to create new offensives in the donbass region, secure vital infrastructure be it military or civilian, round up and expel the AFU from the area, and secure the cities which had not been secured in the original offensive.

At this point even if they took the entirety of Ukraine, it would still result in a global retraction of Russia’s ability to project hard power.

Exactly why the russian's are grinding the AFU to a pulp, making sure when russia actually does their next big offensive, they would have a 5:1 advantage in terms of equipment, soldiers, and munitions.

They never wanted to win this war… at most they wanted a protracted ugly conflict that wasted war materials, damaged the Russian economy and reinforce sanctions, and a boogey man that would drive fence sitters into the arms of NATO.

Interesting, this doesn't strike you as wrong? Using the Ukrainians as meat-shields to try weaken Russia? Like over 400,000 Ukrainians are confirmed to be KIA by some sources. And these 'fence-sitters' I take it are Sweden and Finland? Since they're the only countries which joined NATO. I want to point it out that these countries were far from neutral, they closely collaborated with NATO multiple times. Far from orphan children crying to their new parent's in comfort. More like already shady businessmen have just announced what everyone already knew, they want to create a cartel of mutual misery and monopolization.

This couldn’t have gone better for the west if you had some Brookings institute goon prentending to be Putin. Even actions like reaching out to North Korea had think tanks frothing at the mouth with homicidal glee. If North Korean shells do eventually make it to Russia, you can just about guarantee South Korea is going to be pulled into the conflict as well.

Naivety, stubbornness or delusion? Can't decide what this piece of text conveys more to me. Frankly every western media article plainly states that more should be done, even with all the corporate donors, government censorship, and enforced conformity to toe the management opinion. Even these articles paint a far grimmer picture for the west:

Russia continues to grow

western military manufacturing remains sub-par

Germany and some minor european countries are facing a recession

Western countries are experiencing their worst industrial out-put since 2008!

And Inflation refuses to go to preferred levels.

And the general mood in europe still remains.... sour

Lol, lmao even.

Had to split my answer in two, only way for me address your points. Also I made sure all my sources came from the western media, just in case you spazzed out and died from seeing an RT article. I'm sure this answers all of your questions.

It doesn’t matter if you think Russia is fighting against the stranglehold of western hegemony, or if you think they are simply just a competing western hegemony. None of that is really critical to actually understanding the current combat theater.

It really does, Ukraine does not have the industrial strength or even capacity to fight an attritional war. They rely heavily on western military manufacturing as a means to prop up their forces. To Deny the greater geopolitical significance between the international western bourgeoise and the national Russian bourgeoise is completely delusory way of understanding the current combat theater. Western media also state the complete significance of the Ukraine war between the west and Russia, downplaying this makes you look deceitful.

In no way shape or function has the war in Ukraine been going the way Russia had hoped. This war was planned throughout the trump presidency, hoping that he would be able to serve a second term, or do enough damage to NATO where they would have second guessed turning this into a real proxy war.

A lot of words here yet there's no actual substance to it, trump lost his presidency in 2020. The SMO started in 2022. Unless you have credible sources this is just useless speculation. As for your second point about challenging NATO to not turn this into a proxy conflict. That cannot be done, when NATO officials & western leaders admit that they were training, arming, and preparing the AFU whilst the Minsk Agreement had been signed. NATO had already invested this war as far back as even 2008, when Ukraine was considered an applicant through NATO.

Russia should have gone back to the drawing table, or actually committed enough hard power to overcome an actual defense of Kyiv when their political arm failed to prevent intervention. They bit off more than they could chew and are still fighting to swallow.

1. Russia did actually try to negotiate with Ukraine in February-March 2022 if you re-call. But it was the Ukrainians which walked out (probably because their western masters told them too), not the Russians. The deal was actually quite fair as well, even Zelensky thought so as well, Russia would withdraw, and Ukraine's permanent NATO application would be terminated, but Ukraine's sovereignty would be intact according to Israeli officials, of course the US couldn't allow that. And now the Ukrainians demand a regime change in Russia, its chauvinistic restoration of 1991 borders, and prosecution of Russian officials. And ever since then the Fuhrer has signed a law which forbids negotiations with Russia. Strange how they think they can demand this, when the offensive has not even breached the single line of defense?

2. Why? Kiev had a population of over 3 million people, and 100,000s of defense territorial soldiers. The US had the capitals of Baghdad, and Kabul. Yet they still got routed from those countries, taking the capital of country isn't a guarantee you'll win. The russian's have also been clear that their goal is completely dismantle the AFU fighting ability through attritional warfare. Which is what they're currently excelling at as western media pundits admit that the west is suffering a serious munition famine. As joe biden so points out here.

That’s not even really theoretically possible, or theoretically beneficial in the event of a long ground war. ASATs have only been utilized to bring down low orbit satellites, and the majority of military satellites would need an ICBM to potentially hit their targets.

It is theoretically possible, as demonstrated here , Using ICBMs to target satellites is colourful way to destroy them, but it's easier to use hypersonic missiles And new technologies are being introduced in ASAT warfare, such as experimental lasers which can blind western satellites, and their range is as high as 1500km..

Even if that was possible, it would only be beneficial for a short period of time, until they could route another satellite to cover the same location.

You make seem so easy! Except again these articles points out that the US only 123 active military satellites! Satellites aren't cheaply made either, especially military ones, which can go into the billions. However, ISR satellites cost on average $300 million to fire into space

ASATs are kinda a weapon of last resort, as the tactical benefits are outweighed by their strategic cost. No one wants to create a cascading effect of space debris taking out anything in orbit.

They're a last resort since it falls under the category of MAD, destroying other Nation's satellites would only happen if the world fell under total war. I pointed out here that Russia can actually destroy western ISR infrastructure.

If Russia was going to do it, they would have done so already.

Russia has shown incredible restraint within this war already, many of the attacks that Ukraine did successfully on russian soil always relayed on western ISR to conduct its operations and maneuvers, had this been an actual war, instead of a Proxy conflict, these satellites would've been destroyed already. It show's more responsiblilty to Russians officials rather than incompetency.

Further, the moving of NATO specialists into Ukraine of course makes them legitimate targets, but that only matters if Russia has the ability to accurately strike wherever it is they are being hosted. Unless these classes are being held on the frontline, Russia has demonstrated no capability to do so.

Russia ISR has increased dramatically over this past year, had you said this in 2022 your claim may have been believable (albeit heavily skewed, and without proper analysis on russia's future war development and it's arsenal) but to say this in 2023? Where russia has not only demonstrated its capabilities to strike targets deep within Ukraine, but also is now ramping up new ways to strike within the country? It's simply absurd to claim this, as you will have to deny all the successful strikes which have annihilated multiples NATO HQs, Airfields, Military Factories, and even the SBU Headquarters! How can you say something like this when there's so much evidence which literally proves you wrong? And before you even try to diss russia's strike capability, america's was even worse with the scuds!

This is how russia fires its missiles, does that seem like incompetency to you? Because to me it looks exactly what it looks like, russian missiles are hitting targets behind AA defences, and throwing off western ISR which tracts where these missiles might go.

Hot air like this only serves to make the speaker look less credible.

Medvedev is not constrained by being a head of state, nor even a head of government, while yes his temper is brash and he speaks very, well weirdly lest just put it that way, he's not imprudent, unlike some actual western leaders, which have demonstrated their complete lack of interest in the future. His point stands, western leaders are fools, they cannot win this war, yet the seem to drag it out for no other purpose, if their plan was to starve Russia of money, they wouldn't be buying as much Russian oil as they had been before the war. Simply put, they want to win the war, without having to sanction russia properly, it's an embarrassing way to contain a 'pariah' nation.

Not to mention the more left-wing side of voters in Ukraine are overwhelmingly Donetsk and Lugansk voters. More than 25% in these states voted for the communist party of ukraine in the last election, and guess who voted for the nationalists? Except this time it won't be like spain, the fascists won't win.