"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Putin wanted war with the West. This is how the West fights a war.
 
drgondog said:
Specifics please -facts and sources to contradict? Point out vested interest in article to deceive or subvert? In other words - why specifically do you claim 'skewed and not to be weighed as objective'?
Click to expand...
You are kidding aren't you?
  1. Nearly all involves quotes from 1 individual: Russian journalist Anatoly Karlin
  2. Comes from known pro-Russian biased website
  3. Stupid comments such as "Russia will win. NATO weapons will be suppressed by the spirit of our fighters. " and "In the seventh month of the war, Russia finally resorted to something NATO did to Serbia, and the U.S. subsequently did to Iraq." or "Russia might escalate in response to NATO's proxy war against it"
  4. And then finish it off with the fact that it is almost an incoherent rambling rather than an actual article.
 
Last edited:
I have wondered how well Ukraine's Army will be able to maintain a fluid supply line to their advancing forces.

This is one aspect that has plagued similar situations in the past.
Even Rommel and Patton had difficulties with it.
Without steady supplies, their momentum was hampered.

The one upside in this case, though, is that they are capturing intact Russian stockpiles, which helps considerably.
 
I'm sorry, I was less than specific. I wanted your rebuttal to the Counteroffensive and Market Implications paragraphs - not the quotes from Karlin which are hardly anything other than opinons from Russian side. Your comments on these last two opinion paragraphs .
 

Well, let's start with the statement "The longer the war goes on, more Ukrainian and Russian soldiers will get killed." Firstly, no Ukrainian or Russian soldiers need have died if Russia hadn't invaded in the first place. Then there's the rather obvious omission of Ukrainian civilian casualties in that opening sentence. Instead, the article strongly suggests ("And now Ukrainian civilians will suffer as Russia targets their infrastructure") that Russia is only now targeting civilians directly because of the change in tactics wrought by the Ukrainian military offensive. Failure to recognize the civilian casualties inflicted by Russian indiscriminate attacks against Ukrainian cities smacks of a thoroughly Russophile interpretation of the conflict.

In the Market Implications paragraph we have another reference to "NATO's proxy war" again ignoring the fact that Russia invaded Ukraine. Overall the paragraph doesn't say anything that hasn't already been said in Western media. Russia could cut off fuel supplies, which is why the European nations have been scrambling to find mitigation approaches. In another Russophile slant, the Russian threat to cut off fuel supplies to Europe focuses on the impacts to the Western nations, with zero mention of the impact on Russia. Again, as I've said multiple times, Russia can't afford to cut off supplies entirely because it would halt one of the few sources of foreign income available to Moscow (and, no, India and China won't make up the deficit, even if Russia could overcome the logistical hurdles of pushing fuels eastwards when all their infrastructure points to the west).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 1, guests: 1)

Similar threads

M
All V-22's Grounded
Replies
2
Views
876
GTX
M
All This For The Low, Low Price of .....
Replies
19
Views
1K
MIflyer
M
M
The Wrath of KAAN?
Replies
3
Views
571
Snautzer01
M
What Is The Point Of This?
Replies
3
Views
370
SaparotRob
M
USAF Provides More Proof That UFOs are Real!
Replies
0
Views
385
MIflyer
M
Menu
Log in
Register