Was the goal ever to win? I assumed the goal always was to have another permanent stalemate backed up by endless US arms sales; basically a second Israel.
this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Death to NATO
1551 readers
5 users here now
For posting news about NATO's wars in Ukraine, Serbia, Kosovo, and The Middle East, including anywhere else NATO is currently engaged in hostile actions. As well as anything that relates to it.
Rules:
-
Follow Site Rules
-
No support nor defence of Western-backed governments, NATO or Western Imperialism
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
That was the intent, zman himself said as much
US military industry is certainly a party that is not in any way upset regarding how the war is going. There are going to be contracts for decades to come with effectively unlimited tap.
Lol @ the big red "the views expressed in this article are not necessarily the views of the Hill" up top, above even the headline.
And the sky is blue and grass is green… We pretty much knew this ever since early 2022 lmao
That guy looks like Chris O'Dowd
"While Putin can lead Russia along a single strategic trajectory regardless of the length of the war, the U.S. is subject to the whims of democracy."
My three biggest flaws:
1.) I work too hard.
2.) I care too much.
3.) I would've kicked your ass if my bros didn't pull me away.
4.) I have too much street wisdom
5.) My heart is too big
6.) I smoke more different than anybody
7.) my allies too bad
🤣
Analysis of the article that is seemingly biased towards Pax Americana:
- The Kyiv government have inferior military resource in both quality and quantity. This implies that the claim by Pax Americana news outlet that Russians used outdated weapons that is so inaccurate that it targets civilians by mistake was a mere projection of attacks on civilians by Kyiv and Azov thugs.
- The Kyiv government depends completely on USA government for support against the humanitarian intervention from Russia. This implies that Euromaiden Kyiv government lack democratic support which implied that the 2019 Ukraine election was rigged or unrepresentative of the whole Ukraine population.
- Putin engaged in attrition which gave advantage to Russians since it cause the slow loss of military supplies, morality of troops, and external support of Euromaiden Kyiv while Russia have sufficient supplies and support for the humanitarian intervention. This implied that the claim by Pax Americana that Putin is losing military resources, morality of soldiers, and support was a lie. It also contradicts the previous Pax Americana claim that Putin was wasting too much national resource in the war or that Putin was aggressively expanding Russian "occupation" of Ukraine. This also has the implication that Putin honestly follows his claim to only engage in humanitarian intervention for protection of rebelling states.
- The article did not mention the justification that Putin have for the military intervention nor the context which implies genuine Pax Americana biases.
*Kiev
I hope you're getting something out of that writing exercise, since I think everyone can clearly see "thehill.com" in the url and come to the same conclusion
I find every article from western mainstream media has to be packed with these cliches nowadays. They squirrel the admissions in between, but they have to pour on copium on top.
Even if they dont believe the copium, or even secretly loathe doling it out, they have to if they want to keep their jobs.
remember back when this first started how confident libs were
that fucking ukraine could win a war of attrition against Russia, while using nazis? Russia won the moment they actually committed to the war.
I always claimed that Russia won in the first speech where he said that if other European foreces interfere they would not have time to think before they are dragged into the conflict. That significantly restricted the range of actions Europe and even the US had to strike back. That in my opining all but ensured that Ukraine would loose
The amazing part is that a lot of libs still think Ukraine can win this.
heres how hiliary and ukraine and bernie can still win-
Implying that it even had something of a chance to begin with
What can I say? Slava baloni
At this point, they'll be fine to consider Ukraine still existing a 'victory'...
Give it 2 months of blissfull scilence on the topic as they hope we all forget about it before they tout the victory
And also at the same time proof putin is reforming the USSR
Yes, and it has also destroyed Russia’s offensive capability against Europe for years to come.
America, by spending a mere drop in the bucket in terms of defense budget, saved Europe from an impending Russian invasion.
Russia’s reputation as a military “superpower” is now completely tarnished. The world will remember them as a failed state that took what, a year? to capture one Ukrainian village.
Folx I'm pretty sure this is satire lol
Does need that "/s" though cuz NATOids unironically say this shit
It has...? Russia's been using like 2% of their actual capabilities lol if this isn't sarcasm you look goofy as hell
Deepthroat that boot
Yes, and it has also destroyed Russia’s offensive capability against Europe for years to come.
Russia is at its militarily strongest since the end of the cold war
NATO is severely depleted with no sign of a large buildup to fill it back up
are you stupid
Russia’s reputation as a military “superpower” is now completely tarnished. The world will remember them as a failed state that took what, a year? to capture one Ukrainian village.
google what was world war one
It emptied NATO stockpiles too and they are not being replenished nowhere as fast as Russia's
libs are nothing but infuriating, racist, and cocky
no brain just vibes
It's destroyed NATO's offensive capabilities against Russia, or realistically anyone America conciders an enemy, as well.
Money does not equal material goods, and this war has seen the consumption of the armament and munition stockpiles of both countries' cold war legacy supplies.
The difference is that Russia can maintain the defense, as its war doctrine primarily focuses on. Whereas America and NATO can not attempt an offensive, as their war doctrines focuses on, without any attempted expeditionary force most likely collapsing from overextention.
bad bit
view more: next ›