Technically exactly what happened. Despite both numerical and hardware advantage, Russian forces literally flattened portions of the city in order to advance. And for some reason they also gave up on attempts to envelop it.
AFU also flattened portions of the city to defend it, since they couldn't be having the Russians taking certain buildings.
So as the battle has gone on, both attackers and defenders have had to take buildings out, causing a more sparse spread between certain buildings. It also means there's less to hold at one time, for both sides.
>Why take it when the ukrainians were content with being shelled from three directions
So Russia has not advanced into Bakhmut and still kept Ukrainians in the pocket, right?
Nah, this is the end
We don't know how much it cost each side, so i won't even bother to take a guess who 'won'
One thing that's strange to me is Ukrainians launching unblocking offensive only after city pretty much fell.
Which makes me believe it was to enable Ukr defenders to withdraw.
If they did it like 3 months ago, maybe bahmut wouldn't fall after all
The one we're Soviet union had 15:1 manpower overmatch and were forced to forget their initial plans of installing communist government in Helsinki because of atrocious losses
Russia literally built its army to take on all of NATO at once. That means taking on their navy, their air force, their armoured battalions, their artillery (both conventional and missile) and their infantry. Yet they cannot even prevail against a nation that has been given small arms and a few surplus vehicles.
How was Russia meant to take on all of NATO? Would it be totally different because they'd be prepared for it? I dunno. I know the vatnik cope and all is to say Russia is fighting all of NATO and therefore we're doing great, but you know it isn't true and we know it isn't true. If Russia was so powerful they'd attack Poland to prevent the supplies coming through, raise their eyebrows and NATO would cover before the bear. Instead they don't and just keep threatening people they'll do something if X happens. How many times have they said >If you give X we'll do Y
And nothing happens? Now the UK is going to hand over F-16's they're buying to Ukraine and train them. Nothing has happened.
Russia didn't, the USSR + Warsaw Pact did but this is a common area of confusion on both sides really.
Back in the Cold War we used to look at European units and they'd tell you how many hours they could stall the advance before they'd become overwhelmed. The game would be to try to stop them until America could arrive (if they were ever going to). I seem to remember the Army of the Rhine were rated at 16 hours max.
It seems very hard to move on from the belief that the Warsaw Pact no longer exists, and that Russia isn't the USSR and Russia isn't even Russia in its old form. Personally I think from a defence POV communism with all its problems produced a more effective force than the kleptocratic corruption of a Mafia state.
The "X weeks" lifespan for units in western Europe was based on yom kippur war
In which 3000 vehicles were destroyed, and several hundreds more damaged, in the course of a month
NATO had about 3000 vehicles placed forward to repel the soviet attack
So all were expected to be replaced over a few weeks of fighting
While high attrition rates were unavoidable, take all claims with a grain of salt
The claim was made by dupuy who is criticised for an overly statistical analysis of combat, trying to boil war down to numbers like its warhammer
Because the West isn't involved directly in the war? What kind of question is this? If Russia was weathering 1000+ F-35's, F-22's, Eurofighters, Tornados, Rafaels and armoured columns of M1A2-3's, Leopard 2A6's, Challenger 2's, Leclercs and weathering the storm from 13 aircraft carriers (plus other carriers), dozens of submarines, destroyers, frigates and the artillery and missiles from ground (and air) launched systems then sure, yeah, you could argue that Russia is doing well.
Except none of this is happening. None of those weapons are even in the fight.
Vatnik shills are delusional and do not understand the true power of NATO even without the US.
If Europe really went to war against Russia, this time we would reach the Urals without nukes involved.
Who did Fagner ever hammer besides one of their own guys, leading to such a drop in recruitment that they had to pretend it was just a mock execution
Quite a pathetic thing to gloat over
>were probably not worth it
What do you mean probably? It wasn't. There is no economic benefit for capturing it. There is no strategic benefit for capturing it. The only benefit is political. Technically there is a claim that Wagner gets a massive bonus from Russia if they captured it but I am sure if that was true then they won't pay it after the shit Priggy has done.
Pic related isn't Bakhmut but you call controlling this 'probably not' worth it? You can say 'it wasn't worth it - at all'.
>we fought a righteous war against all the world >they outnumbered us 100 to one >we slaugthered billions, but they kept coming >in the end we were defeatet
We're getting closer to the end aren't we. This cope has a sense of finality to it.
I like how the early war cope of >It's taking awhile because they don't want to destroy infrastructure, Russia is humane compared to the USA!
morphed into >It's taking awhile because we're fighting every military in the world!
I always find these kind of images weird. When you have Wagner admitting they're losing 5-10 times as many men as Ukraine is to advance in Bakhmut, it is implying that it is the other way round.
58264634 >30 y/o+ leftovers from the Cold War various Western countries found in the attic >SEE WE'RE BATTLING ALL OF NATO EVERYWHERE ALL AT ONCE
No (you) for you, troll.
By your logic, the British were involved in the American Civil War because they provided weapons, equipment and support to both sides. Or they were involved in the Ruso-Ottoman War because they ended up getting control of Cyprus. Etc.
>30-40 year old military surplus from the west
Imagine fancying yourself the second army of the world and losing to that
And vatnigs thought they could take on the entirety of NATO, literally fucking pathetic.
All those ammount to less than 10% of the annual nato budget though.
You aren’t fighting all of nato, you’re fighting a poor European backwater armed with some leftovers.
what is this new shilling material even?
The reason a lot of Ukrainians thought life was better under communism is because boomers lived in the golden age of communism and witnessed the fall of the Soviet Union.
Do you have any idea what Eastern Europe was like in the late 90s and early 2000s?
Just to be clear I fucking hate commies, but this is just basic reason
[...] >Russia is the biggest Slavic cutural powerhouse
Ballett, public defecation and T-I-G-E-R-S does not a culture make, N-I-G-G-E-R.
Vodka and Russia speak are a lot more common than anything east or south Slavs have. There is a good chance that your average mutt doesn't even know what a Sloven is?
The thing with red lines and nooklear threats is that if people keep crossing them and you don't actually do anything except seethe impotently people will stop taking you seriously.
first, ukraine 100% giggle fucked russia hard as shit in the last 24 hours which is why we're getting all these "bakhmut has falled!" posts like they haven't been trying to meme it into reality for the last 6 months.
that said nato wouldn't do it. too many chinese business partners aka too much money at stake, we're too comfortable as the collective west to want that suffering either. the un/nato would winge about diplomacy and upsetting the status quo and conventional supplies would be upped even more to ukraine. military leaders would get sidelined by bureaucrats and the moment would pass them by. every government on the globe would be shitting itself hoping the russian's nuclear chimpout would just blow over, and it will, but it'll also change the dynamic between nuclear powers when they go to war with non-nuclear powers especially the smaller ones and especially especially iran and israel. nuclear defense pacts would be worth less than the paper they're written on - kind of like they already are
Not a single NATO unit fights in Ukraine, you need your medication FAST, schizo.
The 40-year-old tech a few sovereign countries have given out of pity has still managed to stop the whole russian army. This is as amazing as it is horrible, all those russian lives lost because of the paranoid schizophrenic NATO-related delusions of the illegal Moscow terrorist regime.
>he still believes in the Russia has functional nukes and Western air defences are weak memes
lmao, quit being demoralized
we are winning handsomely, give yourself a lift little fella
>w-what >the rest of the world would see very dimly indeed on nuclear strikes? >I-I-I'll just NOOK them as well >NOOK THEM ALL
You are literally, figuratively a small, autistic, mokey child.
China has a nuclear umbrella treaty with Ukraine. This means they have to nuke Russia in return. >t-t-they won't
So China ends up destroying their diplomatic reputation.
You are fucking retarded and have no idea what a nuclear war involves. Ignoring your ESLness, I'm not going to explain why none of what you said would happen.
Alright, since Russians seem to be insane people who will destroy all of human civilization if they don’t get their way. Putting them down seems to be only recourse to save the human race
how's that a left meme? is wanting to see russians die not against what leftists want? this is peak republican politics, years of bolstering the mic to combat the russian bear in proxy wars. i don't get it, what changed?
>is wanting to see russians die not against what leftists want? this is peak republican politics, years of bolstering the mic to combat the russian bear in proxy wars. i don't get it, what changed? >conveniently forgets 2017-2021 when a Russian agent who shit talks every world leader except Putin withdrew us from Syria leading to the resignation of General Mattis and attempted to withdraw 12,000 US troops from Germany on the eve of the largest land war in Europe in nearly a century
>thinks the price of gas isn't related to refinery capacity collapsing when everyone was locked inside home and demand fell, now oil companies are afraid of expanding when they're on the sights of environmental bills >thinks the price of groceries isn't related to the businesses that closed down and the trillions printed in the last couple of years
Yeah bro when the war stops everything will return to normal
>Russia nukes Ukraine for some retarded reason >the rest of the world removes Russias ability to use nuclear weapons, then nukes Russia, regardless of the consequences
No. You said that Russia and West would nuke cities. That isn't what happens in nuclear war. In nuclear war, one side is hoping to 'win'. Therefore to win, you target not cities (which are fucking irrelevant) but places where people launch missiles, or places where they cordinate the firing of missiles. That means missile silos and control centres.
Not. Fucking. Cities.
So, you have to fire a missile at each silo.... and then you have to make sure you destroy it, so you send another couple of missiles to make sure it does it. So you've used three nukes on one silo. Then you need to cover for interceptions, lets say 25% of them are intercepted, so you send a fourth (3 hit). But then you have to factor in failures in the missile (lets say 25% fail) so you send a fifth. Then you have to factor in missiles missing, so you send a sixth. You're now firing six nukes to remove one silo. There are 270 in US. So you're firing 1620 nukes just to try and remove the firing sites of the US. Then you've got to target their air force bases where they could launch nuclear capable bombers. Air bases aren't as well protected as nuclear silos, so lets say they only fire three per air base to cover the problems I mentioned above. So that's another 177 nukes. Then you've got to target naval bases, control centres, and that's before you even start targeting bases and stuff the US has abroad.
Now you've got to do the same to the UK, France and possibly China. So those 6,000 nukes (which we are, for this example, assume are all working and the numbers Russia says they have are true).
Now do you see why the deaths don't come from nuclear fire, but from the aftermath. Nobody in a nuclear war is targeting cities.
in recent years it has become obvious that no side is hoping to "win" in a nuclear war, or else you would see nooks in action. they are entirely for deterrence. in order to be a credible military force, your convential equipment has to be top of the line. russias nooks are mostly deployed by bombers, sometimes submarines, only a few are on actual icbms with multiple warheads. since they can't project any force, icbms are their only strategic nuclear weaponry, which severely limits their first strike capability and their ability to take out anything. if russia would go in nuclear, the response would likely be conventional and overwhelming.
therefore, their only logical choice is a massively destructive terror bombing of the largest cities in the west, after which the leadership collectively suicides and leaves russia behind as the shithole it was meant to be.
German here, if you wish to disturb peace in Europe, you have to at least do it properly. For that reason I want Russia to get BTFO'd. Absolute failure of a state, economy, military and society.
Ah yes because chernobyl is completely uninhabitable and fukoshima is glowing green currently. I don't know where you come from but it's time to go back ESL.
Nuclear 'fallout' isn't anything more than a 2-4 month problem as the halflife of the radioactive isotopes produced decay pretty rapidly to safe levels. Unless Russia, in their infinite moronism, has doped their warheads with other compounds and made less effective dirty bombs.
Soviets(and by extension Russians) have put considerable time, effort, and funding into pushing the idea nuclear war is a lose-lose for all those involved, because they know they're lacking compared to the west. >Pay western talking heads to sow panic about a single nuke killing billions/flood the earth/knock it off orbit into the sun etc etc >claim you have thousands of these magical nukes
Its always been a defensive posture.
Oh no, people with different color skin to me, aieeeee. Washington D.C has like 30% white population. So fucking what? As for the rest of your post I've just explained in some depth that nation states in a nuclear war don't target cities. What about this don't you get?
>Oh no, people with different color skin to me, aieeeee
I don't mind people with different skin color, i mind my people going literally extinct in the next couple centuries because modern society is children-adverse and the only solution our elites know to keep the ponzi scheme going is "bring the africans in"
>because modern society is children-adverse
That's not the only reason demographics are starting(and I mean STARTING, like its very miniscule damage at the moment), it's because sperm counts have begun to decrease across the board.
The liberal fantasy of overpopulation is false.
Again, I explained, in great detail they don't target cities. I've explained this. They target control centers and places that can actually fire nuclear weapons. Again, they aren't going to bomb Chicago because it's a major population center. What about this don't you get. Please explain what you're not understanding.
I've explained just to remove the possibility of USA launching nukes from their silos will cost about 2000 nukes.
Destroying a city does not prevent the USA from firing nuclear weapons at you. I've already explained you need multiple nukes to destroy a silo (ignoring reinforced command centers) and you need multiple nukes to cover failures, missing the target, failure to launch etc etc. YOU DON'T HAVE THE NUKES TO WASTE ON A FUCKING CITY. THE CITY DOES NOT STOP THE OPPONENT FROM FIRING NUKES AT YOU. IF YOU CANNOT FIRE NUKES AT YOUR OPPONENT AND THEY CAN FIRE NUKES AT YOU. THEY WIN. BECAUSE THEY THEN CAN GO 'WE HAVE DESTROYED YOUR ABILITY TO LAUNCH NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND NOW WE CAN TARGET WHAT WE WANT'.
WHAT ABOUT THIS DO YOU NOT GET. NOBODY IS GOING TO TARGET CITIES BECAUSE CITIES DO NOT PREVENT THE NATION FIRING NUKES AT YOU AND IF YOU DO NOT HAVE NUKES YOU ARE EFFECTIVELY DEFEATED IN THIS SCENARIO.
What the fuck do you think they're going to destroy missile silos which are 30 fucking metres deep behind reinforced materials? They're designed to RESIST FUCKING NUKES. You think a regular missile is going to do shit to it?
How retarded are you? Seriously? Like, not even memeing, this isn't PrepHole haha you're retarded, this is actual concern for another human being. Have you been tested?
they're still for deterrence. there is no strategic nuclear war. mobile icbms launchers, subs, bombers with capable weaponry and so on make it impossible to use anything against them (other than conventional means). as a result, you cannot win a nuclear engagement even if you have the first strike.
>Shit I never fucking said
Yes you did. You said that 'we would all die' and I explained in great depth that nobody is targeting cities with nukes. You then said >Yes the fuck they would there is no reason not to target city's it destroys logistics I don't think you understand the scale of nuclear weapons
Which is you stating they will use a nuclear weapon on the city.
The rest of your post is retarded. There are multiple papers and research on this topic. The fact you said '8000k' is proof of your retardedness. The fact you think they won't target silos is also retarded. Targeting cities does do nothing to win the war.
You are a retard. Sorry.
they're still for deterrence. there is no strategic nuclear war. mobile icbms launchers, subs, bombers with capable weaponry and so on make it impossible to use anything against them (other than conventional means). as a result, you cannot win a nuclear engagement even if you have the first strike.
Except in this scenario he said that Russia nukes because Ukraine steps foot on Crimea. Which people replied >You're retarded
And then he said >WE WILL ALL DIEEEEEE IF UKRAINE DOES THAAAAAT!
As for 'you cannot win' you most certainly can. You will never remove all possible launch vectors but that doesn't matter. If your opponent only has 60 nuclear weapons to fire, that is infinitely better than 6000. People will die yes, but not 'all of us'. The entire combined nuclear weapon arsenal in the world isn't enough to destroy all of USA.
but destroying the nuclear arsenal of the enemy while depleting your own still does nothing for you. you still need a conventional response, you need to take out the leadership of other country, you need to occupy or otherwise defeat it. it's not just going to fall over after you depleted your arsenal and they have depleted theirs. and this is why russia cannot engage in nuclear warfare - there is no conventional military to back it up, which is why i'm sure that russias would only use nooks to kill as many people as possible and then get rekt. you're so anally hyperfocused on the nuclear shit that you forget that the real power is the conventional military, the force you can project, the force that can occupy, defeat and shape a country.
>They’ve all but captured bahkmut, with tech from the 60s
That’s because their tech from the 2000s, 90s, 80s, and 70s has run out to such an extent they have nothing left. Russia are digging deep into their reserves to pull out functioning vehicles and weapons, while Ukraine are getting 2000s era reinforcements from NATO.
The only thing is, we haven’t seen the Bradley’s or Leopards or Abrams in Bahkmut yet, so Ukraine must be saving them for some grand offensive - Possibly. The future course of the war will be decided by how successful Ukraines use of the new equipment is. They fail, and NATO probably won’t give them much more. They have a great success, and Russia will really be in trouble.
Zelensky seems to be waiting to get F16s before he launches an attack, but he might not get them.
Wait and see.
the window for a counter offensive is from now to october. The climate is then too difficult and also the mud to do anything.
This summer fighting might be intense
doesn't matter what front they die at, russia is aiming for the destruction of the ukrainian identity and they will displace, kill or otherwise suppress every display of ukrainian culture if they get their will.
Doesn't matter. Bakhmut is an irrelevant village with no strategic importance.
Did something even happen there? Who knows...
You must be a Russian bot or something.
Russia hasn't Bakhmut, and even Prigozhin when he claimed they had acknowledged this.
>In his latest video claiming control of Bakhmut, Mr Prigozhin says "no-one can pedantically reproach us for the fact that at least some piece was not taken".
Lol >We took it >But not really >It doesn't matter that we didn't take all of it
https://i.imgur.com/SvXex6B.png
Doesn't matter. Bakhmut is an irrelevant village with no strategic importance.
Did something even happen there? Who knows...
You must be a Russian bot or something.
You are a retarded moronbrain moron. Russian still hasn't taken Bakhmut
The entire nuclear reserve have a pittance of energy compared to natural phenomena. Take a volcanic eruption, a natural and common event which spews out cubic kilometers of dust into the air, you couldn't replicate that with nukes. The most dangerous and disruptive effect of a full scale nuclear exchange wouldn't be explosions, radiation, nuclear winter or anything like that, but the total chaos and logistical disruptions of losing such a large amount of people suddenly.
So apparently they are throwing even the forces previously stationed in southern Ukraine just to get that last 8% captured, and Russians are getting blasted by Himars and whatnot while trying to relocate there.
Jesus fuck, what a blackhole of a meatgrinder.
Any definition of "white" that includes chechens also includes Arabs, Indians and garden gnomes, yes.
Plenty of more exclusionary definitions only limit the category to Europeans and some of them limit it to only Europeans of Germanic and Gaelic ancestry.
>Any definition of "white" that includes chechens also includes Arabs, Indians and garden gnomes, yes. >indians >white
Why are you so adamant about the definition of whiteness should also includes Indians? You are not a Pajeet, are you?
I'm not adamant about anything.
It's just a simple fact that if you expand the definition to the point of making it near-meaningles then yes, it will include all Aryans and some closely connected groups.
And if you narrow it down to near-uselessness it will exclude arbitrary groups like the Irish or Italians.
I just think its really, REALLY funny that its taken over a year to complete a day 1 objective and that a dude posting a cat on PrepHole managed to mind break ziggers.
>russia >European
HAHAHAHAHHAAH! Russians arr not really European. Its like a weird admixture of asian and European much like latin Americans are. >t.russian
Yea, russia will never be white. Also, "ethnic russians" are not a accurate representation of white. Russians do not have the same system of Americans where they take everything into race. For example, pic related is a "ethnic russian".
>fundings are imediate
Anon, they couldn't even take the town when the fundings haven't even arrived. You have a narrow understanding of how fundings works in a war.
You're obviously talking to a le epic troll but just so you know: Next time, you should bring up the time they threw the Russians out of Kyiv before any of that muh funding was even on the table
Be prepared to hear from brown people how they were "stabbed in the back" for the next 20 years when eventually the whole russian house of cards collapses.
>he thinks the whole country getting a one-time transfer of cold war leftovers is equivalent to Germany or France spending dozens of billions every single year
But that wasn't the point, we're talking Bakhmut.
the US took Baghdad in 6 days. Six.
>Anon its been over a year they got all the funding by month 3, and its not all out war for Russia they have other fronts to defend
You bumbling retard. Fundings fo not cause an immediate effect. It takes years for fundings to have a full effect, not to mention a partial one.
>Iraq was the 4th largest military in the world
They had cold war era shit the us had howitzers and abrams tanks with the support of about 50 country's
Anon, majority of the coalition was U.S. forces. The fact that the U.S. was able to get a coalition, even if it miniscules compared to actual U.S. forces is pretty damming if you compared to the amount of support that russia gets. The U.S. was able to effectively destroy the 4th largest military with little effort and minimal casualties(despite the projecting casualties being in the 100k).
yeah because it was fucking iraq they had nowhere near the equipment than the us had not to mention sadum was a fucking retard
>They had cold war era shit
So just like Ukraine?
No ukraine has gotten over 60billion in gibs thats more than Germany or France
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Yes, 60 billion worth of cold war equipment
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>yeah because it was fucking iraq they had nowhere near the equipment than the us had not to mention sadum was a fucking retard
They had the 4th largest military in the world. America was able to destroy them TWICE with little effort. Ukraine is barely in the top 20.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>4th largest military in the world
Yeah because they were a bunch of sand morons armed with aks that dipped in two weeks because the command was shattered
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Anon, they literally just got out of a war.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
10 year war which literally involved trench warfare, chemical weapons, and near "Bro, wtf?" levels of insanity.
Need I mention the Marshes and how they made "roads" with bodies and lye.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>trench warfare
Which America fortunately didn't get to that point. Attritional warfare is the last thing you want in a modern war and America was treating iraq as its peer.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>"The decision to give Iraq the military edge was universal. Not only the Soviet Union, but the entire Western alliance,[clarification needed] largely financed by conservative Arab states, engaged in the most comprehensive and massive arms transfer in history to a Third World state engaged in conflict (...) The 'Western package' for Iraq, however, paled in comparison with the Soviets'. Between 1986 and 1988, the Soviets delivered to Iraq arms valued at roughly $8.8 to $9.2 billion, comprising more than 2,000 tanks (including 800 T-72s), 300 fighter aircraft, almost 300 surface-to-air missiles (mostly Scud Bs) and thousands of pieces of heavy artillery and armored personnel vehicles.
iraq got a shit ton of gibs too especially in terms of aircraft and tanks compared to ukraine
Anon, the soviet union had to change its doctrine and military strategy after the gulf war. They literally panicked because americans were destroying their shit with little effort to the point of changing their minds on how their doctrine and equipment works. The t-90 was named tge t-90 because of how bad of a reputation the gulf war left on the t-72
I dont know what this has to do with anything ukraine and iraq arent the same and never were
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Iraq had the 4th largest military in the world. They were 4th in power while Ukraine was barely between 10-40.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Number don't mean everything in terms of power
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
This. That's why Ukraine can so easily kill Russians at a 10:1 ratio. If you're too fucking retarded to use any tactics or equipment, you're gonna get slaughtered
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>kill Russians at a 10:1 ratio
Once you stop sucking off ukraine we can let you come back down to reality
Nobody is comparing Ukraine to Iraq Anon. Your reading comprehension is very poor.
My point was that the us invading iraq is not the same is Russia invading Ukraine
Iraq was also on the other side of the globe, while Ukraine is literally on Russia's border. USA was also invading Afghanistan, a landlocked nation.
Russia is still bad at war, and was a massive welfare queen during WW2.
>Iraq was also on the other side of the globe
Isreal and kuwait is not far from iraq anon
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Once you stop sucking off ukraine
Wait but I think they have superior equipment because of HATO giving them a higher military budget than Germany, and numbers don't matter? So are you saying that despite all that, the Russians are overwhelming them with a positive casualty ratio?
So numbers matter after all?
I know you're just suffering from cognitive dissonance anon, no more (you)s
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
The ratio is probably 1to1 if not a bit more in the Russians favor because of war crimes
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Isreal and kuwait is not far from iraq anon
Is Israel and kuwait America's homefront? No, it is not and its difficult to supply troops across the globe.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I wonder if post-war Russia would have gotten its shit together if they built their armed forces around overseas deployments like the US did in WW2. Being forced to deal with logistics like that is a big part of why American equipment is so good
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Is Israel and kuwait America's homefront
Yes it actually is anon they already had troops there because of the Gulf War and isreal is an us colony (or the other way around really)
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>having troops in another country means its a home front
No, retard. That doesn't mean anything because america still has to dupply troops there across the globe. Do you think america has a teleportation device in those countries?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>isreal
you need to go back
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Iraq was also on the other side of the globe, while Ukraine is literally on Russia's border. USA was also invading Afghanistan, a landlocked nation.
Russia is still bad at war, and was a massive welfare queen during WW2.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Nobody is comparing Ukraine to Iraq Anon. Your reading comprehension is very poor.
>fundings are immediate
Those "fundings" are fixed valued and they are not immediate changes. In order to have a complete effect, the "fixed value" will have to be an annual one. 100 billion in 1 year is nothing compared to 100 billion in each year for the past 10 years. A year ago, Ukraine's budget was barely over 7-10 billion.
Most of the NATO equipment hasn't even reached Bakhmut yet bar maybe some small arms. I have yet to see any footage of Leopards or Challengers in that area.
Why didn't Russia take the shithole Kyiv? That push was long before the one time donation of 60bn to fight an invading country with a permanent budget of over 80bn
Ukraine didn't have the 60bn in HATO equipment when Russia pushed for Kyiv. You claimed that the US could easily conquer a shithole cause they had far superior equipment
Russia had far superior equipment when they pushed for the shithole they wanted. Why didn't it work?
Unless you're gonna claim Ukraine had better equipment at that time already, in which case I'm gonna reiterate the question, why did Russia attack then?
>Holy shit I already addressed
Yes, you did. Here's how that exact argument went down >Russia had equipment superiority, why didn't they capture the shithole Kyiv? >because they didn't use all their troops >nor did the US, what's different here? >Russia's equipment is shit because US equipment is better >but Ukraine didn't have that equipment yet, so why couldn't Russia capture Kyiv? >I already adressed this
We are going in circles because you have two arguments (not using all their troops, inferior equipment) and are randomly flipflopping between them
I think overall we have established that Russia has no chance of winning this conflict, because according to you numbers don't matter and their equipment is absolutely dogshit
Have a nice day
Yes because its true Russia did not use all of there equipment or there troops I dont even think kyiv was an objective because if they really wanted to they could just slam troops near belrus and taken it
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>I dont even think kyiv was an objective
So the riot control units of OMON in the first wave were there just for shits and giggles?
Damn, russia really does suck as a country.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Which is exactly what they tried to do.
You ziggers really memoryhole your failures.
>aids is mostly from drugs
That may have been the case at first but Russia quite literally has community transition of HIV.
In the rest of the world the only people who are urged to get tested for hiv regularly are druggies and men who have sex with men. In Russia every sexually active person is at risk.
So let's say Russians actually managed to take Buckmutt. What next? What strategic value does it provide? What are they gonna do about all the other fortified cities? Can they take those? Do they have the manpower and equipment?
>What strategic value does it provide?
It would have given them a nice resupply and artillery position 9 months ago to launch further offensives
Now, it's literally just sunk costs. And the vatmorons think the Ukrainian side considers it just as important because we've been laughing about it for all that time
I mean for ukies its was limiting the destruction caused by russian and fagner forces so you chould say it held some strategic point there plus it took russian assault brunt force of it so it did its job like 4-5 months ago and now ukies are surounding it themselves so id say good luck vatniks
Anon was asking about the strategic value for Russia but yeah >I mean for ukies its was limiting the destruction caused by russian
Absolutely. If your goal is to quickly dig a trench to slow down the enemy advance while you prepare better defensive positions, and they keep throwing soldiers right into your machine gun for some fucking reason, you don't abandon that trench
>What strategic value does it provide?
Every day I'm reminded more and more than a vast majority of PrepHole did not know that Ukraine existed prior to this war.
>whoa, people don't know about the surrounding geography and infrastructure of a random town in east Ukraine
do you at least get paid for lörs opinions?
>What strategic value does it provide?
This has been going on for over half a year and only now does your tiny little brain catch up with the idea to ask this question?
for russia, the strategic value at this point is their desperation for any symbolic win as you can see from the shill spergout
for ukraine, it keeps the fighting contained away from the next city on the line
Bakhmut is a major logistics center for cuckrainians. Low strategic value, but a huge blow. But Ukrainians lost 20-30k(!) people, including the best (Nazi battalions like a Kraken and Special Operations Forces)
>"Logistics center"
For what? The only remaining road in Bakhmut leads out of it. The only Ukrainian troops that could be supplied from there are the ones inside the city itself. Whatever supplies that were previously kept there will have been used up in 11 months of fighting. What does Russia gain other than a crossroads they won't be able to advance from?
Bakhmut is pure politics for the Vatniks. And even if they capture the city, the Ukrainians can blow it up with high-yield explosives and then crush the Russian flanks.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Seriously PrepHole, why let Russia have the ruins? Just blow up the city with the Russians inside of it, lol.
>Zelensky says that there will be no Bakhmut - there will be no Ukraine >sends the best to death at the cost of tens of thousands of corpses >oinkranians record songs with the names "Bakhmut Fortress", pointing to the symbolism and significance
Nice copium, cuckditor, kek
>Its not the homefront but they had all they needed the take over a shithole in a few days
Anon, it takes more effort to consistently keep those troops supplied while also being across the globe. Its not a homefront by any metric.
Like I said ukraine got over 60 billion in funding more than France and for Russia its not an all out war
>muh fundings
Fundings are not an immediate effect, especially if they are equipment. It takes years for fundings to take effect as long as they are annual.
>for russia, the strategic value at this point is their desperation for any symbolic win as you can see from the shill spergout
for ukraine, it keeps the fighting contained away from the next city on the line
I wouldn't, I've been wondering too why Zoylensky kept sending "his" people in the meat grinder for 9 months straight. How nice of him to dedicate all that manpower and equipment into what is essentially nothing.
>Like Zelenskyy did a couple weeks ago 🙂
which was that without bakhmut the fighting would move to kramatorsk and slovyansk, and putin would have a symbolic win to sell to his supporters
https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/20/europe/bakhmut-capture-wagner-ukraine-russia-intl/index.html#:~:text=The%20chief%20of%20the%20Russian,after%20months%20of%20brutal%20fighting.
Same as before. Russia took a building or something and the Ukrainians are still slaughtering them from their positions. They got a few feet or so and as such victory screeching.
Was a difficult battle that Russia/Wagner won today. Ukraine is denying it, just like how they denied losing Soledar, and only confirmed it a day later. I think Ukraine is denying it now because today is the 1st anniversary of the end of Mariupol siege, which Russia won as well.
Okay I am confused.
Did they take the god damn city or not just give me a fucking straight answer. I've been looking shit up for the past 3 hours. To my knowledge they have 99% after spamming fire bombs, but Ukraine is still in some industrial bases.
>Zelensky says that there will be no Bakhmut - there will be no Ukraine >sends the best to death at the cost of tens of thousands of corpses >oinkranians record songs with the names "Bakhmut Fortress", pointing to the symbolism and significance
Nice copium, cuckditor, kek
[...]
>literally the same posters
What compels you to samefag like this?
Jannies absolutely went full collateral on this one kek. I don't even try to troll the shills, just asking genuine questions about the current situation.
Jannies absolutely went full collateral on this one kek. I don't even try to troll the shills, just asking genuine questions about the current situation.
because there was a totally not important city called bakhmut that now belongs to not ukraine and lots of blood and treasure were spilled in the process
THE CITY BROKE BEFORE THE AFU DID
Unfathomably based. They stood in the face of demons.
Technically exactly what happened. Despite both numerical and hardware advantage, Russian forces literally flattened portions of the city in order to advance. And for some reason they also gave up on attempts to envelop it.
AFU also flattened portions of the city to defend it, since they couldn't be having the Russians taking certain buildings.
So as the battle has gone on, both attackers and defenders have had to take buildings out, causing a more sparse spread between certain buildings. It also means there's less to hold at one time, for both sides.
>so close I can see individual buildings
lol
you would think the second most powerful army in the world wouldve taken those couple of buildings 8 months ago
Why take it when the ukrainians were content with being shelled from three directions. War isn't like HoI4 you know?
If only there were concrete and brick structures to provide cover for troops inside a city.
You ever heard of pressure
Concrete can only do so much
>War isn't like HOI4
>I can just grind down an entire nation in deathmatch on Bakhmut bros!
>Why take it when the ukrainians were content with being shelled from three directions
So Russia has not advanced into Bakhmut and still kept Ukrainians in the pocket, right?
F
This battle is so incredibly silly and pointless.
I'd not be in the least surprised if Prigozhin's arms fell off when touching him.
Two more weeks
What is the russian army gonna do when they take the ruins of bakmut?
Build filtration camp
declare legal victory, then the hohols will really be screwed
Die in an artillery barrage probably
Nah, this is the end
We don't know how much it cost each side, so i won't even bother to take a guess who 'won'
One thing that's strange to me is Ukrainians launching unblocking offensive only after city pretty much fell.
Which makes me believe it was to enable Ukr defenders to withdraw.
If they did it like 3 months ago, maybe bahmut wouldn't fall after all
Bakhmut served its purpose, Chasiv Yar superfortress has been completed.
Does this super fortress have the pisskey artifact?
54000 puccians died for this village, lol
AND IT'S STILL NOT TAKEN YET
This is just the same meme from the start of the war with a crop of zelensky, some sloppy recolors and a bunch of jaks glued to it
It's much older than that, I think the original version was about the Russian performance in WW1
It would probably fit winter war best
The war where Finland lost 9% of its territory?
The one we're Soviet union had 15:1 manpower overmatch and were forced to forget their initial plans of installing communist government in Helsinki because of atrocious losses
that may have been the very meme I was actually thinking of now that you mention it
I'm also pretty sure I've seen one with dinosaurs
Newfags jfc
Reminder that even Prighozin says that for each ukrops soldier 5-10 Ruschweine die
>2nd army in the world btw
Yes.
1+3+4+5+6 is indeed bigger than 2.
No, that's maybe 10% of HATO power
Western armies are mostly focused on air force, navy and long range precision missile strikes.
Russia literally built its army to take on all of NATO at once. That means taking on their navy, their air force, their armoured battalions, their artillery (both conventional and missile) and their infantry. Yet they cannot even prevail against a nation that has been given small arms and a few surplus vehicles.
How was Russia meant to take on all of NATO? Would it be totally different because they'd be prepared for it? I dunno. I know the vatnik cope and all is to say Russia is fighting all of NATO and therefore we're doing great, but you know it isn't true and we know it isn't true. If Russia was so powerful they'd attack Poland to prevent the supplies coming through, raise their eyebrows and NATO would cover before the bear. Instead they don't and just keep threatening people they'll do something if X happens. How many times have they said
>If you give X we'll do Y
And nothing happens? Now the UK is going to hand over F-16's they're buying to Ukraine and train them. Nothing has happened.
Russia didn't, the USSR + Warsaw Pact did but this is a common area of confusion on both sides really.
Back in the Cold War we used to look at European units and they'd tell you how many hours they could stall the advance before they'd become overwhelmed. The game would be to try to stop them until America could arrive (if they were ever going to). I seem to remember the Army of the Rhine were rated at 16 hours max.
It seems very hard to move on from the belief that the Warsaw Pact no longer exists, and that Russia isn't the USSR and Russia isn't even Russia in its old form. Personally I think from a defence POV communism with all its problems produced a more effective force than the kleptocratic corruption of a Mafia state.
The "X weeks" lifespan for units in western Europe was based on yom kippur war
In which 3000 vehicles were destroyed, and several hundreds more damaged, in the course of a month
NATO had about 3000 vehicles placed forward to repel the soviet attack
So all were expected to be replaced over a few weeks of fighting
While high attrition rates were unavoidable, take all claims with a grain of salt
The claim was made by dupuy who is criticised for an overly statistical analysis of combat, trying to boil war down to numbers like its warhammer
>How was Russia meant to take on all of NATO?
Nooks. The rest of the shit is there to terrorize former vassals. Well, that backfired, too.
The noose and editing is fucked up and I'm tired of ignoring it, the noose isn't even around the cats neck its wrapped around its upperchest area.
Because the West isn't involved directly in the war? What kind of question is this? If Russia was weathering 1000+ F-35's, F-22's, Eurofighters, Tornados, Rafaels and armoured columns of M1A2-3's, Leopard 2A6's, Challenger 2's, Leclercs and weathering the storm from 13 aircraft carriers (plus other carriers), dozens of submarines, destroyers, frigates and the artillery and missiles from ground (and air) launched systems then sure, yeah, you could argue that Russia is doing well.
Except none of this is happening. None of those weapons are even in the fight.
Vatnik shills are delusional and do not understand the true power of NATO even without the US.
If Europe really went to war against Russia, this time we would reach the Urals without nukes involved.
9 is an open secret it stashes US nooks. So technically also nookarmed
Who did Fagner ever hammer besides one of their own guys, leading to such a drop in recruitment that they had to pretend it was just a mock execution
Quite a pathetic thing to gloat over
>92% of Bakhmut is held by Russian forces
so the 2nd strongest army in the word can't
take a small town in 10 months?
The losses were probably not worth it, but bahmut de facto fell. It's a matter of a single digit days before full control.
>were probably not worth it
What do you mean probably? It wasn't. There is no economic benefit for capturing it. There is no strategic benefit for capturing it. The only benefit is political. Technically there is a claim that Wagner gets a massive bonus from Russia if they captured it but I am sure if that was true then they won't pay it after the shit Priggy has done.
Pic related isn't Bakhmut but you call controlling this 'probably not' worth it? You can say 'it wasn't worth it - at all'.
>but bahmut de facto fell
That's a lot of words for saying they haven't taken it yet...
So plant extreme-high explosives in Bakhmut and blow it all fucking up. Wagner's leader is BOUND to go to the city. So blow them all sky high.
>we fought a righteous war against all the world
>they outnumbered us 100 to one
>we slaugthered billions, but they kept coming
>in the end we were defeatet
We're getting closer to the end aren't we. This cope has a sense of finality to it.
How many tomahawk missiles were launched at industrial centers in Russia?
>a puppet army comprised of every western army in the world
May I see it?
I like how the early war cope of
>It's taking awhile because they don't want to destroy infrastructure, Russia is humane compared to the USA!
morphed into
>It's taking awhile because we're fighting every military in the world!
>t.
I always find these kind of images weird. When you have Wagner admitting they're losing 5-10 times as many men as Ukraine is to advance in Bakhmut, it is implying that it is the other way round.
2 more weeks and they might hold 93% with 10 000 more dead russians. I hope.
I know you're shitposting because you've been posting this a lot the last couple of days, but it is just me talking about the image.
Curious that a french "person" keeps posting an image with the same hash as that one on /int/, curious indeed.
Its that argentinian rapefugee living in France that simps for russia. There was a neat pic about it i saw once
But Russia gave more of it all to Ukraine than NATO so far. Is this Russia vs Russia?
58264634
>30 y/o+ leftovers from the Cold War various Western countries found in the attic
>SEE WE'RE BATTLING ALL OF NATO EVERYWHERE ALL AT ONCE
No (you) for you, troll.
Words have meaning ESL-kun. Direct involvement means NATO troops and pilots attacking Russians
So by that logic russia won vietnam?
Yes.
When the war crime tribunals are happening ill be sure to tell them about your participation trophy
By your logic, the British were involved in the American Civil War because they provided weapons, equipment and support to both sides. Or they were involved in the Ruso-Ottoman War because they ended up getting control of Cyprus. Etc.
>30-40 year old military surplus from the west
Imagine fancying yourself the second army of the world and losing to that
And vatnigs thought they could take on the entirety of NATO, literally fucking pathetic.
Town of Bakhmut still hasnt been taken by russian federation.
All those ammount to less than 10% of the annual nato budget though.
You aren’t fighting all of nato, you’re fighting a poor European backwater armed with some leftovers.
I thought Russia and Ukraine were brothers? Are you saying Russia is trying to eradicate Ukraine?
What were the Soviets doing during Vietnam, moron?
>Crimea marked as Russian
heh...
>complain about communists
>gets his source from communists
>posting something on twitter make you the source
Anon do you have brain damage or are you just an ESL?
>post something from Twitter onto PrepHole
By that point, I will say yes, he got it from twitter.
God damn shitskins are so dumb the survey is linked in the image but apparently esls cant read
Whomsever is accusing Puccia of being european and having a culture?
what is this new shilling material even?
The reason a lot of Ukrainians thought life was better under communism is because boomers lived in the golden age of communism and witnessed the fall of the Soviet Union.
Do you have any idea what Eastern Europe was like in the late 90s and early 2000s?
Just to be clear I fucking hate commies, but this is just basic reason
What is the correlation to EU/NATO membership and lower numbers in that pic? Right off the bat, I see Poland, Czechia, and Romania.
So do you honestly think that Ukraine is even approaching NATOs capabilities?
Can't find anything with these numbers from the cited sources.
it source is in the image esl
Vodka and Russia speak are a lot more common than anything east or south Slavs have. There is a good chance that your average mutt doesn't even know what a Sloven is?
>Russia is the biggest Slavic cutural powerhouse
Ballett, public defecation and T-I-G-E-R-S does not a culture make, N-I-G-G-E-R.
The thing with red lines and nooklear threats is that if people keep crossing them and you don't actually do anything except seethe impotently people will stop taking you seriously.
Yeah i dont think they are going to play game theory with the lives of over 40 million people to get back 2
Any use of nuclear weapons by Russia will result in a first strike against them by the rest of the world
I hope the us is not retarded enough to fire nukes at Russia over fucking Ukraine and end the world
The world idiot, the entire rest of the world would intervene.
>the entire rest of the world
So just America and its puppet states got it
Even then worst case they become N,korea 2.0
Even China will glass them retard
you are indeed a fucking mongoloid, go back to your asian steppe
I'm not even sure what this meme is even trying to represent.
first, ukraine 100% giggle fucked russia hard as shit in the last 24 hours which is why we're getting all these "bakhmut has falled!" posts like they haven't been trying to meme it into reality for the last 6 months.
that said nato wouldn't do it. too many chinese business partners aka too much money at stake, we're too comfortable as the collective west to want that suffering either. the un/nato would winge about diplomacy and upsetting the status quo and conventional supplies would be upped even more to ukraine. military leaders would get sidelined by bureaucrats and the moment would pass them by. every government on the globe would be shitting itself hoping the russian's nuclear chimpout would just blow over, and it will, but it'll also change the dynamic between nuclear powers when they go to war with non-nuclear powers especially the smaller ones and especially especially iran and israel. nuclear defense pacts would be worth less than the paper they're written on - kind of like they already are
Retard
Not a single NATO unit fights in Ukraine, you need your medication FAST, schizo.
The 40-year-old tech a few sovereign countries have given out of pity has still managed to stop the whole russian army. This is as amazing as it is horrible, all those russian lives lost because of the paranoid schizophrenic NATO-related delusions of the illegal Moscow terrorist regime.
baZed
Chads
No
Fags
Why does this look like it was taken in the mid 90's?
it was taken with soviet equipment which had been in storage since the 90s and was recently redeployed.
A decapitating first strike against Russia by the rest of the world would result in no nuclear weapons being used outside russian territory.
You underestimates our missile defence at your own risk
>end of the world
>muh fallout
Grow up and join the real world
>nuclear fallout is not real
I give up
>russia has any nukes left after trading them with NK
Do you actually believe this shit
I'm not saying fallout isn't real, but no one outside of Russia is going to have to worry about it
lol no. at this point i doubt russia has any nukes left after trading them with NK, china and iran for 152mm shells.
>he still believes in the Russia has functional nukes and Western air defences are weak memes
lmao, quit being demoralized
we are winning handsomely, give yourself a lift little fella
>w-what
>the rest of the world would see very dimly indeed on nuclear strikes?
>I-I-I'll just NOOK them as well
>NOOK THEM ALL
You are literally, figuratively a small, autistic, mokey child.
China has a nuclear umbrella treaty with Ukraine. This means they have to nuke Russia in return.
>t-t-they won't
So China ends up destroying their diplomatic reputation.
Fine, here’s one that your thirdie brain can comprehend since I know reading comprehension isn’t your greatest strength
You are fucking retarded and have no idea what a nuclear war involves. Ignoring your ESLness, I'm not going to explain why none of what you said would happen.
Alright, since Russians seem to be insane people who will destroy all of human civilization if they don’t get their way. Putting them down seems to be only recourse to save the human race
No, no we wouldn't. Also please speak to your English teacher and learn to spell better.
how's that a left meme? is wanting to see russians die not against what leftists want? this is peak republican politics, years of bolstering the mic to combat the russian bear in proxy wars. i don't get it, what changed?
/pol/tards have long since made everything about politics rather than weapons and military enthusiasts enjoying their hobby.
>claim you're fighting every NATO nation at once
>pick out Poland specifically to seethe about it
Every fucking time.
>is wanting to see russians die not against what leftists want? this is peak republican politics, years of bolstering the mic to combat the russian bear in proxy wars. i don't get it, what changed?
>conveniently forgets 2017-2021 when a Russian agent who shit talks every world leader except Putin withdrew us from Syria leading to the resignation of General Mattis and attempted to withdraw 12,000 US troops from Germany on the eve of the largest land war in Europe in nearly a century
>trump wasnt a warmonger this is bad
wow where the fuck do you guys come from
MAGA died the moment it became cucks for genocidal Russia.
>t. out of touch rich bitch that isnt effected by the price of gas or groceries or the electric bill
yeah yeah we know
>thinks the price of gas isn't related to refinery capacity collapsing when everyone was locked inside home and demand fell, now oil companies are afraid of expanding when they're on the sights of environmental bills
>thinks the price of groceries isn't related to the businesses that closed down and the trillions printed in the last couple of years
Yeah bro when the war stops everything will return to normal
Let me try to explain it to you retard.
>Russia nukes Ukraine for some retarded reason
>the rest of the world removes Russias ability to use nuclear weapons, then nukes Russia, regardless of the consequences
The world will not tolerate nuclear first use
Nice map, I especially like where it doesn't tell you what it's showing
stop noticing things chudchud
No. You said that Russia and West would nuke cities. That isn't what happens in nuclear war. In nuclear war, one side is hoping to 'win'. Therefore to win, you target not cities (which are fucking irrelevant) but places where people launch missiles, or places where they cordinate the firing of missiles. That means missile silos and control centres.
Not. Fucking. Cities.
So, you have to fire a missile at each silo.... and then you have to make sure you destroy it, so you send another couple of missiles to make sure it does it. So you've used three nukes on one silo. Then you need to cover for interceptions, lets say 25% of them are intercepted, so you send a fourth (3 hit). But then you have to factor in failures in the missile (lets say 25% fail) so you send a fifth. Then you have to factor in missiles missing, so you send a sixth. You're now firing six nukes to remove one silo. There are 270 in US. So you're firing 1620 nukes just to try and remove the firing sites of the US. Then you've got to target their air force bases where they could launch nuclear capable bombers. Air bases aren't as well protected as nuclear silos, so lets say they only fire three per air base to cover the problems I mentioned above. So that's another 177 nukes. Then you've got to target naval bases, control centres, and that's before you even start targeting bases and stuff the US has abroad.
Now you've got to do the same to the UK, France and possibly China. So those 6,000 nukes (which we are, for this example, assume are all working and the numbers Russia says they have are true).
Now do you see why the deaths don't come from nuclear fire, but from the aftermath. Nobody in a nuclear war is targeting cities.
in recent years it has become obvious that no side is hoping to "win" in a nuclear war, or else you would see nooks in action. they are entirely for deterrence. in order to be a credible military force, your convential equipment has to be top of the line. russias nooks are mostly deployed by bombers, sometimes submarines, only a few are on actual icbms with multiple warheads. since they can't project any force, icbms are their only strategic nuclear weaponry, which severely limits their first strike capability and their ability to take out anything. if russia would go in nuclear, the response would likely be conventional and overwhelming.
therefore, their only logical choice is a massively destructive terror bombing of the largest cities in the west, after which the leadership collectively suicides and leaves russia behind as the shithole it was meant to be.
>if you wipe out the enemies main population and industrial centers they win
What in the fuck are you on about?
O-Oppenheimer??
German here, if you wish to disturb peace in Europe, you have to at least do it properly. For that reason I want Russia to get BTFO'd. Absolute failure of a state, economy, military and society.
Only shitskin thirdies can't comprehend why first worlders hate russia.
Ah yes because chernobyl is completely uninhabitable and fukoshima is glowing green currently. I don't know where you come from but it's time to go back ESL.
Nuclear 'fallout' isn't anything more than a 2-4 month problem as the halflife of the radioactive isotopes produced decay pretty rapidly to safe levels. Unless Russia, in their infinite moronism, has doped their warheads with other compounds and made less effective dirty bombs.
What are you talking about. I literally just explained exactly why we wouldn't all die. Why don't you read my post?
Soviets(and by extension Russians) have put considerable time, effort, and funding into pushing the idea nuclear war is a lose-lose for all those involved, because they know they're lacking compared to the west.
>Pay western talking heads to sow panic about a single nuke killing billions/flood the earth/knock it off orbit into the sun etc etc
>claim you have thousands of these magical nukes
Its always been a defensive posture.
>white population
Incorrect.
Nuclear winter is a meme. How the fuck is all that ash staying in the atmosphere for 40 years?
Oh no, people with different color skin to me, aieeeee. Washington D.C has like 30% white population. So fucking what? As for the rest of your post I've just explained in some depth that nation states in a nuclear war don't target cities. What about this don't you get?
>Oh no, people with different color skin to me, aieeeee
I don't mind people with different skin color, i mind my people going literally extinct in the next couple centuries because modern society is children-adverse and the only solution our elites know to keep the ponzi scheme going is "bring the africans in"
Say the cat's name.
>because modern society is children-adverse
That's not the only reason demographics are starting(and I mean STARTING, like its very miniscule damage at the moment), it's because sperm counts have begun to decrease across the board.
The liberal fantasy of overpopulation is false.
Can't wait for petersburg to be turned into the sex capital of the world when all the russian "men" are dead
Again, I explained, in great detail they don't target cities. I've explained this. They target control centers and places that can actually fire nuclear weapons. Again, they aren't going to bomb Chicago because it's a major population center. What about this don't you get. Please explain what you're not understanding.
I've explained just to remove the possibility of USA launching nukes from their silos will cost about 2000 nukes.
>puppet army comprised of every western army in the world
500k HATO mercs and 250k bio engineered super nazis
Destroying a city does not prevent the USA from firing nuclear weapons at you. I've already explained you need multiple nukes to destroy a silo (ignoring reinforced command centers) and you need multiple nukes to cover failures, missing the target, failure to launch etc etc. YOU DON'T HAVE THE NUKES TO WASTE ON A FUCKING CITY. THE CITY DOES NOT STOP THE OPPONENT FROM FIRING NUKES AT YOU. IF YOU CANNOT FIRE NUKES AT YOUR OPPONENT AND THEY CAN FIRE NUKES AT YOU. THEY WIN. BECAUSE THEY THEN CAN GO 'WE HAVE DESTROYED YOUR ABILITY TO LAUNCH NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND NOW WE CAN TARGET WHAT WE WANT'.
WHAT ABOUT THIS DO YOU NOT GET. NOBODY IS GOING TO TARGET CITIES BECAUSE CITIES DO NOT PREVENT THE NATION FIRING NUKES AT YOU AND IF YOU DO NOT HAVE NUKES YOU ARE EFFECTIVELY DEFEATED IN THIS SCENARIO.
What the fuck do you think they're going to destroy missile silos which are 30 fucking metres deep behind reinforced materials? They're designed to RESIST FUCKING NUKES. You think a regular missile is going to do shit to it?
How retarded are you? Seriously? Like, not even memeing, this isn't PrepHole haha you're retarded, this is actual concern for another human being. Have you been tested?
they're still for deterrence. there is no strategic nuclear war. mobile icbms launchers, subs, bombers with capable weaponry and so on make it impossible to use anything against them (other than conventional means). as a result, you cannot win a nuclear engagement even if you have the first strike.
Dude. Please learn about the countervalue vs counterforce dichotomy before sperging out and going on a rant pretending half of it doesn't exist.
>NOBODY IS GOING TO TARGET CITIES
The Force de dissuasion would like a word with you.
>Shit I never fucking said
Yes you did. You said that 'we would all die' and I explained in great depth that nobody is targeting cities with nukes. You then said
>Yes the fuck they would there is no reason not to target city's it destroys logistics I don't think you understand the scale of nuclear weapons
Which is you stating they will use a nuclear weapon on the city.
The rest of your post is retarded. There are multiple papers and research on this topic. The fact you said '8000k' is proof of your retardedness. The fact you think they won't target silos is also retarded. Targeting cities does do nothing to win the war.
You are a retard. Sorry.
Except in this scenario he said that Russia nukes because Ukraine steps foot on Crimea. Which people replied
>You're retarded
And then he said
>WE WILL ALL DIEEEEEE IF UKRAINE DOES THAAAAAT!
As for 'you cannot win' you most certainly can. You will never remove all possible launch vectors but that doesn't matter. If your opponent only has 60 nuclear weapons to fire, that is infinitely better than 6000. People will die yes, but not 'all of us'. The entire combined nuclear weapon arsenal in the world isn't enough to destroy all of USA.
Again, you're retarded, just as he is.
but destroying the nuclear arsenal of the enemy while depleting your own still does nothing for you. you still need a conventional response, you need to take out the leadership of other country, you need to occupy or otherwise defeat it. it's not just going to fall over after you depleted your arsenal and they have depleted theirs. and this is why russia cannot engage in nuclear warfare - there is no conventional military to back it up, which is why i'm sure that russias would only use nooks to kill as many people as possible and then get rekt. you're so anally hyperfocused on the nuclear shit that you forget that the real power is the conventional military, the force you can project, the force that can occupy, defeat and shape a country.
>They’ve all but captured bahkmut, with tech from the 60s
That’s because their tech from the 2000s, 90s, 80s, and 70s has run out to such an extent they have nothing left. Russia are digging deep into their reserves to pull out functioning vehicles and weapons, while Ukraine are getting 2000s era reinforcements from NATO.
The only thing is, we haven’t seen the Bradley’s or Leopards or Abrams in Bahkmut yet, so Ukraine must be saving them for some grand offensive - Possibly. The future course of the war will be decided by how successful Ukraines use of the new equipment is. They fail, and NATO probably won’t give them much more. They have a great success, and Russia will really be in trouble.
Zelensky seems to be waiting to get F16s before he launches an attack, but he might not get them.
Wait and see.
the window for a counter offensive is from now to october. The climate is then too difficult and also the mud to do anything.
This summer fighting might be intense
dude i hate bakhmut, a lot of good ukie died there: athletes, actors, poets; when from the russian side it was mostly convicts trash who died there
doesn't matter what front they die at, russia is aiming for the destruction of the ukrainian identity and they will displace, kill or otherwise suppress every display of ukrainian culture if they get their will.
so uh... which one is it?
give it like a day for truth to come out mate.
Doesn't matter. Bakhmut is an irrelevant village with no strategic importance.
Did something even happen there? Who knows...
You must be a Russian bot or something.
Russia hasn't Bakhmut, and even Prigozhin when he claimed they had acknowledged this.
>In his latest video claiming control of Bakhmut, Mr Prigozhin says "no-one can pedantically reproach us for the fact that at least some piece was not taken".
Lol
>We took it
>But not really
>It doesn't matter that we didn't take all of it
You are a retarded moronbrain moron. Russian still hasn't taken Bakhmut
Status:liberated
The entire nuclear reserve have a pittance of energy compared to natural phenomena. Take a volcanic eruption, a natural and common event which spews out cubic kilometers of dust into the air, you couldn't replicate that with nukes. The most dangerous and disruptive effect of a full scale nuclear exchange wouldn't be explosions, radiation, nuclear winter or anything like that, but the total chaos and logistical disruptions of losing such a large amount of people suddenly.
So apparently they are throwing even the forces previously stationed in southern Ukraine just to get that last 8% captured, and Russians are getting blasted by Himars and whatnot while trying to relocate there.
Jesus fuck, what a blackhole of a meatgrinder.
Bakhmut stands defeated by the glorious Russian army. All hail Putin.
So what's the reason for this deluge of nonsensical vatnik spergout right now? What horrific and catastrophic losses have they suffered now?
Ukraine is getting F-16s
In the vid he said the porkies are the 2nd army in the world now, after Wagner.
Are garden gnomes white too?
Any definition of "white" that includes chechens also includes Arabs, Indians and garden gnomes, yes.
Plenty of more exclusionary definitions only limit the category to Europeans and some of them limit it to only Europeans of Germanic and Gaelic ancestry.
>Any definition of "white" that includes chechens also includes Arabs, Indians and garden gnomes, yes.
>indians
>white
Why are you so adamant about the definition of whiteness should also includes Indians? You are not a Pajeet, are you?
I'm not adamant about anything.
It's just a simple fact that if you expand the definition to the point of making it near-meaningles then yes, it will include all Aryans and some closely connected groups.
And if you narrow it down to near-uselessness it will exclude arbitrary groups like the Irish or Italians.
Indians are asians you brown retard.
Look Rajesh, it's okay, we can still be fr... colleagues even if you're a shitskin, you don't need to bleach it.
I don't care if it falls or not.
I just think its really, REALLY funny that its taken over a year to complete a day 1 objective and that a dude posting a cat on PrepHole managed to mind break ziggers.
>russia
>European
HAHAHAHAHHAAH! Russians arr not really European. Its like a weird admixture of asian and European much like latin Americans are.
>t.russian
>actually admits to be chechen goatfucker while calling others "muhammad"
Yea, russia will never be white. Also, "ethnic russians" are not a accurate representation of white. Russians do not have the same system of Americans where they take everything into race. For example, pic related is a "ethnic russian".
>"world power" struggles to take a medium sized town
idgi
did some favelatinx swap the top and bottom text again?
>fundings are imediate
Anon, they couldn't even take the town when the fundings haven't even arrived. You have a narrow understanding of how fundings works in a war.
You're obviously talking to a le epic troll but just so you know: Next time, you should bring up the time they threw the Russians out of Kyiv before any of that muh funding was even on the table
This, you can walk from Ukraine to Turkey thanks to the hundreds of NATO warships in the Black Sea and B-52 formations block out the sun.
On a more serious note I'm glad your propaganda is preparing you for defeat as that means this is all over soon.
Be prepared to hear from brown people how they were "stabbed in the back" for the next 20 years when eventually the whole russian house of cards collapses.
It didn't all go to bakhmut, and most of it hasn't borne fruit yet either
>he thinks the whole country getting a one-time transfer of cold war leftovers is equivalent to Germany or France spending dozens of billions every single year
But that wasn't the point, we're talking Bakhmut.
the US took Baghdad in 6 days. Six.
Anon its been over a year they got all the funding by month 3, and its not all out war for Russia they have other fronts to defend
>US took Baghdad in 6 days
>an actual fucking shithole with 57 other county's
yeah very similar
>Anon its been over a year they got all the funding by month 3, and its not all out war for Russia they have other fronts to defend
You bumbling retard. Fundings fo not cause an immediate effect. It takes years for fundings to have a full effect, not to mention a partial one.
That shithole has over 100x the population and 10x the area of Bakhmut
>an actual shithole
Iraq was the 4th largest military in the world. Stop downplaying iraq.
>Iraq was the 4th largest military in the world
They had cold war era shit the us had howitzers and abrams tanks with the support of about 50 country's
The United States was also using Cold War shit in 1991.
Anon, majority of the coalition was U.S. forces. The fact that the U.S. was able to get a coalition, even if it miniscules compared to actual U.S. forces is pretty damming if you compared to the amount of support that russia gets. The U.S. was able to effectively destroy the 4th largest military with little effort and minimal casualties(despite the projecting casualties being in the 100k).
yeah because it was fucking iraq they had nowhere near the equipment than the us had not to mention sadum was a fucking retard
No ukraine has gotten over 60billion in gibs thats more than Germany or France
Yes, 60 billion worth of cold war equipment
>yeah because it was fucking iraq they had nowhere near the equipment than the us had not to mention sadum was a fucking retard
They had the 4th largest military in the world. America was able to destroy them TWICE with little effort. Ukraine is barely in the top 20.
>4th largest military in the world
Yeah because they were a bunch of sand morons armed with aks that dipped in two weeks because the command was shattered
Anon, they literally just got out of a war.
10 year war which literally involved trench warfare, chemical weapons, and near "Bro, wtf?" levels of insanity.
Need I mention the Marshes and how they made "roads" with bodies and lye.
>trench warfare
Which America fortunately didn't get to that point. Attritional warfare is the last thing you want in a modern war and America was treating iraq as its peer.
>"The decision to give Iraq the military edge was universal. Not only the Soviet Union, but the entire Western alliance,[clarification needed] largely financed by conservative Arab states, engaged in the most comprehensive and massive arms transfer in history to a Third World state engaged in conflict (...) The 'Western package' for Iraq, however, paled in comparison with the Soviets'. Between 1986 and 1988, the Soviets delivered to Iraq arms valued at roughly $8.8 to $9.2 billion, comprising more than 2,000 tanks (including 800 T-72s), 300 fighter aircraft, almost 300 surface-to-air missiles (mostly Scud Bs) and thousands of pieces of heavy artillery and armored personnel vehicles.
iraq got a shit ton of gibs too especially in terms of aircraft and tanks compared to ukraine
>howitzers
>Not being cold era tech
Fuck off back go chudgram Vatmoron.
>They had cold war era shit
So just like Ukraine?
Anon, the soviet union had to change its doctrine and military strategy after the gulf war. They literally panicked because americans were destroying their shit with little effort to the point of changing their minds on how their doctrine and equipment works. The t-90 was named tge t-90 because of how bad of a reputation the gulf war left on the t-72
I dont know what this has to do with anything ukraine and iraq arent the same and never were
Iraq had the 4th largest military in the world. They were 4th in power while Ukraine was barely between 10-40.
Number don't mean everything in terms of power
This. That's why Ukraine can so easily kill Russians at a 10:1 ratio. If you're too fucking retarded to use any tactics or equipment, you're gonna get slaughtered
>kill Russians at a 10:1 ratio
Once you stop sucking off ukraine we can let you come back down to reality
My point was that the us invading iraq is not the same is Russia invading Ukraine
>Iraq was also on the other side of the globe
Isreal and kuwait is not far from iraq anon
>Once you stop sucking off ukraine
Wait but I think they have superior equipment because of HATO giving them a higher military budget than Germany, and numbers don't matter? So are you saying that despite all that, the Russians are overwhelming them with a positive casualty ratio?
So numbers matter after all?
I know you're just suffering from cognitive dissonance anon, no more (you)s
The ratio is probably 1to1 if not a bit more in the Russians favor because of war crimes
>Isreal and kuwait is not far from iraq anon
Is Israel and kuwait America's homefront? No, it is not and its difficult to supply troops across the globe.
I wonder if post-war Russia would have gotten its shit together if they built their armed forces around overseas deployments like the US did in WW2. Being forced to deal with logistics like that is a big part of why American equipment is so good
>Is Israel and kuwait America's homefront
Yes it actually is anon they already had troops there because of the Gulf War and isreal is an us colony (or the other way around really)
>having troops in another country means its a home front
No, retard. That doesn't mean anything because america still has to dupply troops there across the globe. Do you think america has a teleportation device in those countries?
>isreal
you need to go back
Iraq was also on the other side of the globe, while Ukraine is literally on Russia's border. USA was also invading Afghanistan, a landlocked nation.
Russia is still bad at war, and was a massive welfare queen during WW2.
Nobody is comparing Ukraine to Iraq Anon. Your reading comprehension is very poor.
1991 WAS the Cold War.
>>US took Baghdad in 6 days
>>an actual fucking shithole with 57 other county's
on the other side of the globe too
>fundings are immediate
Those "fundings" are fixed valued and they are not immediate changes. In order to have a complete effect, the "fixed value" will have to be an annual one. 100 billion in 1 year is nothing compared to 100 billion in each year for the past 10 years. A year ago, Ukraine's budget was barely over 7-10 billion.
>Russia has 6000 nukes
So, maybe 10-15 will work. I'll chance it.
>West
>R1b
>IE literal Aryans
Lmao, seethe untermensch
>Russia has 6000 nukes
stopped reading right here
Anon, I'm sorry to have to tell you this but the bastards in Sakko i Vantsetti stole the $44 BN destined for Bakhmut.
So are there any non-puccian sources for the claims that Bakhmut has fallen? None of the vatnig shills have offered any believable sources thus far.
Most of the NATO equipment hasn't even reached Bakhmut yet bar maybe some small arms. I have yet to see any footage of Leopards or Challengers in that area.
>invade country
>county gets military aid
>waaaaaaaaaaah it's not fair, we're still winning though that's why we're crying about it so much
>pic
Meanwhile in relaity, the Russians havel ong since passed the 100th wave of mobilisation and the Ukrainians are fighting to the last Russian.
I wish you could use a trip. Seeing a third world zigger get BTFO first thing in the morning was hilarious.
>General population Russian male suicide rate per 100,000: 25.1
>Active-duty US military suicide rate per 100,000: 24.3
kekkles
Vatmorons losing to BCC? now it all adds up.
man, that image is really sad.
Wasn't there a video of a vat being taken by these stairs?hwkdgg
>some guy in ukarine hanging himself
How does one video disprove the 25.1 per 100k suicides?
>but they had all they needed the take over a shithole in a few days
Why didn't Russia?
Like I said ukraine got over 60 billion in funding more than France and for Russia its not an all out war
Why didn't Russia take the shithole Kyiv? That push was long before the one time donation of 60bn to fight an invading country with a permanent budget of over 80bn
60 billion for 3 decades vs 100 billion for 1 year. Which is the most?
How does that disprove that 25.1 is larger than 24.3?
Magomed you're back! how was your trip to the AIDS clinic?
>larger suicide rate than active duty soldiers
Fun fact: AIDS is far higher in eastern Ukraine than Western. The Russian Diaspora in Ukraine is also all in the East.
>Source?
You already admitted the figures are true by seething about them 3 times in a row, it's a bit late to ask for source now
>aids is mostly from drugs and its about the same rate is ukraine lol
so you are a druggie?
>Yeah because the us has better equipment
Why? I thought Russia was the US's peer? And why did Russia attack if their equipment is complete dogshit?
Russia's equipment is not bad but its not better than the us nobody ever said otherwise
Ukraine didn't have the 60bn in HATO equipment when Russia pushed for Kyiv. You claimed that the US could easily conquer a shithole cause they had far superior equipment
Russia had far superior equipment when they pushed for the shithole they wanted. Why didn't it work?
Unless you're gonna claim Ukraine had better equipment at that time already, in which case I'm gonna reiterate the question, why did Russia attack then?
>Ukraine didn't have the 60bn in HATO equipment when Russia pushed for Kyiv
Holy shit I already addressed this gay read more
>Holy shit I already addressed
Yes, you did. Here's how that exact argument went down
>Russia had equipment superiority, why didn't they capture the shithole Kyiv?
>because they didn't use all their troops
>nor did the US, what's different here?
>Russia's equipment is shit because US equipment is better
>but Ukraine didn't have that equipment yet, so why couldn't Russia capture Kyiv?
>I already adressed this
We are going in circles because you have two arguments (not using all their troops, inferior equipment) and are randomly flipflopping between them
I think overall we have established that Russia has no chance of winning this conflict, because according to you numbers don't matter and their equipment is absolutely dogshit
Have a nice day
Yes because its true Russia did not use all of there equipment or there troops I dont even think kyiv was an objective because if they really wanted to they could just slam troops near belrus and taken it
>I dont even think kyiv was an objective
So the riot control units of OMON in the first wave were there just for shits and giggles?
Damn, russia really does suck as a country.
Which is exactly what they tried to do.
You ziggers really memoryhole your failures.
third worlder or vatmoron? genuinely cant tell.
Post hand
He has a point. A NATO proxy war is still a NATO war.
>aids is mostly from drugs
That may have been the case at first but Russia quite literally has community transition of HIV.
In the rest of the world the only people who are urged to get tested for hiv regularly are druggies and men who have sex with men. In Russia every sexually active person is at risk.
Being gay in public in russia is illegal also like I said its mostly from drug usage. easten europe has a big problem with that and so does ukraine
>being gay in Russia is illegal
and yet male on male rape is ingrained in your culture
It's based and trad when Russians do it
>making shit up
Cringe samefagging
>Being gay in public in russia is illegal
So that's the real reason they went to Ukraine
Am I supposed to see something in the white walls? like "IL"? Or am I overthinking this?
It is the drone drop video
I know anon, I'm just wondering why 2 walls are white and 1 is brown
The brown "wall" is a ditch, the grenade fell into it.
It's the sloppy toppy drone droppy video
Thanks doc
what a joke.
what sort of self-respecting pro-anything would take this as a win for their side?
Please understand. Russians don't value life so any gain is a win regardless of the losses they take.
I'm just holding hands with my boyfriend right now. Stunned.
Why is that senior citizen being sent to Ukraine?
that's an actor from some wagner material iirc
So let's say Russians actually managed to take Buckmutt. What next? What strategic value does it provide? What are they gonna do about all the other fortified cities? Can they take those? Do they have the manpower and equipment?
>What strategic value does it provide?
It would have given them a nice resupply and artillery position 9 months ago to launch further offensives
Now, it's literally just sunk costs. And the vatmorons think the Ukrainian side considers it just as important because we've been laughing about it for all that time
I mean for ukies its was limiting the destruction caused by russian and fagner forces so you chould say it held some strategic point there plus it took russian assault brunt force of it so it did its job like 4-5 months ago and now ukies are surounding it themselves so id say good luck vatniks
Anon was asking about the strategic value for Russia but yeah
>I mean for ukies its was limiting the destruction caused by russian
Absolutely. If your goal is to quickly dig a trench to slow down the enemy advance while you prepare better defensive positions, and they keep throwing soldiers right into your machine gun for some fucking reason, you don't abandon that trench
>What strategic value does it provide?
Every day I'm reminded more and more than a vast majority of PrepHole did not know that Ukraine existed prior to this war.
>whoa, people don't know about the surrounding geography and infrastructure of a random town in east Ukraine
do you at least get paid for lörs opinions?
so what is its strategic value?
now they get to rinse and repeat with the next nearest town. see you guys in February when chasiv yar falls.
>What strategic value does it provide?
This has been going on for over half a year and only now does your tiny little brain catch up with the idea to ask this question?
>for over half a year
Strategic Value?
for russia, the strategic value at this point is their desperation for any symbolic win as you can see from the shill spergout
for ukraine, it keeps the fighting contained away from the next city on the line
Bakhmut is a major logistics center for cuckrainians. Low strategic value, but a huge blow. But Ukrainians lost 20-30k(!) people, including the best (Nazi battalions like a Kraken and Special Operations Forces)
>Bakhmut is a major logistics center for cuckrainians
You think they still had loads of equipment for the entire front there
Do you know the meaning of "logistics center"?
Since 2018 i guess, supplied the group in the Donbas.
Chasov Yar and Kramatorsk are next, but larger
>"Logistics center"
For what? The only remaining road in Bakhmut leads out of it. The only Ukrainian troops that could be supplied from there are the ones inside the city itself. Whatever supplies that were previously kept there will have been used up in 11 months of fighting. What does Russia gain other than a crossroads they won't be able to advance from?
Bakhmut is pure politics for the Vatniks. And even if they capture the city, the Ukrainians can blow it up with high-yield explosives and then crush the Russian flanks.
Seriously PrepHole, why let Russia have the ruins? Just blow up the city with the Russians inside of it, lol.
>Bakhmut is a major logistics center for cuckrainians
Since when?
Since about the 1600's.
He's absorbed all the russian cope on why they've died by the thousands for it.
>Zelensky says that there will be no Bakhmut - there will be no Ukraine
>sends the best to death at the cost of tens of thousands of corpses
>oinkranians record songs with the names "Bakhmut Fortress", pointing to the symbolism and significance
Nice copium, cuckditor, kek
another 3rd worlder outs himself
remember the alamo
Amerifag, wtf u talking about
get back in the cage favela monkey
says that there will be no Bakhmut - there will be no Ukraine
lol
>Its not the homefront but they had all they needed the take over a shithole in a few days
Anon, it takes more effort to consistently keep those troops supplied while also being across the globe. Its not a homefront by any metric.
>muh fundings
Fundings are not an immediate effect, especially if they are equipment. It takes years for fundings to take effect as long as they are annual.
Ok, I did the unthinkable and checked 4chan they are spamming dead kids and cp saying they will do that in all ukraine, won't go back to that place.
Really makes you think about the mental side of people siding with russia huh.
What being terminally online does to a motherfucker.
They could all be killed and I would celebrate whomever did it.
What are you on about, moron?
>for russia, the strategic value at this point is their desperation for any symbolic win as you can see from the shill spergout
for ukraine, it keeps the fighting contained away from the next city on the line
I don't think that will make Russia's ambition any better.
>the next city
It actually opens up the entire frontline, which is why Ukraine was desperate to hold on to it.
Wow the entire front line.
it opened up Zaporizhzhia?
how would you characterize the strategic value of bakhmut?
I wouldn't, I've been wondering too why Zoylensky kept sending "his" people in the meat grinder for 9 months straight. How nice of him to dedicate all that manpower and equipment into what is essentially nothing.
Man ziggers are fucking unbearable. Hardly news I know but holy shit
Baker bake!
pls show pics of kramatorsk and sloviansk having been leveled by artillery
Nothing, you are the ones talking about raping dead children, not me.
>Like Zelenskyy did a couple weeks ago 🙂
which was that without bakhmut the fighting would move to kramatorsk and slovyansk, and putin would have a symbolic win to sell to his supporters
Didn't know he lived a more luxurious life than the average russian.
I'm confused, who actually won here, the Russians or Ukraine? There isn't the usually vatnik smugness that comes with victory?
Ukraine, otherwise the ziggers wouldn't spam as much
Russians have won, that's way local cucks do not like it
https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/20/europe/bakhmut-capture-wagner-ukraine-russia-intl/index.html#:~:text=The%20chief%20of%20the%20Russian,after%20months%20of%20brutal%20fighting.
Same as before. Russia took a building or something and the Ukrainians are still slaughtering them from their positions. They got a few feet or so and as such victory screeching.
Was a difficult battle that Russia/Wagner won today. Ukraine is denying it, just like how they denied losing Soledar, and only confirmed it a day later. I think Ukraine is denying it now because today is the 1st anniversary of the end of Mariupol siege, which Russia won as well.
I made a joke about ukies holding a dirt patch outskirts of the city and still claiming to hold it a month ago.
The MSR is the only important part so unless Russia capture the road held by the Ukrainians then all the smoked mobiks are wasted
Also they might get kotelled if Ukraine keeps capturing key positions around the city
Alright, where is this photo taken? Autists, do your thing
In the city centre.
https://nitter.net/ChristopherJM/status/1659910256212824066
>train station
I honestly thought he would be far closer to the westernmost edge, though I guess it's still too hot for a photo op
Im literally shaking right now at the news that bakhmut has fallen
When will the f-16s arrive to change the course of the war and liberate bakhmut from orc occupation
>outdated shit that can't even compare to old commie aircraft
Fucking lol'd, look at this angry chud basedditor
Youre either a retard falling for astroturfing or a samefag
Chill out, chud retard
It's truly over for oinkrane
>oinkrane
This insult is pretty retarded, it's like a farmer is insulting you, who the fuck came up with that?
It's because Ukrainians like eating fatty pork.
That's literally it.
Is that all? It's pretty idiotic honestly
Russians are subhumans, yes. They calls ukrainians pigs for eating salo while they gladly chomp down on some holodets (Fucking meat jelly)
Cockol detected. It's popular in other countries too, the normal name of this - aHispanic
Not ukrainian, I've never had salo or meat jello.
The point is that they both seem nasty, you retarded eastern vatmoron
Don't even try to hide your nationality, fucking shit skin moron from 3rd world, who eats salo and other shit
the reality of Russian homolust is much worse than any fiction
Okay I am confused.
Did they take the god damn city or not just give me a fucking straight answer. I've been looking shit up for the past 3 hours. To my knowledge they have 99% after spamming fire bombs, but Ukraine is still in some industrial bases.
Is your reading comprehension alright? I said more luxurious than the average russian. Which should give you an idea on what it means.
>out of shape
>lives with his parents
The average russian is like that, you retard. Majority of them do not own private property.
>literally the same posters
What compels you to samefag like this?
Take pills, shizofag
You are aware that it's the jannies deleting these posts, right?
I am keenly aware, yes.
Jannies absolutely went full collateral on this one kek. I don't even try to troll the shills, just asking genuine questions about the current situation.
seething ban evader lmao
why are half the fucking comments here deleted lmao
because there was a totally not important city called bakhmut that now belongs to not ukraine and lots of blood and treasure were spilled in the process
Can someone explain why are there so many deleted comments? What is the reasoning behind it? We're hitting Plebbit tier
Gore on a blue board tends to get deleted
Not him but what gore? I'm using the PrepHole addon and the deleted posts has no gore at all.
Not in this thread, but other threads are getting spammed pretty hard right now.
shitposters from 2ch.hk, 4chan and glavset. All the same thing. Constant VPN trolls raiding us because priggy owns the troll farm
this is why
Expect a major gesture of goodwill to happen soon
successful elastic defence
These memes project so much they are better anti russian memes than actual anti russian memes