at the end of the day, isnt it worth it for Russians since they will kill shitton of Ukrainians trapped in the city?

at the end of the day, isnt it worth it for Russians since they will kill shitton of Ukrainians trapped in the city?
Yes they sacrificed a lot but they can afford to take manpower losses in these proportions and Ukraine can't
I fail to see how this is bad for Russia

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >if I spend 10,000 dollars to buy a 1,000 dollar bill, how is that bad for me?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      if i have 100k and you have 20k and i spent 10k and you spent 5k
      who is better off?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I have $100K. You have $20K.
        I want your house.

        I spend $10K so that you lose $5K, thinking that because you are going broke you will eventually leave the house so I can walk in and take it.

        But...at the same time, a bunch of neighbors that hate me give you $7K for free because they don't want me in your house. And now they hate me even more, and got more neighbors to hate me.

        How is that bad for me?

        How is that bad for

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          The discussion is about manpower not money or equipment, we know the West can supply Ukraine with infinite equipment
          But what is the use of equipment if there's no one to use it?

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Ukraine hasn't even started with war time mobilization numbers. They just don't have the equipment for it.
            Neither has Russia started with it, but they also start using vehicles from 1952 by now and will soon have a lot of men with rusty guns and maybe some cars.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            guys vietnam lost 1 milliones muchachos ?!?!?!?
            who are they even going to get to hold a rifle .
            2 more weeks to ho chi minh !

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        You are comparing 100k to 20k, probably because Russia has 5x the population of Ukraine. Are you sure that Russia can keep a proportionally comparable war effort to Ukraine? i.e. field, supply and keep morale of 5 times Ukraine's armed forces in foreign ground while Ukraine fights for survival with the aid of the West?

        You are also assuming that Russia only loses twice the amount of troops as Ukraine and I'm not sure of that. Maybe Russian artillery is being effective and we're just not seeing it, but it would appear that they are losing more than that.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >You are comparing 100k to 20k, probably because Russia has 5x the population of Ukraine.
          Only 3x, actually. Russia does not have anywhere near as much of a manpower advantage as they imagine.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Slightly more than 3x but I think the greater ratio of women over men in Russia compared to Ukraine brings the "able bodies men" count closer to 3x.

            It was stated time and time again by random Black folk from /k/ literally everywhere else people think it's important, people like Zelensky
            >Ukraine is winning because of imaginary rules I made in my head
            Get a fricking grip

            Every bit of Ukraine is important to some degree for morale purposes and they've been using the town's defense to grind down Russian forces, which by all accounts is exactly what's been happening. Strategically it means absolutely nothing should Russians capture it, they'll merely roll up to the next carefully planned killzone to throw their meatwaves at not unlike how the heavy price paid for Soledar resulted in zero further notable gains and only more disastrous fumbled assaults on Bakhmut.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Well, a majority of your 100k is actually degraded currency that can longer be used in transactions, while my 20k has been kept in an air-tight container. While you certainly have more on paper, I can get further with my 20k. If you spend 10k that you had to scrap together out of the pile of moldy bills then you will certainly run into trouble sooner than me spending 5k from my crisp stack of well preserved currency.
        I feel moronic using this metaphor but I tried to make it work, anyways, more manpower doesn't mean you can afford more losses, it just means you have a larger pool to select from. Russians, as much as we like to shit on them, are not insects. While Ukrainians are fighting for their survival, Russians are fighting something they don't really even believe in. Sooner or later the weeping mothers and wives will become louder than the engine of a Lada.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah but you see, the 1,000 dollar bill will be stolen from someone they hate, which makes it worth it in their eyes.

      russians are fricked in the head

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >we can always just print more money

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    If 5000 people just pushed northwest during the night in vehicles I doubt Russia could do a lot about it.
    This isn't mariupol, there are still vehicles able to get there and it's still not surrounded.

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >at the end of the day, isnt it worth it for Russians
    it entirely depends on follow up events

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >but they can afford to take manpower losses in these proportions
    Can they? I'm not sure they can. The Russia of today is not the Russia of WW2. Yes they have a high population, but do they have capable, physically fit young men willing to fight in this war?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      even if they cant advance further, they can establish new lines of defense and sit on them for years like they did in 2014
      then re-ignite the advance once they have enough power
      they have more land than they started with

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        This is the worst possible course of action rusmil can take. People of russia want to see whole of Donbass liberated and will not allow for a ceasefire to commence right outside Artyomovsk. They need to at least get to Kramatorsk-Slovyansk line before talking about hunkering down

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Who gives a frick what Russian population think? Definitely not their government.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Russians will take a shitton of abuse before instability becomes an issue but shitton =/= infinite amount
            they can't throw hundreds of thousands of people into a wood chipper for some shitty half-destroyed oblasts, especially when the rich market they were relying on (europe) wants them to frick off so economy's going to worsen and worsen with time

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        you mean like how they setup defences in and around kherson/kharkiv/kyiv and how they sat on them like they did in 2014?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        That doesn't make sense though. If the goal is to just freeze the conflict along the current frontline and prevent the yukes from advancing until you've reconstituted enough of your force for more offensive operations, why would you do that *after* killing off a significant amount of your own men over some random town? Not to mention the amount if shells and other material expended. That just means you have less resources to mount an effective defense against the inevitable ukrainian counterattacks. It's literally worse than doing nothing.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Nothing Russia does makes sense, stopping the advance at 2014 made no sense either
          but Russians don't follow logic they just do what the monke commands

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          They need a win, and they can recruit and train more than Ukraine can honestly, and attrition early in the game is better than later when even more western aid arrives and political pressure ramps up within Russia. That's the real reason.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >and they can recruit and train more than Ukraine can honestly
            For a very loose definition of "train" given that sending soldiers into battle with nothing but machetes tends not to work against people with machine guns.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      They will be subject to incessant HIMARS strikes. For years, if necessary.

      Also, Russian civilians in major urban centers will probably be subject to terrorist attacks.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Considering how many Russians rooting for the SMO are old fricks nostalgic for the Soviet/Imperial era, forming ten new VDV Boomer Brigades would be only fair and just.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Russia muh endless wave of soldier is a myth. Not even myth worthy, just t-14 armata level cope

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >but they can afford to take manpower losses in these proportions
        Can they? I'm not sure they can. The Russia of today is not the Russia of WW2. Yes they have a high population, but do they have capable, physically fit young men willing to fight in this war?

        That is true but Ukraine's soldier supply is also slowly draining away
        Even by good estimations the kill death ratio is 2 Russians for 1 Ukrainian soldier which favors Russia since they have more than twice manpower

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Where do you get this info? There was never 1 to 2 ratio, maybe at the beginning before himars arrived when Ukraine had little support from the west. It was reported 1 Ukrainian for 5-8 Russian soldiers recently

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            that's the recent cope they all got. also btw at the start russia still lost more men cause they came unprepared and got slaughtered in moronic ways all over the place.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            that's the recent cope they all got. also btw at the start russia still lost more men cause they came unprepared and got slaughtered in moronic ways all over the place.

            Where do you get this 1 to 8 info?
            If it was actually 1 to 8 they wouldnt be advancing non stop for 2 month already

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      nope,
      this

      https://i.imgur.com/slxPNdF.jpg

      This.

      Not only is Russia losing all of it's young people in this conflict due to death/injuries, but the ones with half a brain has already left the country. Yeah it's not gonna be great for Ukraine either but they atleast have some sort of Marshal Plan/EU Gibs dangling above them when the war is finished which could have a baby boom impact similar to WW2, with also alot of Ukrainians returning. I don't see how Russia could turn this around, especially as all of it's industries and state apparatuses have been hollowed out for military investments and yachts with an aging leadership and no clear ideology other than "frick HATO".

      and the best have fled already close to 900k by October. Trade groups cry a lot about it that almost 100k high skill workers like IT left already.

      they are prepping to mobilize students next, so its kinda understandable

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >they are prepping to mobilize students next
        war going so well they need to trim down their student population to sustain the effort?
        unreal

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Russia was already mobilizing people in high skilled professions like neural surgeons last autumn, they are not being smart about this.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          https://i.imgur.com/4NQUrBY.jpg

          nope,
          this [...]

          and the best have fled already close to 900k by October. Trade groups cry a lot about it that almost 100k high skill workers like IT left already.

          they are prepping to mobilize students next, so its kinda understandable

          It's apparently a slow roll hidden mobilization for spring/April/May. No big announcement, just more letters.

          Keep in mind, many students did a type of short military service/training to get bonus points if they didn't have the grades. (kinda like the GI bills) So they were always a high risk group.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >get shit grades
            >get moobilized
            should've done your homework b***h
            pity for those who wanted to get a degree and gtfo

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      They dont have a high population. Its only 120million. They are taking insane and unsustainable losses atm.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Russia can sustain these losses indefinitely though.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          yes because russians just keep on cloning themselves
          moron

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          It can't, less than a million russians a year turn 18

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            isnt it even less for Ukraine? Ukraine has a major population decline problem as well
            Russians have all those Muslim minorities who still reproduce in mass numbers

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Ukraine already mobilized the economy for the war effort. Russia will have to decide if they want to spawn more meat on the battlefield or introduce more people in the economy to reinvigorate its military-industrial complex. Can't have both.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >Russia can sustain these losses indefinitely though
          >

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          https://i.imgur.com/ZzG2kTP.jpg

          >Russia can absolutely afford losses more than Ukraine can
          Nope.
          Ukraine has a larger manpower pool to pull from than Russia does.
          I'm sorry but it is true.
          >b--b-b-but muh 140 million ;~~*(
          Nope.
          Ukraine's sovereign debt and economy is being underwritten and guaranteed by the west. Yes. I know. The bombs and the tanks get all the attention, but the REAL aid is financial.

          Always has been. Always will be.

          Russia doesn't have that. They don't have anyone. Which means they need their men to produce products, services, and still maintain healthy levels of internal consumption. Can't do that if the men are fleeing with their wives to parts unknown to avoid mobilization (as some millions already have), or becoming a casualty of war in some Ukrainian backwater (as some hundreds of thousands already have).
          Russia's handling of men as entirely expendable is a habit as antiquated as the weeping explosives they're pulling out of storage, and both are about equally stable long term.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Go look at Russian birth vs death rates for the last 30+ years lmao

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >Russia can sustain these losses

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            this sounds like hardcore propaganda but at this point I'm genuinely unsure if it is

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              It was an interview with a POW belonging to the 155th

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              It was an interview with a POW belonging to the 155th

              interviews with POWs are always hard to really trust as an accurate source of information, but after seeing those videos from Vuhledar of BMP after BMP just going straight into the minefield it doesn't seem that unbelievable to me

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Yes they sacrificed a lot but they can afford to take manpower losses in these proportions
      Except they can't.

      It can't, less than a million russians a year turn 18

      They dont have a high population. Its only 120million. They are taking insane and unsustainable losses atm.

      >muh loooses

      This is cope. We already know that Wagner recruited 50,000 convicts from prisons. Literally all of them could end up as Russian 'losses' and nobody is going to give a shit about them.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Just because Russia is a demonic death cult it does not mean their recruiting pool is infinite or even that Putin will risk his ass and declare general mobilization.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        That's not something good, especially considering the state of Russian jurisprudence.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I don't know if you serious but its clearly dire. This isn't even a world war. It isn't even a war according to Putin and its clear to any sane person that Russia is fricked economically for decades hence regardless of the outcome.

        For context, even when the British Army was properly funded to fight the red army, the total strength was about 200,000. Russia already lost 150k+.

        Russia lost an entire army's worth of men and equipment in a conflict against little Ukraine, for no gain. NATO hasnt even in their words, "raised their eyebrows". If Russians had any backbone, they would hang Putin several times over just on that record alone.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >and the next town after
          They still haven't taken Bahkmut yet, and are even possibly being counter attacked and encircled. So 'taking Bahkmut and the next town then rolling forward 150k' isn't exactly simple.
          The most likely fallout will be Russians carry on dying around Bahkmut and then Ukriane counters when they feel its right and the exhausted survivors rout.
          Russia has been claiming ammo and manpower shortages on its side for a month now you can see it coming.

          >but they can afford to take manpower losses in these proportions
          Can they? I'm not sure they can. The Russia of today is not the Russia of WW2. Yes they have a high population, but do they have capable, physically fit young men willing to fight in this war?

          I think you underestimate how much Russians give a frick about casualties. Especially when they're getting ride of their prison population by just pouring it into Ukraine. Like this shit is pretty normal before every war just turned into a glorified police operation like Afghanistan and Iraq.
          Westoids really don't understand Russian doctrine, they can only look at it through a Western casualty sensitive lens where even the loss of a single tank is a near catastrophe that shakes the foundation of their military. Yeah Russia tried their ebin 'Rush B' strategy at the start and got fricked up, but now they've gone back to their classic. Massive artillery spam that Ukraine doesn't really have an answer to.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >Massive artillery spam that Ukraine doesn't really have an answer to.
            Counter-arty and tanks, simple as.

            What you don't understand is that numbers don't matter nearly as much anymore. You need the logistics and weapons to equip and feed and clothe your soldiers, and Russia has none of that.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >What you don't understand is that numbers don't matter nearly as much anymore.

              But they do. Russia has an industrial economy, even if its 'worse' than the Western ones. The West can barely supply Ukraine with anything. The Western military industrial complex isn't built for industrial warfare any more. Like yeah, you can get the Raytheon Ultrashell2000 that costs $100,000 each but they can only make 50 a year or whatever.

              >I think you underestimate how much Russians give a frick about casualties.
              No. I don't. I just believe you overestimate their ability to replace casualties with effective front line troops.

              >I just believe you overestimate their ability to replace casualties with effective front line troops.

              From what I can see, apart from a few high profile humiliations, most of their losses are going to be Donbabwean milita and Wagner prisoner cannon fodder

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >I think you underestimate how much Russians give a frick about casualties.
            No. I don't. I just believe you overestimate their ability to replace casualties with effective front line troops.

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >15th Bahkmut thread today, thinly veiled Vatnig gloating and justification

    Something tells me that something big has happened.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I'm not a vatnig I support Ukraine but I try to view this from objective pov not rose tinted glasses

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      They had their own shaed day only that ukrane atcualy hit the oil bases where it hurts

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Don't forget their AA had a 0% interception rate.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Have you missed all the airstrikes on Russian oil depots overnight?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        yeah i have, do you have videos? i like explosions.

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    But the city isn't even surrounded yet?

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Reminder that Mariupol lasted 2 months after being completely surrounded.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Mariupol had the steel plant bunkers which were immune to artillery fire
      idk if Bakhmut has anything like that, once its surrounded it will be barraged from all sides with nowhere to go

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >idk if Bakhmut has anything like that
        Every Soviet city has something like that. One of the lessons the Soviet Union learned from Volgagrad.

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Yes they sacrificed a lot but they can afford to take manpower losses in these proportions
    Except they can't.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Prove it, troon.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Russia is already having to pull out WW2 weapons to arm its soldiers with and they still haven't been able to push forward. At this point even if they tried to conscript more soldiers theyd all be wasted anyways since without winter clothes or food or weapons they'll just freeze to death or surrender to the Ukies.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      This.

      Not only is Russia losing all of it's young people in this conflict due to death/injuries, but the ones with half a brain has already left the country. Yeah it's not gonna be great for Ukraine either but they atleast have some sort of Marshal Plan/EU Gibs dangling above them when the war is finished which could have a baby boom impact similar to WW2, with also alot of Ukrainians returning. I don't see how Russia could turn this around, especially as all of it's industries and state apparatuses have been hollowed out for military investments and yachts with an aging leadership and no clear ideology other than "frick HATO".

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Russia can absolutely afford losses more than Ukraine can. People do all kinds of mental gymnastics cope on here to avoid accepting the fact that if it comes to attritional warfare, the country with 140 million people has the advantage over the one with 40 million

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >the country with 140 million people has the advantage over the one with 40 million
        Except the country with 140 million people only has the resources to arm maybe a couple million, while tens of millions of people in the country of 40 million can be armed as supplies flow in.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Russia can absolutely afford losses more than Ukraine can
        Nope.
        Ukraine has a larger manpower pool to pull from than Russia does.
        I'm sorry but it is true.
        >b--b-b-but muh 140 million ;~~*(
        Nope.
        Ukraine's sovereign debt and economy is being underwritten and guaranteed by the west. Yes. I know. The bombs and the tanks get all the attention, but the REAL aid is financial.

        Always has been. Always will be.

        Russia doesn't have that. They don't have anyone. Which means they need their men to produce products, services, and still maintain healthy levels of internal consumption. Can't do that if the men are fleeing with their wives to parts unknown to avoid mobilization (as some millions already have), or becoming a casualty of war in some Ukrainian backwater (as some hundreds of thousands already have).
        Russia's handling of men as entirely expendable is a habit as antiquated as the weeping explosives they're pulling out of storage, and both are about equally stable long term.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          *thinking*

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            lol the russian economy is already crippled for generations after one year of sanctions.African economies can grow as well but there is still a technological hiatus between them and the developed world.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            I trust rosstat

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >"The sanctions will not hurt us! Our ruble is strong!"
            >proceeds to lose 6% of their GDP in a single year
            >proceeds to drop even further

            Forgone growth is also a loss Ivan. You were on track to grow by 3% in 2022 and you dropped by at least 3% instead. Also, leave the Brits alone, they thought it would be smart to leave the EU. It's like making fun of a downie for being a downie, it's not their fault that they are the way they are.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Sanctions are also mowing Russia's reserves at a dangerous rate, even more so when oil sanctions start to bite.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Russia's economy is expected to see positive growth next year, unlike Britain's.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Russia's economy is expected to see positive growth next year
                By who

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Global south economies are expected to grow more than Russia. See where that logic leads you

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Equipment will attrition must faster than manpower. Long before manpower becomes an issue for either side, one of them will have run out of working trucks to bring supplies forward, and it's not gonna be Ukraine.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Yes, yeah, sure, Russian officials make up numbers here and there, election results, economic results, military numbers, covid deaths etc. HOWEVER THE POPULATION NUMBERS are 100% real. There are REALLY 140 citizens living in Russia. No way they would double count, count economic migrants from Central Asia, donbabweans and other “passport holders” etc. just to suck up to their superiors to make it look as if the plan is getting overfilled...

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    What’s that encirclement thing above Bakhmut?

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >the side that's losing ground is actually trading casualties in 1-10 ratio
    This board is such a sad sight, yeah sure dude, the side that has static defences getting pounded by artillery every minute is taking no loses

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      because bakhmut is insignificant, it's been stated time and time again, that only a small number of soldiers are actually there defending it. and russian artillery is incredibly inaccurate so they aren't hitting shit. of course there's losses still, but nowhere close to russian meat waves tactics.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        It was stated time and time again by random Black folk from /k/ literally everywhere else people think it's important, people like Zelensky
        >Ukraine is winning because of imaginary rules I made in my head
        Get a fricking grip

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          most analystis assess Bakhmut to be of no operational significance without Izium.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >because bakhmut is insignificant

        If they take bakhmut and the town after, they can move up about 150 miles before hitting the next spot thats really defensible

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >and the next town after
          They still haven't taken Bahkmut yet, and are even possibly being counter attacked and encircled. So 'taking Bahkmut and the next town then rolling forward 150k' isn't exactly simple.
          The most likely fallout will be Russians carry on dying around Bahkmut and then Ukriane counters when they feel its right and the exhausted survivors rout.
          Russia has been claiming ammo and manpower shortages on its side for a month now you can see it coming.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I still can't believe that you vatBlack folk want us to believe that the side that is entrenched and defending is losing more soldiers than those who have been constantly attacking with human waves with marginal gains for over 6 months.

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Ukraine got encircled in Bakhmut pssst doesn't matter because I made it up in my mind that Russia lost 8 soldiers per Ukranian killed and also that the city is not important, your move vatnigs !?!?!?!
    This board has devolved into NO U arguments

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      got encircled in Bakhmut
      May we see it?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Ukraine is trading 1-10
        May I see it? Provide a source that shows a third party going to Ukraine and individually iding and counting every corpse or stfu

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >a third party going to Ukraine
          You'll have to wait for the post-war period to get anything remotely resembling like that. And they won't be standing around counting corpses (who knows what the elements and animals will have done by then) but rather looking over documentation.
          So, not immediately post-war either. It will probably takes years of pouring over documents from the Kremlin after they unconditionally surrender to grasp the full scale of their depravity.

          Till then, we merely have to make due with speculation and the scare (but regular) video evidence we have.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            So the side that is more active in twitter is winning ? Damn son that's some logic

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >So the side that is more active in twitter is winning ? Damn son that's some logic
              No, it's youtube and telegram you goyslop slurping troony.

              I know you don't have a farther but DO try and pretend someone raised you well, ok?

              Z!

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >sperge poasting about homosexual fantasy fictions
                (You) have nothing to contribute here. Bye.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          I don't have exact numbers but here you go
          https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64685428
          https://www.ft.com/content/d759e24b-dd48-4adc-a0ae-7e53b89e5231

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            I have a mossad report that claims the opposite of your "third party" sources from countries that literally train Ukrainian troops inside their borders but ok

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Post it then.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              it's not a mossad report though. moron.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Nah you have a Turkish article claiming a Mossad source with no evidence. We live in the digital age check your sources.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                And you have anglo american articles quoting Ukrainian sources with no evidence
                Your ridiculous propaganda sources can be countered by ridiculous propaganda sources

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Except those are credible and high-fidelity sources while yours are schizo bloggers or plain russian lies. It's no surprise russians don't have a concept of absolute truth, everything must be fabricate by the autocrat in order for them to eat.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >My American propaganda is a trustworthy source unlike johnny foreigner propaganda
                Have you ever considered you believe that because you're under the effects of said propaganda?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                No because I'm not American and also because I live in a free country and have a rational soul that can grasp reality as it is, objectively, and assess what is credible and what is not.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                If you are from the anglosphere you're American, you don't have an independent culture or geopolitical stance
                If you are from western Europe you're heavily under American influence to various degrees depending on which country
                If you are from anywhere else frick off shitskin

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >If you are from western Europe you're heavily under American influence to various degrees depending on which country
                That still doesn't contest the fact that I live in a free country and possess rational faculties that allow to discern what is credible, and the sources I quoted are reputed nor just in Western Europe but elsewhere, mostly because it is not a matter of opinion but actual military intelligence. If you live in a totalitarian regime like Russia information is bound to be twisted to serve the regime.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >that I live in a free country and possess rational faculties that allow to discern what is credible
                I wonder what's the official stance of your beloved newspapers when asked the question "how many genders exist" and I'm sure they don't make up propaganda that aligns with the interests of western oligarchs at all
                You're like a little baby

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >I wonder what's the official stance of your beloved newspapers when asked the question "how many genders exist"
                Lol that's the thing, newspapers don't have "oficial stances", they either publish opinion pieces and it's worth what it's worth depending on who wrote it or the quality of the content, or they cite experts on a matter which was the case with military intelligence.
                The fact that you think that newspapers have official stances and that expertise isn't a factor goes to show you probably live in a totalitarian regime where everything is muddled.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Ok link me an opinion piece published in the BBC where they question the number of casualties in the Holocaust
                I'll be waiting

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                We need to permanently ban every /misc/ user.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Uh ? You said glorious western newspapers don't have official stances so surely there is an opinion article about Holocaust revisionism, go fetch it

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I wasn't that anon, I'm just calling you fricking moronic.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Braindead take

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I don't care about the opinion of some random, read what actual historians have to say.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >If you are from the anglosphere you're American, you don't have an independent culture or geopolitical stance

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >vatnik telegram bloggers are the only people on the planet who have any idea of what's going on
                Whatever, frickwit.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Not even, it's a Turkish article taking info from an Iranian blog claiming to have leaked Mossad numbers.

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    you morons do realize there is no more than 5000 Ukrainian troops in the city right? Even if all of them end up encircled, which is very unlikely, this would change nothing.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      5k well trained well equipped soldiers is a lot
      unlike Russians, Ukrainians value every single life
      losing 5k is a blow to morale as well

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        yeah sure but russians make it sound like half the Ukrainian army is defending that city which is laughable. Sure having all of those troops encircled would be bad but come on, how many troops Ukraine fields in total now, 300k?

  13. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >trapped in the city
    Russia hasn't trapped a sizable amount of Ukrainians since Mariupol. What makes you think they will do it here?

  14. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It's worth just for the crazy /k/ope we are gonna see here

  15. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Actually Ukraine losing Bakhmut and having 5k (According to pro Ukraine analysts) troops encircled is a good thing because Ukranians killed 10 Russians for every loss (According to the Kyiv independent) so why worry?

  16. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    There's not even like any
    >ok relax relax, we have the xxth army ready to go, watch this we'll attempt a pocket
    shit. It's just
    >blyat send another 200 men
    >men with no bulges? amazing, the troops won't want to rape them

    It's all bewildering to me tbh.

  17. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >shitton of Ukrainians trapped in the city
    Not really. Bakhmut started out with 70-75K population 8 months ago. As of last week it was down to under 5000, possibly under 4000. The Ukies have been aggressively trying to evacuate everyone they can for almost the entire offensive. The place is basically a gravel pit now without any utilities, no water, electricity, stores. What little food & supplies are brought in as humanitarian aid by the Ukies.

    The very last few holdouts are ancient pensioners with nowhere to go and no resources left, plus a handful of diehard vatBlack folk who are eagerly awaiting the vatBlack person "liberation" when it finally arrives. France24 has a couple of reporters embedded there and they've been broadcasting the destruction every week, interviewing the people who have stayed.

    "At the end of the day," there's nothing left to take. vatBlack folk have dumped a couple hundred thousand rounds of artillery into the city and there's nothing remaining.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      What?
      Why are you randomly bringing up civies into the conversation?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        How many Ukie soldiers are in Bakhmut? Be specific, cite your sources.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Answer the question you were asked schizo, but anyways
          Ukraine says 5k
          Russia says 20k
          So the real number is right in the middle

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >So the real number is right in the middle
            I really dislike how people always assume this is the case
            if you owe me $10 and I say you owe me $50k you don't suddenly owe me $25k

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Ukraine has an incentive to lie but there is a limit on how much they can exaggerate
              Russia has an incentive to lie but there is a limit on how much they can exaggerate
              So the middle ground is the closest to reality you will ever get, first war ?

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            I did answer the question, and (You) have nothing.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        the topic is
        >shitton of Ukrainians trapped in the city
        > "Ukrainians trapped"
        What do you think is going on here? Why are you trying to move the goal posts?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Bro you understand that when people say a city is encircled and that Ukrainians are trapped they don't mean civilians right?are you high?

  18. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Yes they sacrificed a lot but they can afford to take manpower losses in these proportions and Ukraine can't
    Ukraine can conscript a whole country while Russia will cause a civil war if they start conscripting people from Moscow

  19. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Here is your unbiased objective professional free thinking independent western media reporting FACTS from reliable Ukrainian sources bro

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *