sburke

No, the line is "what do you mean by "you people"?

Thing is Russia has lost the war. They might still "win" the battle, but this thing is done in the sense of overall victory. Putin has managed to Unite the Ukrainian people in a frenzy of patriotism Unified the West to take steps no one thought possible a week ago Set up Lukashenko to face another revolt, possibly by his own army. Reveal how decrepit the Russian military is Seriously undermine his own position with his oligarchs, the security services and his own army Ukraine will survive this regardless of how things go on the battlefield this week. Putin however may not. I might have to start thinking of a new avatar. Wouldn't that be a shame.

I think this gets into a Putin state of mind thing and all anyone can do is speculate. We may never know why now. I don't think this would have worked any better under Trump. The US population has become very strongly pro-Ukraine. Certain dynamics might have been different, but it is the Ukrainian resistance that has galvanized the global community. According to Lavrov it was because of a Ukrainian nuclear threat. Russia's Lavrov: Ukraine was invaded to stop nuclear threat (yahoo.com) I think Lavrov is trying to emulate Baghdad Bob.

yes it has relative to Russia. We still have plenty to bang each other over the head with but feelings towards Russia are rapidly skewing to Cold War levels. Even Trump and Tucker Carlson have altered their positions more in line with general sentiment. https://news.yahoo.com/poll-74-percent-of-americans-call-russias-ukraine-invasion-unjustified-142128676.html

found it No, You’re Not Imagining It: Russia’s Army Is Inept (msn.com)

yeah saw that one, but no not it. This one went into detail on things like the service time of conscripts, continuing failure to develop a professional NCO force, training time for pilots etc. Honestly it didn't really cover anything that hasn't been discussed here, but it was a good concise overview.

no actually this Ukraine's steadfast First Lady: Olena Zelenska (msn.com)

I saw a quote earlier today from one analyst This wasn't case of a bad army not implementing a good plan or a good army trying to implement a bad plan. it is just a freakin bad army. The title was something like yes the Russian Army really is as bad as you think or something like that. Been trying to find it again so far without much luck. And Ukraine (and the world) has another hero to cheer on. Olena Zelenska is now getting some coverage as well.

I was doing my best to have him NOT get your attention. I clearly need to work harder at that. So what's for dinner? Poultine?

Man that hurts,,,,

I'll suggest once more to keep on track with the direction of the thread and current events. Continuing down this track is really not a good idea.

Yugoslavia was a failed state. They also were not being attacked by another country. As to the Minsk agreement, that followed an illegal occupation of Ukrainian territory when Ukraine was not in a position to fight. I don't think you want to rehash the 2014/5 actions. I guarantee it won't go well on this forum. Better to stick with current events.

That is a decision for Ukraine to make, not Russia or anyone else. The United Kingdom had a mechanism for this sort of thing to take place and followed a process. There are folks out here in California who'd like to take N California, parts of Oregon and Washington state and form something new just because they represent too small a minority to impact California politics for better or worse.

like the line from Justified where Raylan tosses the bullet on Wynn Duffy and says "the next one is coming faster"

He's made some unfortunate personal decisions, but no one can fault his combat leadership and knowledge.

One other fallout of this is and the heightened patriotism/unity of the Ukrainians and the leverage that gives Zelensky is to potentially sort that out. It now becomes a national security concern to fix that and the national will may have changed the equation. One can hope.

yeah I think he meant new stuff.

1st Cav on deck?

maybe a cm wiki page?

you can always take a scenario and edit your units to the degree you'd like. quick and easy though you might find too easy. I was scarred by my experience play testing the Russian campaign when my btr battalion ran into Cav units mounted in Bradleys.

3 blind mice, 3 blind mice......

https://www.yahoo.com/news/meet-104-old-chen-ping-160615001.html Amazed this guy is still alive.

damn just saw this. I did the St Vith master map for CMFB. Tough one as it is just a lot of ground to cover to do the real battle and beyond the capability of CM to really do. Fascinating engagement and if you haven't read this I'd highly recommend. The Defense of St. Vith, Belgium (7tharmddiv.org) This used to be a free downable, but they indexed it etc and now it is on amazon for $25. I still have the original PDF. Interesting excerpt The only excitement there had been when an M8 armored car from Troop 3 destroyed a Tiger tank. The armored car had been in a concealed position near the boundary of Troop 3, 87th Cavalry Reconnaissance Squadron and Company A, 38th Armored Infantry Battalion, when the Tiger approached the lines at right angles to move along a trail in front of the main line of resistance. As the tank passed the armored car, the latter slipped out of position and started up the trail behind the Tiger, accelerating in an attempt to close. At the same moment the German tank commander saw the M8, and stated traversing his gun to beat on it. It was a race between the Americans, who were attempting to close so that their 37-mm gun would be effective on the Tiger's thin rear armor, and the Germans, who were desperately striving to bring their 88 to bear. Rapidly the M8 closed to 25 yards, and quickly pumped in three rounds; the lumbering Tiger stopped and shuddered; there was a muffled explosion, followed by flames which billowed out of the turret and engine ports, after which the armored cat returned to its position. ballsy

don't leave a post for devs. Turn in a ticket. There is no telling when someone might look at this and then they'd have to contact you anyway. (and yes they do care.)

I would hesitate to say burned. Not because I disagree with the result, but burned seems more like getting ripped off. in our case it is more we went in trying to impose our own perspective despite the facts on the ground. We saw what we wanted to see. Interesting parallels to our efforts in Iraq. We brought in external "leaders" who were utterly clueless with no real base of support and without the proper force ratios or plan to maintain order. In my own probably wrong perspective, we were never going to really stabilize Afghanistan with a regime next door with an active interest in supporting the Taliban (Pakistan). Hell Osama had been living there who knows how long and I'll be damned if I don't think the ISI knew the whole time. That's not even the Taliban, it's f'n Al Qaeda. It may be decades before we really know the impact of Western occupation and support in Afghanistan, but it is going to take a significant cultural shift across the region before the fundamental facts on the ground change. As it is I don't think there was any way we were going to withdrawal and this fiasco not happen. We just haven't wanted to face it which I think is the real reason it has taken so long.