Ukraine lounge

911

Peacock
Catholic
Gold Member
I have never known a single soldier that was a faggot or a leftist or anything similar.

If you think squadies in likes of Coldstream Guards, Royal Anglian, Royal Irish, highlanders etc are anything like that id suggest you are in danger of ODing on pol memes.

You can bet that russian military leadership dont consider British military capabilty in remotely the way you caricatured.

In reality soldiers, at very least british that ive known, and no dont doubt similar elsewhere are tough no nonsense lads from old industrial regions like south wales valleys, north east, scotland (historically 5m scotland make up 25 pct of of uk infantry).

They would fire at the enemy, because they are highly professional soldiers. The pct of muslims in uk army is borderline nil. "paki commanding officers" basically likewise.

We would probably have a situation that isn't unlike Gallipoli, if only smaller, with those brave 10k-20k British and Australian soldiers sent into the grinder facing up to 30,000 Russian tanks and armored vehicles operating under full artillery cover.

The only real threat to Russia from NATO would be a combined air force effort by all members, but for this to happen they would have to move into Ukraine first, which Russia won't allow. Russia will attack the Ukraine as soon as NATO starts building up a large military presence in that country.

Russia is not likely to attack the Ukraine without the cover of a Pacific front, they will coordinate that attack with a Chinese attack on Taiwan, and conversely, China is a lot less likely to invade Taiwan without an EE/Ukrainian front being open. But if red lines are crossed either in the Ukraine or in Taiwan, then all bets are off.
 

Galaxy_Traveler

Robin
Other Christian
Before I give a personal opinion on the developments at the Ukrainian-Russian border, along with a projection of what I think may happen, I think it is appropriate to do what none of the mainstream media seem to be able to do. To take a step back to appreciate the Ukrainian-Russian crisis as the perfect example of geopolitics that it is:

Why has Russia such a bloody history with Western Europe? Between the Invasions of Napoleon and Hitler and the involvement in World War 1, Russia lost approx. 25 Million people, had hundreds of its cities destroyed, its economy ruined and its society traumatized. Was it because of ethnic animosity, was it because of religion, or because of ideology that caused all this suffering and bloodshed for the Russian people? Despite what the Nazis in 1941 gave as their reason for invading the Soviet Union, which points to a mix of ethnic as well as ideological reasons, the main reason for centuries of bloodshed between Russians and Western Europeans is not related to anything ideological and ethnic. The reason for all this bloodshed is Russia's geopolitical situation.

Geopolitics, as it refers to the politics of a country being dictated by their geographic location, can be understood as the root cause, the mother of all factors, the prime motivation for countries' military activities. And the geopolitical weakness that Russia is exposed to led to the consistent bloodshed and suffering of its people for centuries.

The tragedy of Russia is that its European part that is host to its largest cities and population centers up to the Ural mountains lies on the Eastern side of the geographical structure called the European plain. The European plain stretches from Western France across most of central Europe all the way to the Ural Mountains. It is entirely flat land that has no mountains, and the rivers that flow through it can be crossed relatively quickly by entire armies, as the Romans were already able to do with relatively simple means. This flat, fertile land full of forests that stretches across Europe is the perfect staging ground for large scale warfare. Look at the European plain, and see the reason for Europe's bloody history. It is the root cause for the World Wars, the reason why Germany went through the Netherlands in both World Wars to invade France, the cause of Prussia's militaristic culture and the emergence of Germany as a continentally oriented rather than a globally oriented power. The European plain is the graveyard of the European warrior.

Screen Shot 2021-12-06 at 20.04.31.png

For Russia, its location on the Eastern side of the European plain is a constant dilemma. Its large size stretching from the Baltic sea to the Caspian sea makes it very difficult to defend against invaders, and an army starting to March in Western France can reach Moscow in a few months. For a European head of state looking to expand his territory by conquest, Russia is the most tempting target. Its geographic location makes it look easy to invade.
In the past, whenever a middle power emerged in central Europe, the likelihood of an invasion of Russia was very high: Napoleon did it in 1812, The German Empire and Austria-Hungary in 1914, Hitler in 1941. Each time Russia managed to survive, but each time it suffered destruction of biblical proportions: Loosing up to a Quarter of its entire population, Most of its cities bombed to the ground, territorial losses, as well as the emergence of the communists in 1917 as one of the results of the war.

Russian leaders of all times are keenly aware of this issue of Russia being on the exposed side of the European plain, and its entire defense doctrine is based on trying to control the countries at its immediate border to Europe and pushing its sphere of influence as far West as possible. This is what Putin has been doing in the last few decades, when he tries to seek influence in Ukraine and took control of Crimea.

So what does this mean for the current situation of Russian troops massing at the Crimean border?
The Russian leadership is keenly aware of history, and they learned their lessons from the past: The last few times they were invaded, the invasion happened in a moment when they were caught off guard. World War 1 was a crisis that spiraled out of control into a full blown world war by the assassination of the Austrian crown prince that nobody could foresee, and in World War 2, Stalin trusted Hitler to keep is word on the non aggression pact.
The Russians know that such a crisis often happens when they expect it the least, and they know they have to act preemptively in order to keep their open European flank under control. Moscow is less than a day's drive away from the Ukrainian border, and they would rather risk a war than allowing Ukraine to fall under Western control.
Putin at the same time is starting to think of his legacy as he is growing older. He does not want to go down in history as the leader who allowed another military buildup at the Russian border. When will the next European invader try to conquer Russia? These things are hard to foresee, but they happen suddenly and are always unexpected. The best way for Russia to prepare against that is to act preemptively, and for this reason I think they will ultimately attack if they feel that Ukraine is getting too much under the control of NATO. Whether this situation leads to war does not depend on Russia. It depends on NATO. If NATO drops its ambitions of integrating Ukraine as a member, then Russia won't attack. However if they do try to integrate Ukraine, looking at their bloody history, Russia would be stupid not to attack.
 
Last edited:
Before I give a personal opinion on the developments at the Ukrainian-Russian border, along with a projection of what I think may happen, I think it is appropriate to do what none of the mainstream media seem to be able to do. To take a step back to appreciate the Ukrainian-Russian crisis as the perfect example of geopolitics that it is:

Why has Russia such a bloody history with Western Europe? Between the Invasions of Napoleon and Hitler and the involvement in World War 1, Russia lost approx. 25 Million people, had hundreds of its cities destroyed, its economy ruined and its society traumatized. Was it because of ethnic animosity, was it because of religion, or because of ideology that caused all this suffering and bloodshed for the Russian people? Despite what the Nazis in 1941 gave as their reason for invading the Soviet Union, which points to a mix of ethnic as well as ideological reasons, the main reason for centuries of bloodshed between Russians and Western Europeans is not related to anything ideological and ethnic. The reason for all this bloodshed is Russia's geopolitical situation.

Geopolitics, as it refers to the politics of a country being dictated by their geographic location, can be understood as the root cause, the mother of all factors, the prime motivation for countries' military activities. And the geopolitical weakness that Russia is exposed to led to the consistent bloodshed and suffering of its people for centuries.

The tragedy of Russia is that its European part that is host to its largest cities and population centers up to the Ural mountains lies on the Eastern side of the geographical structure called the European plain. The European plain stretches from Western France across most of central Europe all the way to the Ural Mountains. It is entirely flat land that has no mountains, and the rivers that flow through it can be crossed relatively quickly by entire armies, as the Romans were already able to do with relatively simple means. This flat, fertile land full of forests that stretches across Europe is the perfect staging ground for large scale warfare. Look at the European plain, and see the reason for Europe's bloody history. It is the root cause for the World Wars, the reason why Germany went through the Netherlands in both World Wars to invade France, the cause of Prussia's militaristic culture and the emergence of Germany as a continentally oriented rather than a globally oriented power. The European plain is the graveyard of the European warrior.

View attachment 35352

For Russia, its location on the Eastern side of the European plain is a constant dilemma. Its large size stretching from the Baltic sea to the Caspian sea makes it very difficult to defend against invaders, and an army starting to March in Western France can reach Moscow in a few months. For a European head of state looking to expand his territory by conquest, Russia is the most tempting target. Its geographic location makes it look easy to invade.
In the past, whenever a middle power emerged in central Europe, the likelihood of an invasion of Russia was very high: Napoleon did it in 1812, The German Empire and Austria-Hungary in 1914, Hitler in 1941. Each time Russia managed to survive, but each time it suffered destruction of biblical proportions: Loosing up to a Quarter of its entire population, Most of its cities bombed to the ground, territorial losses, as well as the emergence of the communists in 1917 as one of the results of the war.

Russian leaders of all times are keenly aware of this issue of Russia being on the exposed side of the European plain, and its entire defense doctrine is based on trying to control the countries at its immediate border to Europe and pushing its sphere of influence as far West as possible. This is what Putin has been doing in the last few decades, when he tries to seek influence in Ukraine and took control of Crimea.

So what does this mean for the current situation of Russian troops massing at the Crimean border?
The Russian leadership is keenly aware of history, and they learned their lessons from the past: The last few times they were invaded, the invasion happened in a moment when they were caught off guard. World War 1 was a crisis that spiraled out of control into a full blown world war by the assassination of the Austrian crown prince that nobody could foresee, and in World War 2, Stalin trusted Hitler to keep is word on the non aggression pact.
The Russians know that such a crisis often happens when they expect it the least, and they know they have to act preemptively in order to keep their open European flank under control. Moscow is less than a day's drive away from the Ukrainian border, and they would rather risk a war than allowing Ukraine to fall under Western control.
Putin at the same time is starting to think of his legacy as he is growing older. He does not want to go down in history as the leader who allowed another military buildup at the Russian border. When will the next European invader try to conquer Russia? These things are hard to foresee, but they happen suddenly and are always unexpected. The best way for Russia to prepare against that is to act preemptively, and for this reason I think they will ultimately attack if they feel that Ukraine is getting too much under the control of NATO. Whether this situation leads to war does not depend on Russia. It depends on NATO. If NATO drops its ambitions of integrating Ukraine as a member, then Russia won't attack. However if they do try to integrate Ukraine, looking at their bloody history, Russia would be stupid not to attack
Great write up. Very thorough and insightful.
 

Going strong

Crow
Orthodox Inquirer
Gold Member
No Western army could invade Russia, as Western armies have no ground troops anymore (just some elite commando troops, few in numbers).

No Western country could build an army through conscription anymore, as the vast majority of Western males are extremely soy, individualist, shy and helpless.

So except China, no one has the soldiers to invade Russia.

Aa to bombing Russia, from air or sea, good luck with the nuclear reaction it would trigger.

So, Putin could do what he wants. The push back would be Swift system banning. And more importantly, Seizure of oligarch properties outside of Russia.

That's why I think Russian offensive is unlikely unless a good casus belli is stumbled upon. But who knows, as the user wrote above, Putin is getting older and might want to secure Crimea and his (glorious then it would be) place in History by sacrificing Oligarchs' money invested abroad.

As to Ukrainian soldiers, hopefully they won't fight for Obama Biden and their crooked Establishment from Kyiv. They should reunite with their Russian brothers and join their Orthodox forces, against the gay migrant-infested West.

Any Ukrainian soldier who'd choose the ObamaBidenLGBT camp over his Slavic Russian brothers, would deserve a sad fate in combat. If I were Ukrainian I surely would not fight for Biden Harris and the Lgbt West, and neither would I fight for the small Jewish actor who's comfy in a Kyiv Palace counting his millions and doing Zooms with Obama.

Same could be said of Western soldiers. Why should they fight good, Conservative, heterosexual, Christian Russian soldiers? Instead they should turn on their own gay, Godless, "diverse", leadership.

I'm pretty sure that if the West ever starts a huge ground war anywhere (and I don't see how it could be possible, but who knows), against a white, Christian nation (like Russia, Hungary, Serbia, etc) many of their own Western soldiers, among "diverse" battalions, would have funny thoughts as to who their enemies are.

And the Western brass know it too. They know they can't field "diverse" battalions, or it would turn into a friendly fire contest.
 
Last edited:

Going strong

Crow
Orthodox Inquirer
Gold Member
A few days ago, the (intelligent) user El Draque, kinda chastised me and wrote on this thread that the UK armed forces were not, as I've said of Western armies, "full of gays, soys, fat lazy careerists and Diverse hirings".

Post in thread 'Ukraine conflict lounge' https://www.rooshvforum.com/threads/ukraine-conflict-lounge.15139/post-1547583

Well, I'll admit that El Draque is somewhat right on this, as I believe that UK armed forces are a bit less gay/Diverse than the other Western ones. With a bunch of good, famed commandos.

But, look and behold, just today the Defence chief of the UK, has told the press that... he actually wants more gays, Islamists and wymin in the army! Exactly what I've described on this thread : western armies are Woke and proud of it!

Can you imagine how good, dignified Russian soldiers, Heterosexual and Christian, would rout them?

Here is the quote from the Woke UK army boss, enjoy the decline :

"In his speech, Radakin also called for more diversity in the military’s ranks, particularly more women.

“This is not about wokefulness. It is about woefulness. The woefulness of too few women … not reflecting the ethnic, religious and cognitive diversity of our nation … not following our own values, whether respect for each other... ,” Radakin noted".

Just lol. Western armies are exactly as I've described here, gay and totally useless except a few Commando elite troops. Putin could roll his tanks to Frankfurt with no resistance. None.

By the way I can't help but notice the Russian-sounding name of the UK defence chief. Maybe the Russians put a mole in there, charged with hiring wymin, gays and Diverse. Great move : you win by making your enemies Woke. Game over, your adversaries are gays.
 

La Águila Negra

Ostrich
Other Christian
Was just catching up on this. Very unsettling with Biden at the helm. Steve Bannon goes onto Tim Poole to discuss the situation.



I am one minute in and already disappointed on the amount of propaganda seeping through. It's something of a bi-partisan American thing to fall for this type of gaslighting, unfortunately.

There is no Russian troop build up on Ukraine's border, and therefor there is no imminent invasion.

Similarly there is no 'centrist middle of the road' approach in this whole charade. Frankly it reminds me of the coronavirus hoax and the WMD scam. Trick your political enemies into accepting part of the narrative through these psychological mindgames. No. Instead reject their paradigm completely.

What is happening though is a defensive Russian troop concentration in strategic staging areas. Those areas are hundreds of kilometers from the Ukrainian border. This is related to constant Ukrainian/NATO violations of the Minsk ll Agreements. In fact the main staging area, Yelnya, is 275 km from the Ukrainian border. 275 kilometers. It's closer to Moscow than it is to Ukraine. I just checked out the distance Amsterdam-Brussels. 210 km, and it will take ~2.5 hours by car to get there. For what it's worth.


What we are witnessing here is a massive propaganda campaign to massage public opinion into believing the Russian Threat narrative. On this wave of outrage and political will NATO will then move more heavy weapon systems and personnel into the country. NATO will also greatly expand financial/military help to the country.

And ironically enough it is the creeping NATO-ization that will make Russia eventually take the bait and put a stop to these brazen provocations. If US and allies keep up the pace that point might be reached quite fast.

It's an absolute master-plan looking at it from a bird's eye, I have to admit. The US has been constantly out playing and out maneuvering Russia. Putin is to blame for it.
 
Last edited:

La Águila Negra

Ostrich
Other Christian
And yet, if something should/were to happen, now is the right time for Putin.

"Pandemia" helps in several ways, drawing the eyes of the world away, and allowing for extreme internal control of opposition. Winter helps for tanks, and gas supply retaliation.

Recognising the independence of the 2 break aways, and maybe throwing Odessa in, for the corridor, would be a decisive step in securing Crimea, and expose NATO as powerless to counterattack.

If Putin waits more, Biden/Obama will resume arming the Ukraine, and strangle Crimea, the jewel. Putin cannot remain in the frozen mode there, because of Biden Obama's plots and weapons delivery.

So at long last we will really know what Putin is really made of. Is he just a very good smart leader, who got Crimea (temporary?) back, or, is he the great ultimate hero stratege that Mother Russia deserves, who will forever secure Crimea (and get Odessa back).

The post below is one I made elsewhere but wanted to share here as well. It doesn't play exactly into your doubts but I wanted to go into Putin's often overlooked shortcomings anyway. Russia is between a rock and hard place here and the praise he gets completely undeserved in my opinion

Putin is a weak leader, not sure where at-right veneration comes from.

He completely unnecessarily let Ukraine slip out of his hands in 2014, backstabbed Yanukovich, let the US get away with stepping on his red lines and only after it became clear that the US was going to take over the Russian naval base in Sebastopol did he finally do something.

Same with the Donbass. Not many people know that Putin let Mariupol fall to the Ukros in 2014 to cut the DPR/LPR off from naval access. Keep them small, dependent and use them as a chip to block NATO accession for the Ukraine

Obviously the US just worked around it by creeping NATOization. There are tons of un-official bases and missions in Ukraine. Putin got played yet again

US wins either way. What is their goal? Counter the emergence of a Eurasian economic system. That's why they are so opposed to NS2. Keep Europe divided, keep the EU close and keep NATO relevant

So they are again expanding eastwards.

If Russia intervenes Europe will be forced to cut all ties to Russia. Ukraine, which is a wreck, will be dumped on Russia's plate.

If Russia doesn't intervene they'll soon have NATO ICBMs on their borders - yet again. And they'll look incredibly weak in the eyes of the rest of the world.


What's Putin going to do? He should have nipped Ukraine in the bud already in 2014. Now it's becoming a really big problem.

Fortunately he has rolled out his QR slave system after an 18 billion USD gift of the IMF, and is looking to impose an all-encompassing CBDC soon (Sberbank's CEO Herman Greff is on the WEFs Board of Trustees)

Tackling real problems there Vlad!
 

eradicator

Peacock
Agnostic
Gold Member
No Western army could invade Russia, as Western armies have no ground troops anymore (just some elite commando troops, few in numbers).

No Western country could build an army through conscription anymore, as the vast majority of Western males are extremely soy, individualist, shy and helpless.

So except China, no one has the soldiers to invade Russia.

Aa to bombing Russia, from air or sea, good luck with the nuclear reaction it would trigger.

So, Putin could do what he wants. The push back would be Swift system banning. And more importantly, Seizure of oligarch properties outside of Russia.

That's why I think Russian offensive is unlikely unless a good casus belli is stumbled upon. But who knows, as the user wrote above, Putin is getting older and might want to secure Crimea and his (glorious then it would be) place in History by sacrificing Oligarchs' money invested abroad.

As to Ukrainian soldiers, hopefully they won't fight for Obama Biden and their crooked Establishment from Kyiv. They should reunite with their Russian brothers and join their Orthodox forces, against the gay migrant-infested West.

Any Ukrainian soldier who'd choose the ObamaBidenLGBT camp over his Slavic Russian brothers, would deserve a sad fate in combat. If I were Ukrainian I surely would not fight for Biden Harris and the Lgbt West, and neither would I fight for the small Jewish actor who's comfy in a Kyiv Palace counting his millions and doing Zooms with Obama.

Same could be said of Western soldiers. Why should they fight good, Conservative, heterosexual, Christian Russian soldiers? Instead they should turn on their own gay, Godless, "diverse", leadership.

I'm pretty sure that if the West ever starts a huge ground war anywhere (and I don't see how it could be possible, but who knows), against a white, Christian nation (like Russia, Hungary, Serbia, etc) many of their own Western soldiers, among "diverse" battalions, would have funny thoughts as to who their enemies are.

And the Western brass know it too. They know they can't field "diverse" battalions, or it would turn into a friendly fire contest.

At some point, the USA military will be full of obese women, trannies and faggots that cannot walk with a pack or do a push up but are essentially diversity hires because diversity. And we are supposed to fight China and Russia who have regular armies.

Our army won’t be shooting at itself because of race but because they are poorly trained and completely inept.
 

dicknixon72

Pelican
Tucker got the good word out on this abortion of a foreign policy move. Col. Doug MacGregor also did yeoman's work pointing out the fact that we're ready to go to war against an Orthodox Christian nation...



COL MACGREGOR: "This is not the Soviet Union, this is Russia - a Russian state that rests on the foundation of Orthodox Christianity. Its back to what it has been for a thousand years. We should celebrate that, not try to destroy it."
CARLSON: "Maybe that's one of the reasons we're trying to destroy it..."
COL MACGREGOR: "Could be."
 

DeusLuxMeaEst

Pelican
Orthodox Catechumen
Gold Member
Tucker got the good word out on this abortion of a foreign policy move. Col. Doug MacGregor also did yeoman's work pointing out the fact that we're ready to go to war against an Orthodox Christian nation...



COL MACGREGOR: "This is not the Soviet Union, this is Russia - a Russian state that rests on the foundation of Orthodox Christianity. Its back to what it has been for a thousand years. We should celebrate that, not try to destroy it."
CARLSON: "Maybe that's one of the reasons we're trying to destroy it..."
COL MACGREGOR: "Could be."


Goes back to a live stream where Roosh asked, who's work is the US currently doing?

We are no longer a nation under God...well the US is following a 'God' of sorts (of light) alright, and it's clearly not the Christian God.
 

dicknixon72

Pelican
Goes back to a live stream where Roosh asked, who's work is the US currently doing?

We are no longer a nation under God...well the US is following a 'God' of sorts (of light) alright, and it's clearly not the Christian God.

I feel a good number of Americans follow the righteous path, or at least try to. Our government, however, does not.

I am reassured, though, that foreign countries recognize this and know that the average America is a kind, optimistic, generous, forgiving, hard-working, and decent person longing to be free of our (((shackles))).
 

Don Quixote

Ostrich
Orthodox Inquirer
I can't believe what I'm reading. In Europe's supposed plan to rebuke Russian "aggression," one of its bargaining chips is to block the NordStream 2 pipeline LOL. It's like saying Europe will shoot itself in the leg if Russia makes a move. I can't even believe the sheer idiocy of this statement, which to me illustrates just how clear the desperation is, or more likely, what an intentional spiral into chaos this whole thing is.
 

Don Quixote

Ostrich
Orthodox Inquirer
We should game out what exactly is going on here. Is it possible that the U.S. actually wants Russia to invade, not to start world war 3 (although it certainly moves the dial in that direction), but rather so they can shut oil off to Europe? Would a European energy crisis benefit the U.S.? No. But it might benefit Davos. Right now Europe is having mini uprisings everywhere; a new elaborately created crisis would help them clamp down on these. I don't know, but what do people here think? Because at the moment, if Biden refuses to withdraw Ukraine's NATO commitment I think Putin will take back Ukraine in 2022. This may even stir up a similar coordinated move from China.
 
Top