comment: >
  
  in ww2 it was paired with loads of 😱 western hardware aid. no one is aiding ruzzia this time around
context: I am sure everyone is expecting this. You don't prolong a war if you have no plans to regain the initiative. They will die trying. >
  
  The "prolong the war" comments are just scare tactics to try to force a settlement.
  The reality is that the Russians know they have to make major gains before the Western tanks start arriving.  Then they will attempt to solidify their positions by crying out for "peace" before they start getting their asses handed to them. >
  
  I wouldn't put it pass putin to turn this into a frozen conflict and hope for a gop president in 2024 >
  
  That is exactly what I think he's hoping for. And not just in the US. What he's hoping is that he can outlast a war of attrition, not necessarily with Ukraine, but it's Western partners. I sincerely hope that he is wrong, but if the GOP wins in 2024, I'd say it's likely that the coalition largely falls apart. Another reason republicans are traitors to Democracy the world over. >
  
  Traitors to democracy lol. Imagine a world that is only safe if the US can provide billions of dollars of goods. Why didn't Russia just invade under the trump administration? Odd they took Crimea under a dem, and now they're trying for Ukraine under a dem. >
  
  Putin was waiting for Trump to pull out of NATO if he won a second term in 2020. >
  
  Isn’t it ironic that pre-Russia’s invasion, there was all this talk about NATO becoming obsolete.  Thanks to Vlad, NATO is more focused than it’s been in decades. >
  
  It used to be "beware the ides of march". But, you know, global warming and all. >
  
  500,000 soldiers. That’s pretty scary. >
  
  they've been having logistics issues since the start of the war because a combination of lack of material and logistics capabilities stuck firmly in world war 1 organization levels.  
  i cannot imagine that all those soldiers are remotely properly equipped. >
  
  Don't worry, they wrote "BYOR" on the conscription notice. >
  
  "Bring your own Russian? But I am Russian." >
  
  If they are massing, can they just be bombed where they are? Seems crazy to not take them out before the offensive starts. >
  
  Probably on the Russian side of the border. >
  
  Why is that an issue? The two countries are at war with each other. >
  
  They don't need to take territory, that really would be a bad move. But, few well place drone strikes in the massing troops would be a serious demoralizing blow. I'm sure a few splattered troops in images being passed around would make a bunch of them decide to quit before they even go in country. >
  
  I think another part of it is buying time. Drone strikes behind the border mean Russian brass are ordering whatever troops are left to attack right then and there. Not drone striking buys a little more time to fortify, position, and gather counter-intel. probably saving some lives. >
  
  See February 24th 2023 >
  
  Febrary 15th -16th is the same moon phase as last year and with a week of crescent >
  
  What made you write this? I'm asking because I vaquely remember reading once something about Putain being fond of numbers, or certain dates ligning up, or something like that. It reminded me of it >
  
  
  I checked with the lunar calendar and maybe invaders prefer the dark side of the moon.
  
  There is no dark side in the moon, really. Matter of fact, it's all dark. The only thing that makes it look light is the sun. >
  
  I think you mean to say the Russians are getting ready to deliver free boots, vehicles and arms to Ukraine. (If you don't know what I'm talking about remind yourself how the first offensive went... Can't imagine the new scripts are any better) >
  
  We should just air drop a massive load of vodka to the russians assuming they will just drink themselves stupid and give up >
  
  This is brilliant >
  
  Reminds me of the 100 Days Offensive, when the Germans tried one final push against the Western allies before the US arrived during WWI. Same with here and the tanks. 
  History doesn’t repeat but it sure rhymes. >
  
  a fellow Grian watcher I see >
  
  So if they know they are amassing, do they not have the ability to hit them now? Its not like Russia is posturing, they've already invaded, so borders mean nothing. >
  
  Russians simply can't stop. I think Ukrainians will stop them as they stopped them last year. >
  
  Hope a lot of Ukrainian artillery is ready for the moment they step over the border.  I want the border to look like a mass of shredded flesh and twisted metal when they're done.
  Not because I want people to die, but because these Russian soldiers need to be stopped, and they aren't stopping just by being asked. >
  
  Russia needs to win before all the Western tanks and vehicles arrive.
  The big question is if Ukraine manages to win the coming battle, what happens next. >
  
  Ukraine just needs to hold them off another month or two.  I genuinely shudder at the cost to Ukrainians on the front to repel these assaults.  Some brave folks out there for sure. >
  
  Load up the tanks? >
  
  And bring your friends >
  
  Smells Like Teen Conscripts >
  
  Russia needs to push now and cant afford wait. If Russia waits Ukraine will get more tech from the west and their conscripts will get rowdy and unruly if they just sit around at camp and drink for the next 1-2 months >
  
  Let them push now so they can get killed faster. Fuck Russia >
  
  My guess is Ukraine will do what they have done in the past. Let them advice and take some last and then slaughter as many russians as they can. Then wait to build troops and equipment and then push back.
  Right now there are a bunch of Ukrainian troops who are far along in general training and specialized training so in the next month or so Ukrainian troop numbers will swell. 
  By the time the ground dries up enough to allow wide scale ukrainian actions there will be a ton of western tanks on the battle field. >
  
  
  a ton of western tanks on the battle field. 
  
  Like the tanks will be useful addition and likely more than carry their weight but really like 200ish tanks would be over selling it. It's a lot but its a pittance in comparison to the stockpiles of stuff sitting around. >
  
  Well to my limited understanding is that the tanks will be far more advanced than the Russian opposition but since they're so limited they'll be used more tactically. Tanks seemingly require a great deal of support to not make them metal coffins in urban environments. When I saw Russians just throwing vehicles into Ukraine they got shredded. >
  
  Oh yah these are going to do great work and likely have double digits counts if they clash against Russian tanks but they will just not be physically enough to combat Russia if another offensive like the first happens they can only cover so much ground and America in particular is likely to be very protective of those tanks keeping them from the biggest fights. Or they are so stripped down it doesn't matter but that would greatly weaken them. We shall see. >
  
  Russia trying the same thing the second time an expecting different results is the definition of insanity. >
  
  Russia knows only one real military "strategy" and it's to just throw bodies at the problem. This is how it has been for most of their existence.