35 minutes ago, Bill said:

Honestly I don't even know if it was an accident or not. To be honest, it's not outside of the realm of possibility.

Everyone in this part of the world drives like their a**es are on fire, they're getting chased by the police, and they're late to getting laid, all while not wearing a seatbelt.  They make a Mexican taxi feel like a five star safety rated Volvo standing still.

Once i was in a car on a four lane undivided highway. We were passing a car that was passing a truck that was passing a bus. On a curve.

I can't tell you the amount of times here i went to go put my seatbelt on for the driver to put their hand out and and tell me no.

Of course, even that, I'm still only 50/50 on it being an accident.

Funny thing is, I'm thinking Russia wouldn't want to call it an assassination because it means they can't protect their proxies in their annexed land. And Ukraine, obviously, doesn't wanna go around saying, "Yeah we assassinate political figures."  

But logically, yeah, a car accident is likely the highest probability. 

2 hours ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

@Abracadabrahow do you handle all of this winning bruh ?

The optics are bad but the military tactical rationale is correct. Withdrawing to the more defensible east bank of the Dnieper prevents the possibility of 30K men being cut off from supply and communication. Having a river to your back is not the most secure rear. The danger of the destruction of the Kakhovka dam flooding out the area and leaving men stranded was too great a risk. 

While this retreat is a PR disaster, the loss of 30K men would have been catastrophic. The Russians have repeatedly prioritized the lives of their men over holding nearly indefensible territory. They know the Ukrainians are a proxy designed to "extend" the Russian forces. Denying NATO that accomplishment seems to be top priority. It's as if they know the real enemy has yet to take the field. The major battles are still ahead. 

 

16 minutes ago, Abracadabra said:

The Russians have repeatedly prioritized the lives of their men over holding nearly indefensible territory.

1 hour ago, Abracadabra said:

The optics are bad but the military tactical rationale is correct. Withdrawing to the more defensible east bank of the Dnieper prevents the possibility of 30K men being cut off from supply and communication. Having a river to your back is not the most secure rear. The danger of the destruction of the Kakhovka dam flooding out the area and leaving men stranded was too great a risk. 

While this retreat is a PR disaster, the loss of 30K men would have been catastrophic. The Russians have repeatedly prioritized the lives of their men over holding nearly indefensible territory. They know the Ukrainians are a proxy designed to "extend" the Russian forces. Denying NATO that accomplishment seems to be top priority. It's as if they know the real enemy has yet to take the field. The major battles are still ahead. 

 

1 hour ago, Abracadabra said:

The optics are bad but the military tactical rationale is correct. Withdrawing to the more defensible east bank of the Dnieper prevents the possibility of 30K men being cut off from supply and communication. Having a river to your back is not the most secure rear. The danger of the destruction of the Kakhovka dam flooding out the area and leaving men stranded was too great a risk. 

While this retreat is a PR disaster, the loss of 30K men would have been catastrophic. The Russians have repeatedly prioritized the lives of their men over holding nearly indefensible territory. They know the Ukrainians are a proxy designed to "extend" the Russian forces. Denying NATO that accomplishment seems to be top priority. It's as if they know the real enemy has yet to take the field. The major battles are still ahead. 

 

8 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Why do you find that funny?  They equipped them with tampons and everything.

Russia's military has likely lost half its tanks in Ukraine and will be weaker than it was before the war, Pentagon says

Russia has likely lost half of its main battle tanks while fighting in Ukraine, a senior US defense official said Tuesday, adding that the Russian military will end up being weaker than it was before the war began.

Colin Kahl, the undersecretary of defense for policy, told reporters this week that Russian President Vladimir Putin has "suffered a massive strategic failure" during his ongoing and unprovoked war in Ukraine.

Highlighting Putin's military setbacks, Kahl said that Russian forces have "probably lost half of their main battle tanks" and tens of thousands of troops in Ukraine, according to a Department of Defense report published Wednesday.

Kahl did not specify exactly how many tanks the Pentagon estimates Russia has lost, but according to open-source intelligence analysis by Oryx, at least 1,450 Russian tanks have been destroyed, captured, abandoned, or damaged over the course of the war. Notably, Russian troops fleeing Ukrainian battlefield advances have left behind modern T-90 tanks that Moscow considers to be among the most advanced in its arsenal.

Russia has, in turn, been forced to pull old and obsolete tanks from storage — like the Soviet-era T-62 main battle tank. This type of tank is decades old, can even be seen in some museums, and has long since been replaced by newer, more capable systems.

Just now, jsdarkstar said:

Russia's military has likely lost half its tanks in Ukraine and will be weaker than it was before the war, Pentagon says

Those are the old tanks though. I've been assured they are saving "the good stuff" for later.

When were these great tank battles where thousands of tanks were lost? Massive tank graveyards should litter the landscape for miles and miles.

No such sight exists. The loom is empty. 

Go on prancing around with your head held high. 

18 minutes ago, Abracadabra said:

When were these great tank battles where thousands of tanks were lost? Massive tank graveyards should litter the landscape for miles and miles.

No such sight exists. The loom is empty. 

Go on prancing around with your head held high. 

Maybe you need to take off the red glasses and see the world as it really is - you know, one where Russia cares so little for its people, it sends them to die, ill-equipped and ill-trained?

 

Just a thought.

22 minutes ago, Abracadabra said:

When were these great tank battles where thousands of tanks were lost? Massive tank graveyards should litter the landscape for miles and miles.

No such sight exists. The loom is empty. 

Go on prancing around with your head held high. 

listen ivanka, take the L. your motherland is being embarrassed like no other country has ever before. this actually dwarves how the US sheet the bed in vietnam. 

thanks for that. 

 

1 minute ago, Toastrel said:

Maybe you need to take off the red glasses and see the world as it really is - you know, one where Russia cares so little for its people, it sends them to die, ill-equipped and ill-trained?

 

Just a thought.

I'm not swayed by the propaganda spewed by MI6 and CIA rags. The Russians are flawed just like everyone else but the idea that they don't have adequate training and equipment is just another lie fed to a population already predisposed to bigotry. 

14 minutes ago, Abracadabra said:

I'm not swayed by the propaganda spewed by MI6 and CIA rags. The Russians are flawed just like everyone else but the idea that they don't have adequate training and equipment is just another lie fed to a population already predisposed to bigotry. 

suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure

18 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

listen ivanka, take the L. your motherland is being embarrassed like no other country has ever before. this actually dwarves how the US sheet the bed in vietnam. 

thanks for that. 

Right, because the entire war hinges on Kherson city. lol

Meanwhile, the West has resorted to sending Ukies crap dug out from mothballs. And why is that? Because the Ukies are burning through crap so fast they can't keep up. The rate of attrition is unsustainable and everybody knows it. Russia, on the other hand, is just scratching the surface of their capability. Their MIC is churning out armaments round the clock. 

NATO is not long for this world.

 

1 minute ago, Abracadabra said:

Right, because the entire war hinges on Kherson city. lol

Meanwhile, the West has resorted to sending Ukies crap dug out from mothballs. And why is that? Because the Ukies are burning through crap so fast they can keep up. The rate of attrition is unsustainable and everybody knows it. Russia, on the other hand, is just scratching the surface of their capability. Their MIC is churning out armaments round the clock. 

NATO is not long for this world.

 

suuuuuuuuuuuuure. 

keep drinking the kewlaid 

2 hours ago, Abracadabra said:

While this retreat is a PR disaster, the loss of 30K men would have been catastrophic. The Russians have repeatedly prioritized the lives of their men over holding nearly indefensible territory.

 

3 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure

hey he's not wrong, he only falls hard for Russian propaganda and lies.

1 minute ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

hey he's not wrong, he only falls hard for Russian propaganda and lies.

he never fails to deliver a good laugh. 

20 minutes ago, Abracadabra said:

I'm not swayed by the propaganda spewed by MI6 and CIA rags. The Russians are flawed just like everyone else but the idea that they don't have adequate training and equipment is just another lie fed to a population already predisposed to bigotry. 

I know, you like your propaganda from the pravda people in Moscow.

You can pretend all you like, but the proof is in the pudding. Your swift taking over of your neighbor failed badly, and you are having you ass kicked daily.

russia to ukraine

 

 

 

this is what abra is hanging his hat on right now. 

 

 

Bakhmut next.

Looks like such a huge gain for russia good job kiddo

59 minutes ago, Abracadabra said:

Bakhmut next.

Thousands of Russian lives sacrificed for a dot on the map. 

More evidence of that care Russia takes with lives, fascist.