panzermartin

These losses are fantasy stats, as we have discussed before. I wouldn't take seriously their daily report either. https://www.economist.com/europe/2022/07/24/how-heavy-are-russian-casualties-in-ukraine

I'm sorry but the connection of green movements and environmentalists with Putin and Saudi dictators sounds very trumpish to me and not something I would expect to read in this forum.

Thanks for the post. Sometimes when I write here I get a lot of replies I can't follow. I feel like I'm shot from different directions, so sometimes I have to leave a debate unresolved or like waving hand as you say. It's really exhausting sometimes. The fact I'm posting here and not in some pro russian forum tells me that I can sense where I mostly belong. But I like to challenge the dominant line. I did this with the Iraq War here when everyone was going Gung ho, and you can't imagine the flak I took. Everyone was so certain about the WMD the AL qaeda links and so on, only to accept some years later that they were wrong. Bush Jr was joking as well and life went on as usual. And people were again posting facts, excel sheets, analysis from reliable sources but nobody predicted the mess that followed. So, whatever firm facts we are looking for, might not be that firm sometimes. But I still come here, because it is still one of the best sources of info on the internet about the war. I'm sorry that I'm not contributing to that so much. I have been posting since 2002 here and I appreciate that despite heated discussions from the Iraq war, to Gaza, Syria and Ukraine I was allowed to voice my half baked opinion.

I'm not dodging any point. Of course the state of their nuclear will probably not be ideal. And the number of active warheads might not be accurate. But I find it more scary personally, less safe. You imply that this will prevent them from using them? I don't really know. Or in an event of nuclear war this will help NATO somewhat prevail? The US administration doesn't behave like they underestimate Russia's nuclear arsenal though.

Grigb, I sense you and your family have a personal inflicted wound from soviet times or today's Russia. Because you are really passionate about hating your own country in a way I haven't seen before. It's true I can't debate that, from my safe western corner of fantasies. But I can spot the personal side. The thing is, don't worry the message is getting across and we are not actually that passionate to defend Russia's actions. Maybe we are just playing the devil's advocate to try to challenge our own mindset and seek the truth. Its not changing the course of history. Even if we think that evil or backwards countries still have national interests or rights when even criminals have the right in court to defend themselves and not get them straight to the electric chair.

No, I have been defending modern Germany a lot in a country that has been pretty anti german and have taken a lot of flak because of this. So, whatever came across my posts its probably misinterprented. On the other hand we also shouldn't equalize today Russia with Nazi Germany because it is a simplification in a more complex situation.

So, what is the actual point of diminissing the nuclear capabilities of Russia? To make us feel better, I know. Because in all other aspects it doesnt matter. Its not a discussion with some conclusion to export. We can only assume and assuming in such life or death matters is not a good guide. And if you have Brazil's GDP doesn't matter that much either. According to the GDP of Germany, they should have the best european army and nukes. But they don't because their focus was not there. And North Korea has 30 to 40 nuclear warheads with a GDP a fraction of Malta''s. If you are a country that has been succesfully practicing nuclear weapons since the 1940s and you have thousand advanced rockets, you still have some good chance to end civilization. No point in debating this.

No, nothing really compares to german engineering. On a serious note I don't mean to downplay the Gulag years, it is that those times were different and very harsh in history of humans. Even Russia has moved on since then although they still feel like a caricature mutation of soviet union and tsarist russia.

And another malfunction of (russian?) hardware. Or maybe violence is a feature in russian made robots :

Yes I know they had. But back then Greece (and again in the 60s) also had concetration camps for communists, Belgians had zoos with humans from African colonies, South Africa had apartheid and Blacks could be shot for going to school in US. But we don't have these anymore (ok apart from Blacks being shot) and neither have the Russians. Russia is not Nazi Germany but it can become if the conditions grow worse and some "gifted" preacher emerges.

Historically, are we aware what percentage of nuclear tests were a failure on both sides of the curtain? It would be a good first indication.

Good points thanks. You might be correct that a lot of warheads are of questionable condition. I don't know how time will treat such complicated devices. But I would bet their rocket fleet is in good shape and the platforms can achieve all the stages of flight most of the time. The real question is, how many of the warheads are needed to go boom to erase a big country from the map and If it's logical to bet on these chances at all. If say 100 are launched and only 3 out of 10 goes boom, you will still have most big cities wiped from the map. I guess until we hear again about resuming nuclear test detonations we are still away from that scenario.

History is not linear. We have talked about the deeper reasons fascism was nurtured in post WW1 Germany. The British empire monopoly, the capitalist anatagonism, the global anti communist phobia, the humiliation of a defeated great power and the economic misery, that sunk them into this illness. They didnt wake up on day and said we are going to rule the world. It's the conditions that make the characters not vice versa. Watch how fascism will rise again in Germany and Europe once it sinks into poverty or is neglected its cheap energy from the East. Oh, and they are building a big army I heard. Russia is heading the same way Germany was unfortunately. And it's not in the steering wheel no matter what. The most powerful and the monopolies of this world are always the moving force.

I think Russia has been more active in the nuclear front than the West , with newer platforms, advanced warheads etc. So it might come as a surprise that they are in fact ahead of the competition in that macabre department. If I was Russia and I knew my conventional army can never be enough to counter NATO, I would keep a sizeable force enough for neighboring police (that came out not even enough to take Ukraine) and invest more in asymmetrical measures like nuclear than in my conventional army. So the state of their army might not be a 100% reflection on that. Plus they are famous for their reliable rocket tech. Nuclear are not a BTR that is left to rust, it is a deadly serious national security asset that demands strict monitoring.

But of course. It's like that from the beginning. All the official RU roars are empty threats. (Except maybe the final nuclear answer if they get cornered) Every time something bad happens to Russia from NATO intervention, they reply "the consequences will be severe" and nothing happens. This country was forced to fight a war nobody really wanted. It's really a tragedy what's unfolding. Can you imagine going to WW3 by mistake. Btw given the claimed bad state of Russian weapons I was surprised that no missile landed in Poland by malfunction. (Lviv is very close to the border) So they must be doing something right

Good read, thanks

Great post thanks.

What dominant and shallow media you are talking about. You mean the ones have been bombarding us with the evil Russia thing since forever. The ones that were claiming that Russians sold their fuel for vodka or they are running out of missiles or tires since week 1. Or that Russia executed the heroic defenders on snake island. Because these make the 95% of mainstream World news. Yes, thats shallow. I mostly rely on info here, some Twitter accounts and surprisingly some pro russian places . Sometimes, among their blatant propaganda, they have more accurate info on what's going on the battlefield like in 2014. They quickly proved the 2000 russian encriclement that circulated here, was not true, as Haiduk confirmed. The rules of this western dominated world are set by the most powerful. Russia is not there among them, it's actually the underdog. Their friends are Iran and North Korea ffs. Underdogs don't set the rules and don't have the initiative that's why I don't agree with the thought that Russia had some grande world domination plan apart from securing its national interests NEXT to its borders and in mostly russian dominated areas. We ll see how the energy powerplay will unfold, I think it's their only serious leverage, as their military is so backwards as you all agree.

Forced because Ukraine was slipping away from them each passing day and was cleary not possible to reverse the situation with political intervention. NATO presence in Ukraine would be a direct threat to the existance of the current status quo in Russia. And ironically, its NATO aid and intel thats killing most russians right now. With a heavy heart, because they mistakenly hoped Ukraine will collaspe by a sudden show of force. I dont think anyone wished for a prolonged bloody war , one that would cost them thousands of losses. They still call this a "special operation" and are reluctant to mass mobilize. Apart from the extremists, I don't think the army had much will to do this. The first days with massed abandoned equipment were a clear indication. Unprepared because they could never match the aid of a coalition of the most advanced western military powers in the long term.

Thanks, that's some very interesting info. If the Russians were indeed in trajectory to clash with NATO all these years they should have invested more in this department. This is a deadly disadvantage if accurate. From the state of their army to the sat thing, I have come to the conclusion that there was no actual desire to challenge US/EU hegemony and the Ukrainian coup caught them unprepared. Even this war caught them unprepared and they were clearly forced to conduct with a heavy heart.

Look, I find your posts interesting and well thought most of the time and I appreciate your contribution here. But a lot of times you all get carried away. As Haiduk noted its not a grainy video that proves nothing, they were actually multiple MLRS launchers hiding there and were destroyed. (there was also a tiktok video that revealed that before the strike iirc) This is somewhat insulting to the counter argument that some don't even accept a filmed and proven fact. What is left for us who want to challenge the dominant narrative line here? I 80% rely on this thread to get my info about the war. I'm not so prone to russian propaganda as @Grigb says . Yes I sometimes visit some pro russian forums as well , but guess what, I challenge them the same way and get bashed "don't listen to UKR Nazi propaganda" . They are much worse than here to be honest On your points I can't answer in a professional way as I'm not a military pro, as many people here. UA has definitely hurt RU logistics with newly acquired hardware no doubt. And it's much easier to do that when your opponent is on the offensive and in a hurry with predicted routes and command hubs. RU has demonstrated the ability to hit long range targets but I never claimed their effectiveness is on par with western standards. They have caused some serious damage though, the Mikolayev and Lviv barrack attacks comes to mind among others. But it's true Ukraine is still in the fight despite monthly everyday raids. AA is still up, Artillery is very much active, even UAF is active and this is a loud failure of RU. Lot of this has to do that UA has the huge advantage of having a big supermarket of NATO weaponry that can freely roam and pick what they want most of the times. RU can't compete on this but who can? But the actual degree RU has degraded UKR ability to fight is not clearly evident yet Imo. What we know is that most Soviet era stuff has been put out of action or is already expended. Some of it has to do with RU hitting targets deeply in UKR territory for those months. The moment of truth of whether the RU has inflicted a serious blow to UA ability to conduct major operations will soon come. Some are overly confident that they will inevitably degrade and push back the occupiers but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

I'm not saying they have superior accuracy or ISR, cause they don't. But forum members here claim that RU doesn't even posess the ability to strike with decent accuracy, while there are filmed events that prove them wrong. I can bet my money that there are lot of undocumented or covered accurate strikes besides the few known ones you mention. No Ukraine is not on par (yet) with the long range capabilities of RA despite the HIMARS panic.

So what is this from the early days , a lucky shot? Aaa yes, another shopping mall hit by inaccurate dumb russian missile that some corrupt official looted the guidance system. There is a certain wishful thinking here and the effects of the echo chamber are not doing justice to otherwise very interesting and informative thread. Haiduk has all the reasons to be a wishful thinker here but his posts are mostly grounded to reality, good or bad.

No concrete proof and I wouldn't trust the numerous Russian claims . The only one who could reveal concrete evidence (Ukraine) will never do so. But Russians must be hitting something these months apart from schools and supermarkets.

OK I laughed at this. I still find it hard to believe a country with so much investment in space technology, military satellites etc doesn't have less primitive Intel gathering.