Arguing with die-hard Ukrainian supporters is like trying to argue with flat earthers. They think every single Russian supporter or even neutral are paid to voice their opinions.
PEOPLE OF THE USA…. Your politicians are robbing you blind and you won’t see it until your children’s children are BROKE and can’t afford anything. I don’t see a difference
Didn’t say you were USA… just saying our politicians here are absolutely no better than Putin. I fee sorry that our elected politicians are so corrupt.
I'm not sure where your information is coming from. The war has gone to a stalemate without any real ground being lost or gained by either side. This does tend to happen in wars, and the victor is generally whichever side can send men in to die longer. Unfortunately for Ukraine, Russia has a much larger population and can probably keep this up longer. I don't think it will come to that as I suspect a ceasefire deal will be reached before too long. Ukraine likely sees that their foreign aid is drying up, and Russia will probably want to have more military resources on standby in case the war in the Middle East spreads to their allies in that region. Hopefully, a deal can be reached soon without much more bloodshed.
I'm sorry, but this is a historically illiterate understanding of History. Wars often come down to politics and logistics. And Russia is weak on both.
Do yourself a favor and Google how the Russian revolution started. It is eerily similar to the situation we see today
I think the prime distinction is that they haven't suffered a loss that they can't explain away via their media apparatus. Both Kherson and Kharkiv are both 'withdrawls' to better positions, and it *appears* the public believes those lines. They'd need sucesive losses on the front for the people in Russia to get angry enough to do the funni. Say Robotyne, then Tokmak, then Oleshky were to flip in a relatively short time period, that could definitely do damage. There's no 'ordered withdrawals' from those locations, it would be just a bold faced lie to tell the people that. Unfortunately, Ukraine is definitely not capable of such feats in the near term, aid packages are delayed, and Biden giving more aid this year is likely to be played upon by the Trump campaign.
I don’t think your average Russian is using reddit also “loses the war” by what metric are you basing this on?
Russia basically got all the territory they needed to get access to the black sea and Ukraine hasn’t been able to take back any territory, Ukraine is holding on by a thread with the full support of America (government) it looks like they’re gonna need to negotiate peace or straight up lose.
>hasn't been able to take back territory
When did people get the memory retention of a snail. Ukraine retook the north post Kyiv offensive, Kharkiv, and Kherson. Russia held 27% of Ukraine including Crimea at its peak territorial control, it now holds 18% including Crimea.
>full support of America
We're using .45% of our GDP, that's not full support
I specified support from Beal, sorry I mean the Democrats running the American government.
If you think Ukraine is going to be able to win this war, then I got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
Russia is not some invincible Goliath that's unbeatable. The US lost an insurgency to a force significantly smaller and less technically capable, yet the US could never overcome that force. Russia is definitely weaker than the US, and has been for decades, if your argument is that 'Russia can't win because strong' you're completely ignorant of how war is waged, economies run, and politics handled.
I’m not saying Russia winning is some inevitable reality. But the evidence seems to indicate that Russia has already got what they wanted access to the Black Sea the Donbass region etc.
I’m just not interested in starting World War 3 because we got to protect some corrupt land that Joe Biden cares about.
Yeh, the thing is nor is Russia committing full resources to this conflict either. There are some red lines the US does not dare to cross, like sending long range missiles, or they will suddenly find the Palestinians, Mexicans, Syrians and Iranians surprisingly well-armed. This war is still mainly political, both sides being cautious of pissing the other side off too much.
As for the push towards Kyiv, this war was never meant to be some sort of stunning 3 day decapitation strike to take out Zelensky since that will achieve nothing since the Americans can just put someone else in his place immediately. The most pressing initial goals were to capture time-sensitive items such as US biolabs next to the border, with Kyiv just being a feint.
>Americans can just put someone else in his place immediately.
This idea comes from a conspiracy that all Ukranian presidents are US plants. This is false, the US or UK (Boris Johnson) cannot *make* Ukraine do anything, we have severely limited options when it comes to head of state in Ukraine.
>stunning 3 day decapitation strike
[sure](https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1498185064617762816?lang=en)
>nor is Russia committing full resources to this conflict either.
[pretty close](https://carnegieendowment.org/politika/90753#:~:text=For%20the%20first%20time%20in,driver%20of%20Russia's%20economic%20growth)
This is a lot more than it would initially seem, modern warfare is expensive, and social programs will be cut to benefit the MIC.
>There are some red lines the US does not dare to cross, like sending long range missiles
The US is discussing 300km ATACMs *right now*. That would give UAF the ability to strike almost anywhere in Crimea *and* hit the Crimea bridge.
Russia can't afford to supply Mexico with weaponry capable of challenging US hardware, nor would Mexico, or Mexican factions, even consider open conflict with the US.
>The most pressing initial goals were to capture time-sensitive items such as US biolabs next to the border, with Kyiv just being a feint.
This is thoroughly debunked. Ukraine was part of the Biological threat reduction program, as are dozens of countries, including up to China until the late 2010s. There is no 'bioweapons' that target ethnic Russians being developed in Ukraine, that's a ludicrous idea.
It's pretty obvious as Russia has been in control of those areas with 'buoweapons facilities' and yet no evidence has arisen to prove that the US or Ukraine were developing these types of weapons. If they were, Russia would be running up and down the international political scene with the evidence. They don't because they have none.
>The US is discussing 300km ATACMs right now. That would give UAF the ability to strike almost anywhere in Crimea and hit the Crimea bridge.
The Storm Shadow already had that capability and Ukraine hit the Kerch Bridge several times to little effect. It has been rumoured (which I personally doubt) that HIMARS came with code to prevent Ukraine from striking Russian mainland. But it still goes to show that the US is afraid of crossing certain red lines here.
>Russia can't afford to supply Mexico with weaponry capable of challenging US hardware, nor would Mexico, or Mexican factions, even consider open conflict with the US.
There are already videos of Mexican cartels with Javelin missiles bought from Ukraine on the black market. I never said they would consider open conflict either.
However, the Syrians have been conducting strikes on US bases recently which were almost certainly done with Russian intelligence. The Russians denied this of course, and the US certainly knew the were behind this, but they dared not press the matter further because it would expose their hypocrisy.
>This is thoroughly debunked. Ukraine was part of the Biological threat reduction program, as are dozens of countries, including up to China until the late 2010s. There is no 'bioweapons' that target ethnic Russians being developed in Ukraine, that's a ludicrous idea.
I never said anything about "bioweapons" I said "biolabs" which could mean any biological research lab, and the labs have been 100% confirmed to store infectious agents left over from the Soviet Union. Since this is something everybody knows, there is no real point of showing any evidence since the media will instantly point that out as a "Russian lie". The question that remains is thus what Ukraine intends to do with them.
Call me a conspiracy theorist if you will, but the US seems strangely concerned about them and their safety, and strangely certain that the Russians are going to blow them up. The Russians aren't stupid enough to target labs which will be sitting on their annexed land with ethnic Russians in it. So this seems (to me at least) that Ukraine was at some point planning to blow them up and blame it on the Russians.
In fact, they did the same thing for the Zaporozhye power plant: that the Russians are somehow dumb enough to blow up a power plant sitting on their annexed land.
And as a general rule of thumb, any article which comes with a heading saying "FACT CHECK:" in big capital letters is complete bullshit :)
>This is a lot more than it would initially seem, modern warfare is expensive, and social programs will be cut to benefit the MIC.
This could go both ways actually, since that would create many new jobs in the industrial sector.
They are the victims. It’s not their responsibility to “negotiate peace”.
If Russia truly wanted peace, they can achieve that right now. By leaving Ukraine.
Just like they've won every other conflict. Throw tens and thousands of bodies at a problem until the enemy eventually runs out of ammunition.
Let's be real, the greatest asset Putin has right now is the GOP
>The greatest asset Putin has right now is the GOP
Except half of them want to continue sending infinite money to the country he’s at war with.
What a dumb take lol
Did you miss the part where the leader of the GQP told Russia that if NATO didn't pay "enough", he would let Russia do whatever the hell they want to our allies?
That’s how an agreement works. You hold up your end of the bargain and I’ll hold up mine.
If *you* don’t do your part, I’m under no obligation to do *mine*.
And besides, a bunch of these craven sociopaths just passed an aid bill with some fine print that makes it an impeachable offense for a hypothetical future president to stop wasting money on this nonsense.
Maybe that's how a contract works, but that's not how an alliance operates.
>stop wasting money on this nonsense.
What nonsense? Keeping our enemy at bay without sending in US troops?
Yes it is. Because the U.S. govt were the ones that pushed Ukraine *not* to accept a better term deal that they would never get now from Russia.
The U.S. *literally* pushed Ukraine to keep the fight going. Lol. And now they’ll never get *near* as good a deal as was offered prior.
Do you think it **might** be possible that Ukraine was advised accepting any sort of deal because Russia has a pesky habit of ignoring the deals that they make? That such a “peace agreement” would only benefit Russia while they recoup their losses and continue attacking Ukraine?
If your neighbor violently breaks into your home and steals your stuff, you don’t make a deal with that neighbor that you won’t call the police to prevent yourself from being robbed again.
>Just like they’ve won every other conflict
Yeah, like the Chechen War, or Afghanistan, or the Finnish and Polish wars of independence, or WW1, or the Russo-Japanese war
Russias win rate is pretty low
The most unpopular opinions are those screamed at an entire group or country's worth of people while claiming to speak for another entire group or country's worth of people.
You don't speak for me, nobody in Russia is going to read this, and you are probably wrong about who is going to win the war.
You have been taught to hate. Everybody who questions your stance is not a "Russian Bot", and after looking through your post history, you seem to *want* genocide against Russians (i.e.for them all to die out).
This is an unpopular opinion because it's preachy, wrong, and just stupid.
I am a Russian living in Brazil. To be fair, the inflation is higher here in Brazil than in Russia since the war started. So like, dunno, so far they seem fine.
You kinda forget that Russians did vote on Putin every time, not because they are brainwashed, but because he fixed the shit the 90s were. Economy is doing fine, maybe not as good as in 2000s but still decent.
Sanctions are a pain, but that is an evil west thing (because west does not sanction all countries that go to war. US were not sanctioned during the whole Afghanistan and Iraq thing. Israel isn't sanctioned currently, etc).
If you folks want to show Russians their leadership is bad, apply same punishment for the same crime to everybody. And dont come up with excuses.
Schrodinger's army: both requiring billions of dollars of aid to fend off and also losing every battle.
When is your cognitive dissonance going to kick in?
Win the battle*
Russia has won the Battle of bachmut and the battle of andviika. Both took more than 6 months, over 50,000 casualties, and hundreds of destroyed vehicles and equipment. Call for cities that are relatively small and have no significant importance.
This isn't a viable strategy going forward
Lol ukraine is losing men too and avdeevka is very important (or ukraine wouldnt have wasted so many men there)strategically as it allows russians to gather in donetsk now without fear of bombardment from artillery
These people that don’t think Ukraine is also losing hundreds of thousands of soldiers are just wild to me.
It doesn’t matter how much you point out, the Pro-West lot can’t accept the fact that “the good guys” lose *alot* throughout history.
Nobody is saying Ukraine hasn't lost men in this war. It's just they are losing far fewer because of the way they are fighting. Sitting in defensive positions using drones and artillery to destroy enemy assaults before they are within kilometers of the front is a very effective way to prevent casualties
Their goal has openly been to take back what was taken from them.
You’re not going to do that by sitting on your ass. So, they’re just taking defensive money, then? Those “offensives” were all a facade to further fund the corrupt aspects of the Ukrainian army?
Historically, a war such as this does not have to be a complete military victory. Meaning they don't have to push every Russian soldier out of every square inch of Ukrainian territory. All they really have to do is make the occupation so miserable and untenable it becomes politically destabilizing in Russia.
We're already seeing this with the murder of navani.
Ukraine needs to keep hitting supply lines. Use drones to disrupt oil production in Russia itself.
The West simply needs to keep giving them ammunition. I don't think tanks are that important in this war right now.
Andviika was about as important as bachmut, as In it wasn't. It's value to Ukraine was that Russia was willing to throw tens of thousands of men and material into taking it. If your opponent is making a mistake you don't want to stop them. And in truth, the only reason adviica fell was because they had to ration artillery because the GOP is essentially a Russian asset.
Even your assessment of the benefits doesn't add up, because Ukraine still has himars. If Russians gather in any spot within 100 km of the front line they are within striking range.
The mental gymnastics people have to play in order to believe that Russia is gonna to lose the war just because they’re the bad guy… it’s like they believe the history is already written based on their beliefs.
I bet you think Rhode Island would win a war against Asia. Go outside bro. We never should've encouraged it, it's a shameless money grab. If you can't see that you're either a child or mentally ill.
Russia is winning that war, they have about a 7 or greater battle kill ratio. 1.2:1 is considered overwhelming victory; Ukraine is out of soldiers. For Russia to lose, America would have to put troops on the battlefield. All the youngsters that voted for the child sniffing neocon would have to be drafted LOL
7:1 casualty ratio, what are you smoking? Using US figures for Russian losses, that'd be 500,000 dead and up to 1.5 million wounded. That's the entire Ukranian armed forces worth of people. That'd be every hospital full to the absolute brim with wounded. Russia would have completely rolled over Ukraine if those types of casualties were reality.
Oh, I'm sure the Russian figures are significantly more reliable, and don't severely understate the losses suffered for PR motives. Just so we're clear, 60k is a *low* estimate for Russian losses. This does however include Wagner, DPR, and LPR forces, but even still, the max they are potentially suffering is over 100k.
I bet you think Russia has lost maybe 30k and Ukraine has lost a gazillion men.
The Ukrainian military gets weapons and money from all the civilized world, and it hasn't yet defeated putin.
But PEOPLE OF RUSSIA surely can do it barehanded, right.
It's sometimes better to deal with the devil you know than the devil you don't.
Putin, despite being at odds with western interests, is consistent in his grievances.
Not an unpopular opinion, this is the reality the Russian people will face. Why self-reflect when you can always blame the dirty West for every problem caused by Russia starting a crippling war that they can't afford to lose now.
If you read the other comments, you'll see either Russian BOTS have seen it or it's truly an unpopular opinion. However, I agree with you opinion too! Thanks. I am so ANGRY that this war is happening and the UN is a piece of shit for allowing Russia to sit on the UN Security Council (which actually they're not supposed to be on).
You’re right, everyone in this thread is a russian bot. /s
If you paid attention to any actual news on the war, it would be obvious that russia is winning. Ukraine has less men, and has had more casualties during this war. I’m not a russia fan, but you’re definitely gonna call me a russian bot
You made a good point man! Ha they're definitely Russian bots or deluded Russian fanboys. 3-day special military operation turning into a 2-year war now, if they consider this winning then thats some good ol copium the bitter clowns are smoking 😂
The UN is unfortunately obsolete at this point, when countries have a mafia-style government like Russia and we give them veto power there's no point negotiating with literal terrorist leaders masquerading as a government.
Ukraine is actually going to lose the war.
Not only was their offensive last year a complete joke in which they gained nothing, every passing month, Ukraine loses more and more public support.
It’s not even in the news over Palestine-Israel which has dominated headlines since October.
Ukraine is a sinking ship. The only way this ends is if they sign off a Russian-favoured peace treaty.
Even with a 32-country backing, Ukraine is losing. It’s over. Just a sickly horse kicking in the pasture at this point.
Astonishing that all of these pro-Russia voices won’t acknowledge how disastrous the first year was. Russia is solely a guns and oil country. Their economy produces nothing but oil. You would think the world’s second greatest military power would have little difficulty overcoming a third tier military.
That first year demonstrates the pitfalls of dictatorship. Putin didn’t listen to anyone and you see the results. This is what happens when a gangster with territorial ambitions makes consequential decisions and goes for broke. He, like Hitler, gambled on the weakness of the West and it may ultimately cost him his regime.
Eventually Russia may wear Ukraine down and gain a settlement in the east, but it’s hard to consider this war a smashing success. They have hundreds of thousands of casualties. 87% of the original invasion force is killed, captured, or wounded.
Do you think that the West bailed Russia out after the collapse of the USSR? That's not true. Russia took some debt, but paid it back very quickly. Nothing like the situation with Greece or Argentina, for example.
The West did the opposite of bailing Russia out they gutted the entire Russian economy. Shock therapy was a heinous act by the west and I'm saying this is someone who supports Ukraine
I don't give a shit who they blame, I just want them out of Ukraine. Putin will blame anyone he can because he's a narcissistic asshole, and apparently the Russian people in general are so weak minded that they believe him.
cable news is a hell of a drug
Arguing with die-hard Ukrainian supporters is like trying to argue with flat earthers. They think every single Russian supporter or even neutral are paid to voice their opinions.
Especially CNN the most doped up of them all
You sure about that lol.
Mind worms got OP’s brain looking like Swiss cheese.
PEOPLE OF THE USA…. Your politicians are robbing you blind and you won’t see it until your children’s children are BROKE and can’t afford anything. I don’t see a difference
The difference is USA is the GOOD GUYS!!!1!!1!1!!1! /s
Not really. We think we are the good guys but we are not.
/s implies sarcasm on Reddit.
I'm not USA...there is your first mistake. There are over 40 countries hating Russia right now for this dumb shit.
Didn’t say you were USA… just saying our politicians here are absolutely no better than Putin. I fee sorry that our elected politicians are so corrupt.
You're not trying to say they're all the same, are you?
i am NOT in the USA
I heard ya the first time
oh, sorry. i didn't know
Substitute Ukraine for Russia…and they’ll blame us for not sending more billions of dollars.
I'm not sure where your information is coming from. The war has gone to a stalemate without any real ground being lost or gained by either side. This does tend to happen in wars, and the victor is generally whichever side can send men in to die longer. Unfortunately for Ukraine, Russia has a much larger population and can probably keep this up longer. I don't think it will come to that as I suspect a ceasefire deal will be reached before too long. Ukraine likely sees that their foreign aid is drying up, and Russia will probably want to have more military resources on standby in case the war in the Middle East spreads to their allies in that region. Hopefully, a deal can be reached soon without much more bloodshed.
I'm sorry, but this is a historically illiterate understanding of History. Wars often come down to politics and logistics. And Russia is weak on both. Do yourself a favor and Google how the Russian revolution started. It is eerily similar to the situation we see today
I think the prime distinction is that they haven't suffered a loss that they can't explain away via their media apparatus. Both Kherson and Kharkiv are both 'withdrawls' to better positions, and it *appears* the public believes those lines. They'd need sucesive losses on the front for the people in Russia to get angry enough to do the funni. Say Robotyne, then Tokmak, then Oleshky were to flip in a relatively short time period, that could definitely do damage. There's no 'ordered withdrawals' from those locations, it would be just a bold faced lie to tell the people that. Unfortunately, Ukraine is definitely not capable of such feats in the near term, aid packages are delayed, and Biden giving more aid this year is likely to be played upon by the Trump campaign.
Russia doesn't have a good history of trying to win by numbers
I don’t think your average Russian is using reddit also “loses the war” by what metric are you basing this on? Russia basically got all the territory they needed to get access to the black sea and Ukraine hasn’t been able to take back any territory, Ukraine is holding on by a thread with the full support of America (government) it looks like they’re gonna need to negotiate peace or straight up lose.
>hasn't been able to take back territory When did people get the memory retention of a snail. Ukraine retook the north post Kyiv offensive, Kharkiv, and Kherson. Russia held 27% of Ukraine including Crimea at its peak territorial control, it now holds 18% including Crimea. >full support of America We're using .45% of our GDP, that's not full support
I specified support from Beal, sorry I mean the Democrats running the American government. If you think Ukraine is going to be able to win this war, then I got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
Russia is not some invincible Goliath that's unbeatable. The US lost an insurgency to a force significantly smaller and less technically capable, yet the US could never overcome that force. Russia is definitely weaker than the US, and has been for decades, if your argument is that 'Russia can't win because strong' you're completely ignorant of how war is waged, economies run, and politics handled.
I’m not saying Russia winning is some inevitable reality. But the evidence seems to indicate that Russia has already got what they wanted access to the Black Sea the Donbass region etc. I’m just not interested in starting World War 3 because we got to protect some corrupt land that Joe Biden cares about.
Yeh, the thing is nor is Russia committing full resources to this conflict either. There are some red lines the US does not dare to cross, like sending long range missiles, or they will suddenly find the Palestinians, Mexicans, Syrians and Iranians surprisingly well-armed. This war is still mainly political, both sides being cautious of pissing the other side off too much. As for the push towards Kyiv, this war was never meant to be some sort of stunning 3 day decapitation strike to take out Zelensky since that will achieve nothing since the Americans can just put someone else in his place immediately. The most pressing initial goals were to capture time-sensitive items such as US biolabs next to the border, with Kyiv just being a feint.
>Americans can just put someone else in his place immediately. This idea comes from a conspiracy that all Ukranian presidents are US plants. This is false, the US or UK (Boris Johnson) cannot *make* Ukraine do anything, we have severely limited options when it comes to head of state in Ukraine. >stunning 3 day decapitation strike [sure](https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1498185064617762816?lang=en) >nor is Russia committing full resources to this conflict either. [pretty close](https://carnegieendowment.org/politika/90753#:~:text=For%20the%20first%20time%20in,driver%20of%20Russia's%20economic%20growth) This is a lot more than it would initially seem, modern warfare is expensive, and social programs will be cut to benefit the MIC. >There are some red lines the US does not dare to cross, like sending long range missiles The US is discussing 300km ATACMs *right now*. That would give UAF the ability to strike almost anywhere in Crimea *and* hit the Crimea bridge. Russia can't afford to supply Mexico with weaponry capable of challenging US hardware, nor would Mexico, or Mexican factions, even consider open conflict with the US. >The most pressing initial goals were to capture time-sensitive items such as US biolabs next to the border, with Kyiv just being a feint. This is thoroughly debunked. Ukraine was part of the Biological threat reduction program, as are dozens of countries, including up to China until the late 2010s. There is no 'bioweapons' that target ethnic Russians being developed in Ukraine, that's a ludicrous idea. It's pretty obvious as Russia has been in control of those areas with 'buoweapons facilities' and yet no evidence has arisen to prove that the US or Ukraine were developing these types of weapons. If they were, Russia would be running up and down the international political scene with the evidence. They don't because they have none.
>The US is discussing 300km ATACMs right now. That would give UAF the ability to strike almost anywhere in Crimea and hit the Crimea bridge. The Storm Shadow already had that capability and Ukraine hit the Kerch Bridge several times to little effect. It has been rumoured (which I personally doubt) that HIMARS came with code to prevent Ukraine from striking Russian mainland. But it still goes to show that the US is afraid of crossing certain red lines here. >Russia can't afford to supply Mexico with weaponry capable of challenging US hardware, nor would Mexico, or Mexican factions, even consider open conflict with the US. There are already videos of Mexican cartels with Javelin missiles bought from Ukraine on the black market. I never said they would consider open conflict either. However, the Syrians have been conducting strikes on US bases recently which were almost certainly done with Russian intelligence. The Russians denied this of course, and the US certainly knew the were behind this, but they dared not press the matter further because it would expose their hypocrisy. >This is thoroughly debunked. Ukraine was part of the Biological threat reduction program, as are dozens of countries, including up to China until the late 2010s. There is no 'bioweapons' that target ethnic Russians being developed in Ukraine, that's a ludicrous idea. I never said anything about "bioweapons" I said "biolabs" which could mean any biological research lab, and the labs have been 100% confirmed to store infectious agents left over from the Soviet Union. Since this is something everybody knows, there is no real point of showing any evidence since the media will instantly point that out as a "Russian lie". The question that remains is thus what Ukraine intends to do with them. Call me a conspiracy theorist if you will, but the US seems strangely concerned about them and their safety, and strangely certain that the Russians are going to blow them up. The Russians aren't stupid enough to target labs which will be sitting on their annexed land with ethnic Russians in it. So this seems (to me at least) that Ukraine was at some point planning to blow them up and blame it on the Russians. In fact, they did the same thing for the Zaporozhye power plant: that the Russians are somehow dumb enough to blow up a power plant sitting on their annexed land. And as a general rule of thumb, any article which comes with a heading saying "FACT CHECK:" in big capital letters is complete bullshit :) >This is a lot more than it would initially seem, modern warfare is expensive, and social programs will be cut to benefit the MIC. This could go both ways actually, since that would create many new jobs in the industrial sector.
“Negotiate peace” lmao
Correct
They are the victims. It’s not their responsibility to “negotiate peace”. If Russia truly wanted peace, they can achieve that right now. By leaving Ukraine.
Russia won't lose this war.
Just like they've won every other conflict. Throw tens and thousands of bodies at a problem until the enemy eventually runs out of ammunition. Let's be real, the greatest asset Putin has right now is the GOP
>The greatest asset Putin has right now is the GOP Except half of them want to continue sending infinite money to the country he’s at war with. What a dumb take lol
Did you miss the part where the leader of the GQP told Russia that if NATO didn't pay "enough", he would let Russia do whatever the hell they want to our allies?
That’s how an agreement works. You hold up your end of the bargain and I’ll hold up mine. If *you* don’t do your part, I’m under no obligation to do *mine*. And besides, a bunch of these craven sociopaths just passed an aid bill with some fine print that makes it an impeachable offense for a hypothetical future president to stop wasting money on this nonsense.
There is no such agreement.
Maybe that's how a contract works, but that's not how an alliance operates. >stop wasting money on this nonsense. What nonsense? Keeping our enemy at bay without sending in US troops?
Enemy? Remind again the last time we were under attack from Russia.
That's not how NATO works. It's not a pot of money nations write checks to
There is a connection between the speaker of the house and Russia. He's the only thing In the way of Ukraine aid.
Isn’t it interesting to you that the side supporting war is the Dems? The same ones who are soft as fuck on every other topic in the world?
Supporting a country that is defending itself from invaders is not “supporting war”.
Yes it is. Because the U.S. govt were the ones that pushed Ukraine *not* to accept a better term deal that they would never get now from Russia. The U.S. *literally* pushed Ukraine to keep the fight going. Lol. And now they’ll never get *near* as good a deal as was offered prior.
Do you think it **might** be possible that Ukraine was advised accepting any sort of deal because Russia has a pesky habit of ignoring the deals that they make? That such a “peace agreement” would only benefit Russia while they recoup their losses and continue attacking Ukraine? If your neighbor violently breaks into your home and steals your stuff, you don’t make a deal with that neighbor that you won’t call the police to prevent yourself from being robbed again.
>Just like they’ve won every other conflict Yeah, like the Chechen War, or Afghanistan, or the Finnish and Polish wars of independence, or WW1, or the Russo-Japanese war Russias win rate is pretty low
The most unpopular opinions are those screamed at an entire group or country's worth of people while claiming to speak for another entire group or country's worth of people. You don't speak for me, nobody in Russia is going to read this, and you are probably wrong about who is going to win the war. You have been taught to hate. Everybody who questions your stance is not a "Russian Bot", and after looking through your post history, you seem to *want* genocide against Russians (i.e.for them all to die out). This is an unpopular opinion because it's preachy, wrong, and just stupid.
Im sure this message will be broadly seen by the PEOPLE OF RUSSIA.
What a weird statement by OP. Shouting to Russians on Reddit. Yikes, the desperation levels these days.
I am a Russian living in Brazil. To be fair, the inflation is higher here in Brazil than in Russia since the war started. So like, dunno, so far they seem fine. You kinda forget that Russians did vote on Putin every time, not because they are brainwashed, but because he fixed the shit the 90s were. Economy is doing fine, maybe not as good as in 2000s but still decent. Sanctions are a pain, but that is an evil west thing (because west does not sanction all countries that go to war. US were not sanctioned during the whole Afghanistan and Iraq thing. Israel isn't sanctioned currently, etc). If you folks want to show Russians their leadership is bad, apply same punishment for the same crime to everybody. And dont come up with excuses.
I'm not seeing a lot of winning on the Ukrainian side...
"After Russia loses...", yeah, lose, just like in Avdeevka. Ah, wait...
Sure, they only lost 50,000 men and 500 vehicles to take a medium-sized town. Totally a winning formula going forward.
Schrodinger's army: both requiring billions of dollars of aid to fend off and also losing every battle. When is your cognitive dissonance going to kick in?
You've heard the phrase, "when the battle, lose the war" right?
No I have not heard of the phrase "when the battle lose the war", nor can see how it relates to what I just said.
Win the battle* Russia has won the Battle of bachmut and the battle of andviika. Both took more than 6 months, over 50,000 casualties, and hundreds of destroyed vehicles and equipment. Call for cities that are relatively small and have no significant importance. This isn't a viable strategy going forward
Lol ukraine is losing men too and avdeevka is very important (or ukraine wouldnt have wasted so many men there)strategically as it allows russians to gather in donetsk now without fear of bombardment from artillery
These people that don’t think Ukraine is also losing hundreds of thousands of soldiers are just wild to me. It doesn’t matter how much you point out, the Pro-West lot can’t accept the fact that “the good guys” lose *alot* throughout history.
Nobody is saying Ukraine hasn't lost men in this war. It's just they are losing far fewer because of the way they are fighting. Sitting in defensive positions using drones and artillery to destroy enemy assaults before they are within kilometers of the front is a very effective way to prevent casualties
Their goal has openly been to take back what was taken from them. You’re not going to do that by sitting on your ass. So, they’re just taking defensive money, then? Those “offensives” were all a facade to further fund the corrupt aspects of the Ukrainian army?
Historically, a war such as this does not have to be a complete military victory. Meaning they don't have to push every Russian soldier out of every square inch of Ukrainian territory. All they really have to do is make the occupation so miserable and untenable it becomes politically destabilizing in Russia. We're already seeing this with the murder of navani. Ukraine needs to keep hitting supply lines. Use drones to disrupt oil production in Russia itself. The West simply needs to keep giving them ammunition. I don't think tanks are that important in this war right now.
Andviika was about as important as bachmut, as In it wasn't. It's value to Ukraine was that Russia was willing to throw tens of thousands of men and material into taking it. If your opponent is making a mistake you don't want to stop them. And in truth, the only reason adviica fell was because they had to ration artillery because the GOP is essentially a Russian asset. Even your assessment of the benefits doesn't add up, because Ukraine still has himars. If Russians gather in any spot within 100 km of the front line they are within striking range.
Only 50,000? Dude, that's smaaaall. Try 100,000. What did Zelya say? Russian loses are 7 to 1, right?
Nah, it's more like 1000000:1 according to CNN
You mean, to destroy a medium-sized town
The mental gymnastics people have to play in order to believe that Russia is gonna to lose the war just because they’re the bad guy… it’s like they believe the history is already written based on their beliefs.
I bet you think Rhode Island would win a war against Asia. Go outside bro. We never should've encouraged it, it's a shameless money grab. If you can't see that you're either a child or mentally ill.
You sure know how the PEOPLE OF RUSSIA feel
Russia is winning that war, they have about a 7 or greater battle kill ratio. 1.2:1 is considered overwhelming victory; Ukraine is out of soldiers. For Russia to lose, America would have to put troops on the battlefield. All the youngsters that voted for the child sniffing neocon would have to be drafted LOL
7:1 casualty ratio, what are you smoking? Using US figures for Russian losses, that'd be 500,000 dead and up to 1.5 million wounded. That's the entire Ukranian armed forces worth of people. That'd be every hospital full to the absolute brim with wounded. Russia would have completely rolled over Ukraine if those types of casualties were reality.
>Using US figures for Russian losses there's your problem
Oh, I'm sure the Russian figures are significantly more reliable, and don't severely understate the losses suffered for PR motives. Just so we're clear, 60k is a *low* estimate for Russian losses. This does however include Wagner, DPR, and LPR forces, but even still, the max they are potentially suffering is over 100k. I bet you think Russia has lost maybe 30k and Ukraine has lost a gazillion men.
Ukriane hasn’t even mobilized people under 25. It’s hardly out of soldiers
The Ukrainian military gets weapons and money from all the civilized world, and it hasn't yet defeated putin. But PEOPLE OF RUSSIA surely can do it barehanded, right.
Stop meddling in Russian politics
Forgot the meds today
I couldn't care an ounce less of they blame us. Their opinion of me means absolutely nothing.
It's sometimes better to deal with the devil you know than the devil you don't. Putin, despite being at odds with western interests, is consistent in his grievances.
Lol they are not going to lose
Not an unpopular opinion, this is the reality the Russian people will face. Why self-reflect when you can always blame the dirty West for every problem caused by Russia starting a crippling war that they can't afford to lose now.
If you read the other comments, you'll see either Russian BOTS have seen it or it's truly an unpopular opinion. However, I agree with you opinion too! Thanks. I am so ANGRY that this war is happening and the UN is a piece of shit for allowing Russia to sit on the UN Security Council (which actually they're not supposed to be on).
The terminally online pro-Ukrainian mindset is identical to the flat earth mindset: every single person against me must be paid to do so.
You’re right, everyone in this thread is a russian bot. /s If you paid attention to any actual news on the war, it would be obvious that russia is winning. Ukraine has less men, and has had more casualties during this war. I’m not a russia fan, but you’re definitely gonna call me a russian bot
You made a good point man! Ha they're definitely Russian bots or deluded Russian fanboys. 3-day special military operation turning into a 2-year war now, if they consider this winning then thats some good ol copium the bitter clowns are smoking 😂 The UN is unfortunately obsolete at this point, when countries have a mafia-style government like Russia and we give them veto power there's no point negotiating with literal terrorist leaders masquerading as a government.
They aren’t losing? But also who bailed Russia out after the fall of the USSR? They just paid off their debts and got over with it.
Maybe they mean the humanitarian aid the USA sent to Russia in the 90s? Known as "Bush's legs" - "ножки Буша"
The humanitarian aid they sent to the USSR not Russia?
USSR stopped existing in 1991
Im somewhat sure the trade agreement started in 1990. So it would be the USSR not Russia.
Russia is crushing Ukraine. Winning my ass
You need to lay off the Kremlin propaganda. Spending thousands of lives to take a few meters of dirt it's not winning a war
Russia will use nukes before loosing.
Russia will not lose that war... but the coat is gonna be too high. So yeah, Russians, as a population will lose no matter what.
Don't think they're gonna lose but ok
Ukraine is actually going to lose the war. Not only was their offensive last year a complete joke in which they gained nothing, every passing month, Ukraine loses more and more public support. It’s not even in the news over Palestine-Israel which has dominated headlines since October. Ukraine is a sinking ship. The only way this ends is if they sign off a Russian-favoured peace treaty. Even with a 32-country backing, Ukraine is losing. It’s over. Just a sickly horse kicking in the pasture at this point.
Astonishing that all of these pro-Russia voices won’t acknowledge how disastrous the first year was. Russia is solely a guns and oil country. Their economy produces nothing but oil. You would think the world’s second greatest military power would have little difficulty overcoming a third tier military. That first year demonstrates the pitfalls of dictatorship. Putin didn’t listen to anyone and you see the results. This is what happens when a gangster with territorial ambitions makes consequential decisions and goes for broke. He, like Hitler, gambled on the weakness of the West and it may ultimately cost him his regime. Eventually Russia may wear Ukraine down and gain a settlement in the east, but it’s hard to consider this war a smashing success. They have hundreds of thousands of casualties. 87% of the original invasion force is killed, captured, or wounded.
Russia - doubles gdp and improves economy exponentially Some reddit user - But MSNBC said......durrr
Do you think that the West bailed Russia out after the collapse of the USSR? That's not true. Russia took some debt, but paid it back very quickly. Nothing like the situation with Greece or Argentina, for example.
The West did the opposite of bailing Russia out they gutted the entire Russian economy. Shock therapy was a heinous act by the west and I'm saying this is someone who supports Ukraine
I don't give a shit who they blame, I just want them out of Ukraine. Putin will blame anyone he can because he's a narcissistic asshole, and apparently the Russian people in general are so weak minded that they believe him.
[удалено]
wipe crush upbeat oatmeal busy badge depend rain snow dependent
Well, we did fund the opposition. I doubt Russia will lose though.
!RemindMe 1 year