Poland`s aid to Ukraine if Russia invades - part 2

I like that idea.... all Russians in Russia, they stay in and we stay out.

ft.com/content/151bedc7-567b-4c16-b9cb-ddc1f558aa66

the rebranded Russian version of McD is firing on all cylinders. But this time nobody is queuing all night to get in, the punters of suburban Moscow are already full from their Sunday Sushi lunches probably.

I like the name of this chain - "It's Tasty. Full Stop". - fully in line with Russia's traditions of free speech

Well, a Ukrainian intelligence officer, and not just any officer - a deputy head, along with a governor, and front line troops confirmed everything I've been saying:

1) Ukraine is TOTALLY dependent on the west for arms, they have 10% of what they actually need (and that's after all the aid, money, material, etc. worth tens of billions allocated to them)

2) This has turned into a war of attrition where artillery is key, a war of attrition that Ukraine is losing since they don't have a fraction of the resources in men or materiel that Russia does even with all the billions given to them

3) Russia has 10-15x+ the amount of artillery Ukraine has, and unlike Ukraine they actually have plenty of shells allowing them to constantly shell positions. Meanwhile, Ukraine conserves what little shells they have left and is begging the west for more.

4) Ukraine is suffering heavy losses of 100-200+ soldiers killed per day which they cannot sustain, unlike Russia which despite having more losses has far more reserves of trained soldiers, and not civilians given a rusty AK47 with an hour of target practice sent to the front line

5) Russian army is more powerful as noted by the deputy head of Ukrainian intelligence (an oxymoron in it's own right)
6) Ukraine's army is losing so many soldiers that they're now relying on the civilians that signed up for the "territorial defense." Problem is, like the soldier mentioned, they don't have any training, panic and run as soon as they get shelled, and simply don't have the skills that professional soldiers do. They need more quality soldiers which they cannot quickly obtain and more and more are dying each day.

7) Russia is slowly taking more and more land

What I forgot to mention, and is a very valid point, that even western stocks or artillery and shells are getting low. They can increase production, but that of course takes time. Russia is taking advantage of this which is why they're gradually gaining ground in the east.

In a similar situation as with Mariupol, Severodonetsk is in Russian hands except for some holdouts in a big chemical plant.

rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/ukrainian-military-unit-russia-artillery-1365021/
newsweek.com/ukraine-risks-losing-artillery-war-russia-vadym-skibitsky-military-intelligence-1714782
newsweek.com/we-are-out-ammo-ukraine-awaits-aid-russian-artillery-bears-down-1715060

I recently read an article that stated Ukraine would need some $7 billion PER MONTH in aid just to stay afloat and fight off the Russians effectively. I highly doubt that the west is going to agree to provide them that, especially considering the looming recession, inflation, and citizens especially in the USA are starting to get sick of billions spent abroad instead of being spent stateside.

This can go one of two ways:

A) The west gives in to Zydensky's incessant daily pleading for billions more shekels to fight the Russians, although this would only prolong their inevitable defeat and sooner or later the west realizes the futility of the situation or potentially caves to constituents and cuts off the vast majority of aid.

B) The west gets sick of Zydensky's incessant daily pleading for billions more shekels sooner than later and thus forces Zydentsky to either negotiate and cede some territory or lose even more land. Zydensky will most likely demand that the army continue fighting even though it's a hopeless battle. Morale is already sinking due to the high casualty rates, lack of equipment, lack of ammo especially shells for artillery, lack of troops for rotation at the front, etc.

Either way, Ukraine has no chance of winning and by winning I mean regaining the territories that they lost. That's what I would consider a real "win" and there is no possible way that Ukraine is going to suddenly turn the tables so much that they recapture everything they lost and drive Russia back to its borders. I think anyone who isn't totally delusion can see that's not going to happen.

The only way Ukraine could win this war is really dependent on what a persons' definition of "win" is in this situation. If not being totally obliterated and left with even broker, 25%+ smaller country but at least retaining sovereignty is considered a "win" which to some people in the USA, i.e. Kissinger are saying is most important, then yes, Ukraine can "win."

Question is, does the Supreme Comedian-In-Chief Zydensky consider this a win? He keeps saying that "Ukraine will prevail" and yes, they most likely will. However, the Ukraine that comes out of this war is going to far smaller than it was just a few months ago, left with an economy that's 35-50%+ smaller, a currency that's worth dogshit, and an estimated $600+ billion in damaged infrastructure to address.

Or will Zydensky keep encouraging the fight to the last man? He keeps urging soldiers and civilians alike to fight a losing battle. He has them go against the Russians without equipment, without artillery support, without training, and now without even morale.

If anything, Zydensky's refusal to negotiate and cede territory now and continue to fight a losing war is getting more of his own people killed than by the Russians. It's his hubris that driving the 100-200+ killed, 500+ wounded per day. If he agreed to give up Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk or something like that the war would end and it'd save thousands of lives.

The war is not going to end until Russia loses. Everyone knows that. The World realizes that Russia cannot succeed because they will not stop with Ukraine. Whatever it costs today will prevent more costs tomorrow.

Except that not everyone has read Russia's military doctrine, in which, in response to an existential threat, Russia may use its nuclear arsenal first. And Putin's well-known rhetorical question - "why should we care about a world in which there is no place for Russia?" ......

Do you still want total war and total victory? Are you willing to bet absolutely EVERYTHING you have on trying to win? Knowing that if you lose there is no chance to win back, this is not poker or roulette. No one will deal the cards a second time.

@Velund
And this is the problem. The "existential threat" that Putin perceives does not even exist in the rest of the world. What Russia considers a threat is really the rest of the world not wanting anything to do with Russia because of the way Russians act. That is not existential, it is real, and it is not threatening, it is simply ignoring.

An existential threat would be the USA and NATO adopting and making a policy public that says they seek to destroy Russia and kill all Russians. That's a threat. That threat can be made real by Russia through hostile actions with other countries like Ukraine, Lithuania, Poland or any other country. A threat does not simply materialize out of the mist. The threat if made would be made due to the actions of Russia itself. Self fulfilling prophecy, as we see happening with Finland and Sweden applying to NATO. They would never have applied if not for this invasion of Ukraine.

The mentality of Russians is not something that most of the world want to deal with. It really is just that simple. This war is Putin thumping his chest saying look at me I am like Peter The Great, I will rebuild the USSR. Yet, Russians forget the USSR was a total failure. Russia is not much better now than it was 30 years ago if you compare it to other countries advancement over the last 30 years.

I understand Russians love their country, like most love their own countries for their own reasons, even when all countries have some pretty bad historical events. That's just life. The exception with Russia is that Russia wants to go back while the rest want to move forward. Until that thinking has ended, Russia will always be what it is today, a pariah nation living on the fringes never fully achieving what lies within its potential. Sad really.

Never figured you the type to believe MSM propaganda....

Meanwhile, as I wrote, no one doubts that Russia is the most brutal military force in the world. They're stuck a couple hundred years behind the rest of Europe and are totally dedicated to political and military philosophies that the civilized world has turned away from.

And anyone who looks at the last 12 years knows that if Ukraine "cedes" land to Russia, then Russia will be back in a few years to take more.

Anyone who looks at Russian and Polish history knows Russia will not stop with Ukraine (Russian state media keeps repeating this with great consistency).

Help stop Russia in Ukraine or invent reasons to stay in Chicago when Russia comes for Poland....

The biggest existential threat is your own way of living - drinking, cheap amphetamines, no incentive to work and of course bad food. Living standards did improve in Putin's first decade (after Yeltsin, things could only get better).

But after 2008 this became more difficult to maintain improvements as it meant real democracy and economic reforms that would put an end to his theft - so he went more and more down the rabbit hole of his paranoia and need for conquest.

It is either that or living in constant threat that another Putin will one day want to start another conquest. If I have to choose between living in constant danger and quick death, I choose the latter. At some point people just don't give a f*ck anymore. If we are to be invaded, murdered and enslaved, because some retarded "Peter the Great" dreams of an empire, then we might as well just die and take the aggressors with us. Simple as that.

The sad (for you) reality is that Russia is not planning to disappear into thin air and leave its lands and resources to someone else. If that's a problem for you, that's entirely your own problem.

The sad (for you) reality is that the Russian mentality fully agrees with the Roman brocard and the fundamental principle of law - "Pacta sunt servanda". An agreement must be honored, even if its violation may bring much greater benefits. And a gentleman's word in the Russian tradition is almost as good as a written document. At least in relations with partners who have never broken their word before. At the time of the negotiations, the promise was made - a united Germany joins NATO as one, and then "not an inch to the East." The promise was already broken by Clinton, in the famous "I personally promised you nothing" manner. But this does not make the Russians feel that they have lost the right to enforce what they promised. And all the talk about "the sovereign decisions of the new members" supremely sucks for us (to use the most polite phrase possible). You might as well decide to be taken to Paradise alive and immediately - it doesn't change a thing. You were not the one to talk to about not expanding NATO when uniting Germany and we don't give a **** what you think about it.

The sad (for the Finns) reality is also that they just flushed 70+ years of mutual respect and balanced consideration of each other's interests between Russia and Finland down the toilet. Now life in this part of the world will become significantly more expensive for everyone, but especially for Finland.

I could go on describing the sad reality point by point. But I don't see the point. The only thing that the Anglo-Saxons and their cocksuckers will have to answer for is the attempt to incite a civil war between the Little Russians, the Great Russians and the White Russians. And the answer will have to be tough.


Then you perfectly understand Russians now. ;)

Russia never honors any agreements (cf Budapest memorandum)

All Russia had to do was stay within its internationally agreed borders and it could have had a prosperous future (or at least one not dominated by poverty and repression).

It was the choice of Russia to throw away its future.


No such thing. Why are you killing people over an idea as mytholotical as unicorns?

But the negotiations about Germany joining NATO were with the USSR, a defunct nation, and obviously a colonial empire. Discussing what was agreed with it is about as relevant as whatever the declining British Empire did in Rhodesia.

You don't accept that the decisions about Poland's security are for the Polish people to take, and we are clear - membership of NATO with our democratic friends and protection against the drunken louts and their 19th century dictatorship

OOps. Then Poland, Lithuania, etc. statehood is in immediate danger. It was restored with direct participation of USSR, a defunct nation, and obviously a colonial empire. Anything that is signed by Bolsheviks should be denounced immediately.

There is only one little mistake you made. Can you figure out where it is?

Probably irreversible now.

Have you seen the new 'Lada' they're trying to produce in Togliatti? Like a cat from 30 years ago.


More a deliberate winding down planned over decades since African colonies were mostly a liability. Plus of course the ethical issues involved. We aren't russia or France.


The best protection is to be part of a rules based system.

I see that Germany is blocking Spain from sending equipment to Ukraine. Its clear that their government (and Micron's) want russia to win.

Not really. You had peace, you had western Europe in your pockets (gas, oil, technology imports), you had (still have) the largest country on the planet with relatively small population and a lot of natural riches. Why all of a sudden the imperial conquest 2.0, the "Peter the Great" idiocy? It's just doesn't make sense. Bobko's explanation (regaining some land and sending the message to other former Soviet republics) also isn't completely satisfactory when you consider all the consequences.

OK, I could to some extent understand a limited strike against Donbas and Luhansk and securing the territories with Russian majority that you consider to have been oppressed (adopting your point of view). That would be something within the limits of logic (kind of). However, the entire talk of imperial conquest Peter-the-Great-style or threatening nuclear war or/and invasion of NATO countries - this irrational aggressive barbarism, this points to some inherent flaw in general Russian psyche, a form of collective madness if you will, that has to be dealt with, and you don't deal with aggressive madman by appeasing him (we tried that with Hitler - didn't work).

That's why Poland should acquire nuclear weapons - as much as possible - legally or illegally, so that when we someone tries to invade us, murder and enslave our people again, we will take the bastards with us.

Russians don't want prosperity or peace, they want attention - they want the rest of the world to be impressed by and/or afraid of them.

Narcissistic wound - the entire culture is built around the idea that they are superior to everyone else and offering something wonderful to the world.... which turns into collective, narcissistic wound when the world rejects them and that wound turns into rage and bloodlust

The problem isn't a big bad dictator forcing his Peter the Great ideals on an unwilling, peaceful populace..... it's a canny leader giving the bloodthirsty, violent mob what it wants.

A very dangerous thing if you've ever had to deal a narcissist. There's really only two solutions; walk far away or destroy.


I've never understood their psychology. When we're on holiday, my OH avoids them like the plague and sometimes points them out from a distance by their behaviour.

Some, if it's a large hotel with gardens just walk around and around in pairs, dressed up and grinning. Others, mostly younger ones just do nothing with a sort of iron curtain around themselves, avoiding contact with others. Nearly always somewhere 'exclusive' where the public aren't allowed. Poles can be a bit like the latter however they're chattier and you can engage. With Russians, almost never.

...and in such case appeasement will never work. It's, as Velund said, total war until victory or death. We are given no choice.

t.me/denazi_UA/12534

The mothers of captured Ukrainian soldiers are begging their authorities not to exchange them or try to bring them home. They know they will be sent back to the front and will probably never see them alive again. And they state that they are afraid that they will be beaten and mistreated because they surrendered.

There was no such promise made. I already wrote about it on this thread.


But we were the ones to talk about it later, fortunately :)


No, the Finns didn't do it. You did it by invading Ukraine. If you're not able to understand such a simple and obvious thing then that's really scary.

We are Poles and we don't need the permission of Russia, the USSR or whoever, anymore than we need the permission of Turkey, Pakistan or some other mid range power like Russia

you do need permission from usa tho apparently to send ur migs.

@Velund
Actually, nothing is sad for me. In the end, Russia will not just disappear, you are right. But in the end it will be changed, like it or not it will be changed because it has to in order to benefit its citizens. A few years of 1980's lifestyle awaits Russia as sanctions take effect longer term. Citizens will demand their western products and freedom to travel. Which by the way, the US is denying visa's by the bunches for Russian, Belarussian, and other nations right now. There will only be so long that people will accept these things missing from their lives that they once had.

As for gentlemen agreements or written agreements, Russia may keep its word. The US is not NATO and does not make the decisions on what countries decide to apply, they do that on their own. There is no recruiting center for NATO. Don't blame Finland for applying, blame Russia for making them feel as though they have to apply in order to be safe. Same for Sweden. Russian aggression is the drive behind countries joining NATO.

Take the approach that the USSR agreements do not mean anything? You may as well do that based on current actions, and then the rest of the world can prepare in all seriousness for WW3. In the end Russia can not win. Even if they take territory from Ukraine, Russia has already lost. The sanctions are going nowhere, and the civilized world is aligned against Russia. So, enjoy the $hit hole country you have. Happy gulag!

But that's irrelevant. What is relevant is what is in the contracts. This is the way it has always been in international diplomacy. Otherwise it would be an endless he-said-she-said game that would lead to eternal conflict.

Diplomats involved in negotiations cannot give guarantees for anything, they have no mandate to do so. They are there to negotiate what is in the contract, the contract is signed by politicians that have a mandate to do so, and only what is in the contract counts.

This is how it has always been, and this is the only way that makes sense. Otherwise Germany could pretend Russia has promised to give back Königsberg (some German conspiracy theorists claim that Gorbachev did), therefore it is OK to invade it. It would lead to complete chaos.

The contracts between the West and Russia are all publicly available. No guarantees are in them, and that's what counts.

Indeed. Whats more, Soviet diplomats were particulary notorious for fighting for each phrase in those treaties. They included provisions in the 2+4 for the upkeep of Soviet soldier cemeteries in Germany, yet we are supposed to believe that they thought a verbal promise on such a crucial matter was enough?

OMG... was I wrong, massive, and I mean _massive_ crowds celebrating "Russia day" in Enerhodar....

twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1536238331926876161

what permission?? Poland wanted to sent them but demanded f15 or f35 . US said -no
seems like Polands policy is to sent scrap to ukraine and replace it with german/us
didnt work with Germans, Poland got middle finger instead of leopards

lol

Compare this to the crowds of Enerhodar inhabitants with Ukrainian flags trying to stop Russian troops from entering their city (this video was tweeted on the 2nd of March, 2022):

mobile.twitter.com/DaryaTsymbalyuk/status/1499051850116571137


There was not even a verbal promise. Gorbachev confirmed this. Putin is lying. I posted an article about this in the earlier days of the invasion.

Excellent post Dirk and spot on.
As bad as we all wanted Ukraine to win it is time to face the facts which men rely on while women rely on their emotions.

It's all but over so let's end it a.s.a.p.

...and even those are most likely hired actors. The fact that Russia was only able to hire so few actors for such an important day shows that the sanctions are really taking their toll. :)


Влади́мир Влади́мирович? Departing from the truth? Never!


Yes, the front has been broken in so many points, Ukrainian forces are encircled and Russian tanks are rolling forward along the entire frontline.

Erm... no...

liveuamap.com/pl

... wait a minute... :D