holoween

I won't get involved in this discussion further as it is leaning towards whataboutism. But to be fair: The US did wage quite a few wars that violated international law. By your own admission, this would make all US soldiers who fought in one of those war criminals. I have zero problem with criticizing the US for their wars but calling each and every soldier a war criminal just for fighting in it is indeed absurd, I think. You are right, blindly following orders and getting away with it is a thing of the past, as it should be. But a judge will always weigh the severity of the what a soldier did under orders against possible consequences of refusing said order, meaning there is no automatism here.

Im sorry what?
What exactly gave you that idea? Germany being unwilling to defend eastern europe doesnt mesh with the fact there are literally german troops in Lituania to defend them.
And germany stopped their gas imports from russia 100% while poland is still buying oil from them.

Im sorry what?
What exactly gave you that idea? Germany being unwilling to defend eastern europe doesnt mesh with the fact there are literally german troops in Lituania to defend them.
And germany stopped their gas imports from russia 100% while poland is still buying oil from them.

Im sorry what?
What exactly gave you that idea? Germany being unwilling to defend eastern europe doesnt mesh with the fact there are literally german troops in Lituania to defend them.
And germany stopped their gas imports from russia 100% while poland is still buying oil from them.

Im sorry what?
What exactly gave you that idea? Germany being unwilling to defend eastern europe doesnt mesh with the fact there are literally german troops in Lituania to defend them.
And germany stopped their gas imports from russia 100% while poland is still buying oil from them.

Im sorry what?
What exactly gave you that idea? Germany being unwilling to defend eastern europe doesnt mesh with the fact there are literally german troops in Lituania to defend them.
And germany stopped their gas imports from russia 100% while poland is still buying oil from them.

Im sorry what?
What exactly gave you that idea? Germany being unwilling to defend eastern europe doesnt mesh with the fact there are literally german troops in Lituania to defend them.
And germany stopped their gas imports from russia 100% while poland is still buying oil from them.

Im sorry what?
What exactly gave you that idea? Germany being unwilling to defend eastern europe doesnt mesh with the fact there are literally german troops in Lituania to defend them.
And germany stopped their gas imports from russia 100% while poland is still buying oil from them.

Im sorry what?
What exactly gave you that idea? Germany being unwilling to defend eastern europe doesnt mesh with the fact there are literally german troops in Lituania to defend them.
And germany stopped their gas imports from russia 100% while poland is still buying oil from them.

Im sorry what?
What exactly gave you that idea? Germany being unwilling to defend eastern europe doesnt mesh with the fact there are literally german troops in Lituania to defend them.
And germany stopped their gas imports from russia 100% while poland is still buying oil from them.

Well, it tells us that the rest of the world doesn't buy our pretty Sunday speeches, and rightly so. Our precious western values apply mostly to ourselves and definitely only extend to other regions of the world as far as they don't interfere with our interests. Which usually means we don't give a f*** about autocrats as long they are "our" autocrats and we don't care about human rights when cheap resources and workforce are better accessible without them.
That's why it means nothing to quite a few countries that we are democracies and China and Russia are not. For them it matters how they are treated and as a matter of fact, so far we have a worse track record.
What we should learn from that is that we shouldn't take it for granted that we are seen as the good guys and everyone gathers under our banner. If this is to become a clash of systems then we better make sure to win the hearts and minds of the rest of the world through deeds not words.

1 year of the war is passed. From the start of the invasion and to the huge count of air and missile strikes. One of my friends has been killed by wagner artillery in Bohorodichne village near Bakhumt. My father-in-law has been killed by storming the defensive enemy positions in the Kherson region 1st of October. I gave 3 of my salaries (all what I have)on the first day of the war on the military budget. Thanks to all of you, thanks for your help. Taking carry of our refugees, helping our soldiers to destroy enemy forces with AT weapons, artillery, APS, AFV, and Tanks, peoples who served in foreign legions. Thank you for giving billions of money to support our economy. Special thanks to battlefront for small support for me, when I asked about a discount, they gave me 2 games with all DLCs for free - I didn't expect this. Some of my relatives were in Kherson in occupation, and all high-value electronic and expensive things were looted from them by Russian forces. And now we don't fear rocket strikes (10 times they exploded 700-1000m from my house) we don't fear nuclear threat, we don't fear the second army in the world and you shouldnt. Sorry for we English would that what I want to say for all of you, I can tell you many things about the war but first i will try to improve my language knowlages.

Sorry, but I think this will be appreciated here...

Well, there goes pretty much every book in 18th and 19th century literature in every tradition folks...

Guys - look you probably have  plenty of examples  of bad things in past literature - Its the nature of  things . I enjoy  Literature and Non fiction from times when   people of color  were clearly being  treated as less than human in literature of the times . Do I think such Books need to be purged from  our Libraries ? Well - personally no  . And I'll happily keep what Russian Literature I have as well - safe on my bookshelves . When you start targeting the Literature /Books of a Culture for reasons of the moment  -  you are heading down a troublesome path that I have no interest in going down .

This seriously gets ridiculous. So now everyone who isn't firmly in the "Russia sux, lol, Ukraine has already won" camp is pro Putin? Really?

The big conversion is a4 to a5.

Can they stop it with the Wehrmacht markings?  You can still fight the Russians.

There's no hyperventilation here, mate.
Know your enemy and know yourself, and in a hundred battles you will never be in peril.
Notice there's two sides to that aphorism, and swapping Western for Ukrainian agency is the kind of paternalistic thinking that has been at the root of the previous Western failures.
@Maciej Zwolinski made the critical point above; full marks to Zaluzhny and UA command for Ukraine's operational successes to date! but the conditions that made those possible cannot be relied upon going forward.
'Well then, they'll think of something else* cuz Zaluzhny is Supah Geeeenius' is kind of the mirror image of the 'Cuz Russia Sux' fallacy, which is a trap you yourself have rightly warned of.  So let's not echo chamber here, nobody is rushing for the smelling salts but there is a limit to Ukrainian capability (Will is only a part of it) that is worth probing.
* someone just suggested a 'backhand blow' near Torske, and I very much hope they're right!
...As to Ukraine being a far better strategic investment for the West than Iraq and A'stan, sure enough (I'm attempting to take that bet myself 😉).
But OTOH, ask the Iraqi Kurds what courage, hardiness, loyalty and social cohersion did for them in the end, being surrounded by powerful enemies their US sponsors feared to offend too much.  Or the Free Syria Army, the Marsh Arabs, Hmong and Montagnards before them....
Anyhoo, this is a far more interesting line discussion IMHO than still more Tanx n Krautz blahblahblah.  Carry on schooling us (or ignore us if we're tiresome), but we will feel free to push back.

Ok so uranuim enrichment is now a military installation?
Just wondering about the actual distinction you want to make because once you open up from only uniformed soldiers being military targets you quickly run into a slippery slope where eventually your oponents population is a military target because they could contribute to a war effort.

Every simgle civilian can be conscripted into an army so therefore its ok to kill civilians.
That is the "it can be" argument at its final form. Everyone agrees its an aweful idea so therefore where is the line.

Ok so uranuim enrichment is now a military installation?
Just wondering about the actual distinction you want to make because once you open up from only uniformed soldiers being military targets you quickly run into a slippery slope where eventually your oponents population is a military target because they could contribute to a war effort.

Yes, when a Russian fakes surrender to blow himself up with a grenade, then it's a war crime, but when a Ukrainian does it, he's a hero...

Do you like arguing strawmen or do you simply not read what i write?
To requote myself
 
To clarify my overall position. I think this war is the best study case for a peer war in the near future and wed be well served carefully analyzing it and taking its lessons to heart.
 
And in regards to AFVs there are 2 overarching lessons learned
1. AFVs are vulnerable
2. AFVs are essential for offensive operations
The first lesson learned really doesnt need further explaination just look at the losses
The second one aparently does need so lets deal with that.
 
The core issue starts at another lesson this war reemphasises namely determined infantry cannot be shot off an objective with firepower alone. You can cause casualties but you still need to clear it with your own infantry. This point i dont think i need to elaborate on.
The next iussue is that infantry has difficulty gettin onto an objective using its own firepower and artillery only slightly changes that. This difficulty increases and decreasess with force density. Just compare the charkiv to the kherson offensive. Or if you want to experience it yourself atka a random cm map and fight a series of attacks starting at tiny size and eventually going to huge.
What tanks do is provide the firepower to get infantry onto an objective. They also provide supression via the threat of applying their firepower but thats a secondary effect they share with several other weapons systems. Their morale effect obviously decreases with at weapons available for the oponent but if they dont have any that can on its own win the fight.
This is the core reason why tanks exist now for over 100 years and are quite likely to continue existing for quite some time. Id love to see your argument for how this is weird twisted logic and what your suggested replacement is and please tell ukraine aswell because right now theyre still asking for tanks.
 
Im not going in detail over the rest of the post because it basically boils down to whatever you can think of to kill the tank it usually kills infantry easier and at greater rate, AFVs evolve with the threats, Soldiers dont.
 

Do you like arguing strawmen or do you simply not read what i write?
To requote myself
 
To clarify my overall position. I think this war is the best study case for a peer war in the near future and wed be well served carefully analyzing it and taking its lessons to heart.
 
And in regards to AFVs there are 2 overarching lessons learned
1. AFVs are vulnerable
2. AFVs are essential for offensive operations
The first lesson learned really doesnt need further explaination just look at the losses
The second one aparently does need so lets deal with that.
 
The core issue starts at another lesson this war reemphasises namely determined infantry cannot be shot off an objective with firepower alone. You can cause casualties but you still need to clear it with your own infantry. This point i dont think i need to elaborate on.
The next iussue is that infantry has difficulty gettin onto an objective using its own firepower and artillery only slightly changes that. This difficulty increases and decreasess with force density. Just compare the charkiv to the kherson offensive. Or if you want to experience it yourself atka a random cm map and fight a series of attacks starting at tiny size and eventually going to huge.
What tanks do is provide the firepower to get infantry onto an objective. They also provide supression via the threat of applying their firepower but thats a secondary effect they share with several other weapons systems. Their morale effect obviously decreases with at weapons available for the oponent but if they dont have any that can on its own win the fight.
This is the core reason why tanks exist now for over 100 years and are quite likely to continue existing for quite some time. Id love to see your argument for how this is weird twisted logic and what your suggested replacement is and please tell ukraine aswell because right now theyre still asking for tanks.
 
Im not going in detail over the rest of the post because it basically boils down to whatever you can think of to kill the tank it usually kills infantry easier and at greater rate, AFVs evolve with the threats, Soldiers dont.