you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 43 points 1 year ago (43 children)

    Russia can't even beat ukraine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 43 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (35 children)

    "steadily" as in... they complete one every couple of years? How long until they're done? 10-20-30 years? They started this in 2014 and 11 years later they've accomplished next to nothing beyond creating a pile of bodies.

    If germany took this long to take poland it probably wouldn't have been world war at all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 35 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (30 children)

    I read a few articles that said at russias current pace it would take them a hundred years to take Ukraine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (16 children)

    No, there is no fantasy universe where Russia just turns around and stops when they are winning the war. Ukrainians do not want to be sacrificed for foreign profits, and are deserting in huge numbers (see the subject of this post). The far-right nationalist movements in ex-soviet states are temporary, in the long run there will be a return to socialism. There was no "Russian rule" in the USSR.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (14 children)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    So you don't really have a point, just ad hominem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    I absolutely have given many points here and never once resorted to ad hominem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    I'm biased in that I'm a communist, sure, but my methods of analysis focus on material reality, not marvel-esque ideas of Russia just turning around and walking away right as it's clear they are winning.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Ukraine is losing, they aren't stopping Russia. Right now, Pokrovsk is encircled and about to fall to Russia. It is in Ukraine's best interests to concede and stop the bloodshed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (13 replies)
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (43 children)

    Russia has had its ass kicked with western hand-me-downs. Once they roll out the real kit, the whole thing will be over within days.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 43 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    There is nothing militarily nato can do. Even if different countries wanted to help more and actually fielded armies, it would be a stalemate. Only a political solution will work.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    the warmongers will say they knew the outcome all along.

    Ukraine war was instigated to eliminate nordstream and capture EU to US energy before renewables could take hold. Also sweet weapons profits. Absolutely the theater of it has a predetermined plot ending with Russia winning. The goal was to make that last 10+ years. Any end to any war is a defeat for US energy and weapons profits.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 4 points 1 year ago (27 children)
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • load more comments (9 replies)
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (56 children)

    20th C thinking.

    • NATO countries would tool up fairly quickly on a war footing
    • strategic advantage is no longer about tanks and artillery, it’s about the next few generations of drones
    • dirty tricks haven’t even begun, really
    • energy capacity is at this weird turning point of shifting production options and efficiencies, makes predictions harder
    • Ukraine’s industrial capacity has changed to a war footing and they now export drones
    • a non-democratic Ukraine would be a risk as big as oligarchy Russia
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 56 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    I'm not a bot, people have done nothing but reassert their own claims ad nauseum to me as well with no proof. What specifically do you want evidence for? I've provided evidence in this thread when asked for.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (36 children)

    keep up the good fight comrade cowbee <3 i wish i had your patience.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 36 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (35 children)

    Thanks comrade! Seems the warmongers came out of the woodworks on this one.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 35 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (27 children)

    No, this is fantasy. I'm not hand waiving anything, you're parroting unsubstantiated claims. Stories like kidnapping children are especially unsubstantiated.

    The war will end when Ukraine concedes. No matter how much materiel NATO donates, it cannot win, and the war is increasingly unpopular.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    I'm repeating analysis even agreed upon by western sources, you're repeating far-right propaganda and talking points. The difference between the settler-colonial genocide of Palestine and the Russo-Ukrainian War is that Israel intends to exterminate all of Palestine, and must to complete their settler-colonial project, while Russia only wants the 4 oblasts, which are already pro-Russian (that's why Kiev has been bombing them for a decade). If Palestine surrenders, they die, if Ukraine surrenders then the war ends and the Donbass region joins Russia like they want to.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (21 children)

    Reports from Ukrainian intelligence, sure, not actual verified proof of erasing Ukrainian identity nor of kidnapping. Do you just trust Israel whenever it claims Hamas is torturing babies? Did you believe the story about Saddam's forces removing babies from incubators? You need verified proof before belief.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    I mean, sites like the BBC are right wing propaganda outlets. If you like, I can also copy and paste a bunch of sources:

    NATO expansion

    In May 1990 speech Secretary General Manfred Wörner said “The very fact that we are ready not to deploy NATO troops beyond the territory of the Federal Republic gives the Soviet Union firm security guarantees.”

    This shows 2 things:

    1. As we already knew NATO had told the Soviet Union although that it would not move further East than East Germany
    2. They understood full well that NATO moving East was seen as threatening by USSR given the promise not to do so was a “security guarantee” for them.

    https://www.nato.int/docu/speech/1990/s900517a_e.htm

    fascism

    maidan coup

    war crimes

    negotiations

    misc sources

    That doesn't actually form an argument, though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)

    Ukraine will cede the 4 oblasts and will likely be neutral to NATO at the end of the war, crippled and battered, vs the same results without the devastation of years of conflict had they surrendered months in when they had the chance. Ukraine has taken far less civilian casualties than they've claimed, and has dealt far more than they've claimed. Russia isn't some evil empire of villians, it's a country at war. It isn't Israel.

    I do agree that pasting tons of sources isn't going to do anything, that was the reason I posted so many (though you can feel free to check them, as I've already done for your sources). I do think it's funny that my sources are largely things like bbc and OHCR, just presenting a narrative that concedes basic material reality.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    The IMF does that with almost every loan. Sorry to spring this up on you, but the west is a cabal of imperialist nations that exploit, loot, and plunder the world. It forces poverty and austerity measures to free up money for loans and foreign investment to own key infrastructure. This austerity comes in the form of privatizing and destroying safety nets, and the very same safety nets Europeans enjoy are funded by this imperialism.

    From The Nation: https://www.thenation.com/article/culture/the-rotten-roots-of-global-economic-governance/

    From The Elephant: https://www.theelephant.info/analysis/2025/01/16/debt-and-austerity-the-imfs-legacy-of-structural-violence-in-the-global-south/

    The people did want the Russian loan, that's why there was a civil war. The Russian loan would have been far better. Yanukovych went against the wishes of parliament, which was in his bounds as president to do so, then was couped by the west and the far-right Banderites.

    As for your source, it does indeed align with the far-right, pro-imperialist narrative. What it does is admit some basic facts, but twist them, exaggerate, and minimize, as all good propaganda does. I've read these western framed sources already, but I'm a communist, and as such I agree more with leftist analysis like that. My opinion is the common Marxist take, shared largely by PSL's statement and FRSO's statement.

    Since you love sources, why not read through these? They're almost all western sources, so you should understand that these people already try their best to present the far-right narrative you agree with, but they still can't help when basic facts arise:

    NATO expansion

    In May 1990 speech Secretary General Manfred Wörner said “The very fact that we are ready not to deploy NATO troops beyond the territory of the Federal Republic gives the Soviet Union firm security guarantees.”

    This shows 2 things:

    1. As we already knew NATO had told the Soviet Union although that it would not move further East than East Germany
    2. They understood full well that NATO moving East was seen as threatening by USSR given the promise not to do so was a “security guarantee” for them.

    https://www.nato.int/docu/speech/1990/s900517a_e.htm

    fascism

    maidan coup

    war crimes

    negotiations

    misc sources

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    There isn't a strong argument that China is "steadfast in becoming imperialist." There's projection from western countries that have imperialized and colonized the global south for centuries. The liberal, western definition of imperialism you give is meant to makw any influence seem to be imperialism, it's vibes-based. A much better definition is one of extraction via export of capital, ie outsourcing and using millitary domination to force austerity on the global south (exactly the role of the IMF).

    China and Russia are not imperialist by this definition, one that is materialist, and accepted by the majority of the world and not just the west.

    The west provoked the war with Russia, sabotaged peace talks, and give aid in exchange for steep loans and rare earths. They are forcing Ukraine into an unwinnable war so that they can fleece Ukraine for everything.

    As for Putin, generally the people and land in Eastern Ukraine are Russian, that's why the divide exists. Western Ukraine is Ukrainian. Putin's words often get morphed through a game of telephone, exaggerated, or taken out of context. He's certainly no saint, but he's also not Hitler 2 like liberals claim.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    No, I don't. I trust some things that can be factually verified, but I take nothing either side says at face value.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I've never once said either of those, because both are wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    There is a degree of that, but often it's overplayed by pro-Ukrainian people to the degree that they believe Russia is trying to ethnically cleanse Ukraine, which is wrong, and is purely justification for continuing an unpopular war that the west uses to damage Russia and carve Ukraine out for resources.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    There's not ethnic cleansing in Ukraine, though. The nationalist Banderite movement that dominates Ukraine right now is similar to Israel saying everyone is out to destroy them. I don't deny Putin's words, but at the same time I also don't deny Ukrainian words when they say they want an ethnostate and are oppressing ethnic Russians in Ukraine.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • load more comments (7 replies)
  • load more comments (12 replies)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    I'm not Russian, for one, and for two, drone warfare is used by all current conflicts because its cheap and extremely effective. Russia still produces tanks and artillery. I don't know why people get so bloodthirsty, outright war between Russia and NATO is the last thing anyone should want.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

    Russia is a huge country, with 146 million people. Russia does have nukes, and does have a modern millitary with industrialized production outpacing NATO. Again, a war with NATO would be long and bloody, but likely would result in Russia winning or both sides losing. War with Russia should be the last thing anyone wants.

    Israel couldn't even beat Iran, and Israel has all of the fanciest tools NATO has. A war with Russia would be long, bloody, and benefit nobody.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Both sides have sizable soviet stockpiles, but both Russia and NATO have been supplying modern arms and equipment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (19 children)

    NATO outspends Russia 10-1. That doesn't translate to actual firepower or sustained war capacity. Russian production is much cheaper for comparable quality.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (14 children)

    You're confusing the monetary price with actual, qualitative results. The same widget costs more money to produce in the US than it would in Russia, Russia has lower labor costs and higher industrialization. There's also effectiveness, drones are cheap and can often achieve the same or better results than traditional ballistic missiles that cost more. The fact that the west spends a lot is due to the millitary industrial complex. To equate capital investment across different economies is an error, you can find the same medicine in the US for hundreds of times the price as you can in Canada, as an alternative example.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    Cost of living is higher in the US, ergo wages are higher, ergo production costs more. This is true across all fields, plus the lack of industrialization means it's more difficult to manufacture. Why are all of your goods made in China, Vietnam, etc?

    Privatized industry also costs a lot more, especially the millitary industrial complex. I'm aware that the US has drones, I'm also aware that the drones of today are entirely different and far cheaper to produce.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Industrial level is lower in the US. Cost of living is inflated because it's an imperialist country, and siphons vast sums of wealth to the imperial core. The US and Europe have hollowed out their productive capacity and shifted it all overseas. Goods are made in China for cheaper because industrialization is higher, as is productive capacity. Russia is heavily sanctioned, and largely produces for itself.

    Spending 10 times as much does not mean you are getting 10 times as much out of it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Chinese industry is some of the most advanced on the planet. I use US as an example, because industrial output is lower. Your list is measured in terms of dollars, not actual goods and output.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    No, not "next to," at this point China has surpassed the US and Europe in manufacturing in all but a few specialized fields.

    Secondly, saying that NATO can't field war against Russia doesn't mean that NATO can't try, or that Russia would single-handedly destroy all of NATO. Russia would win like Vietnam won against the US, by NATO failing to accomplish their goals without nuclear war.

    If it was China and Russia against NATO, it would similarly be devastating for all involved, but NATO wouldn't succeed in crushing Russia and China without nuclear war.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    Russia produces 4x the amount of artillery shells as all of NATO. SU 35 is half the cost of F35, with better flight availability. Missile technology of Russia is far (at least 5 years) ahead of US. Drone technology is Russia, China, Ukraine only capable. Nuclear powered torpedo is undetected annihilation of any carrier fleet or port in the world. US military spending is just corruption for political cronies. Incompetent pursuit of higher tech they are incapable of implementing, but get paid for anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Whatever USA is producing is 4x times more advanced than that.

    They're artillery shells.

    Russia technology is overall 10 years behind of US

    Way ahead in missiles. Hypersonics the US has failed at. new 14000km 15 hour range nuclear cruise missile. https://www.reuters.com/world/china/russia-tested-new-nuclear-powered-cruise-missile-top-general-says-2025-10-26/

    USA started using military drones more than 20 years ago.

    US still has crap that Ukraine has no use for. New generations test poorly.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)