Russia Ukraine War 2022

Who will win this war?.


  • Total voters
    543

GaudaNaresh

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2022
Messages
2,911
Likes
9,295
Country flag
1. Lost Syria proxy war, not direct military intervention.
sure. a proxy war involving you is still a war and your loss is still a loss
2. Lost Vietnam due to cultural weakeness (won every major battle, though)
Irrelevant. War is won or lost on the basis of accomplishing or not accomplishing the stategic objectives. 'won every battle but lost the war' has happened several times in history. still a loss. Pyrrhus of Epirus is the most famous historical example amongst westoids. Another one is Hannibal barca during his italian campaign : won every battle ( in italy). lost the war.

3. Iraq was a military victory- Saddam hussein was no more, but the war was totally uncalled 4
4. Afghanistan- lost proxy war, not lost military intervention
Afghanistan = vietnam. direct military involvement. Direct loss via the same 'won every battle but lost the war' axiom. Pyrrhus lost the war too. Same in iraq.
 

Dark Sorrow

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
4,988
Likes
9,931
Two Russian villages were evacuated after a fire at a munitions depot near the Ukrainian border in Belgorod province.

 

Dark Sorrow

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
4,988
Likes
9,931
For Russia to set out to halt NATO expansion this is another setback : Palki Sharma Upadhyay

 

Kumaoni

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2022
Messages
8,307
Likes
22,824
sure. a proxy war involving you is still a war and your loss is still a loss

Irrelevant. War is won or lost on the basis of accomplishing or not accomplishing the stategic objectives. 'won every battle but lost the war' has happened several times in history. still a loss. Pyrrhus of Epirus is the most famous historical example amongst westoids. Another one is Hannibal barca during his italian campaign : won every battle ( in italy). lost the war.



Afghanistan = vietnam. direct military involvement. Direct loss via the same 'won every battle but lost the war' axiom. Pyrrhus lost the war too. Same in iraq.
No, what happened was the USA invaded Afghanistan and overthrew the Taliban and weakened al Qaeda significantly. Where the US failed was geo-strategically- in establishing a healthy, “democratic” regime in AFGHANISTAN
sure. a proxy war involving you is still a war and your loss is still a loss
In terms of failures maybe, but in strict military terms, no.
Irrelevant. War is won or lost on the basis of accomplishing or not accomplishing the stategic objectives. 'won every battle but lost the war' has happened several times in history. still a loss. Pyrrhus of Epirus is the most famous historical example amongst westoids. Another one is Hannibal barca during his italian campaign : won every battle ( in italy). lost the war.
They didn’t lose this war militarily at all. They lost it Becuase they were too pussy to understand the real effects of war. While they were active in SV, they repulsed all invasions of the NVA, even the tet offensive, which was supposedly the cause of the withdrawal, was beaten back with massive NV casualties. Wars are fought in objectives, USA political leadership is too corrupt to understand the cost and benefits, hence they are called “PHD in geostragetic failure”, but not military.
 

Varzone

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Mar 2, 2022
Messages
2,914
Likes
5,484
No, what happened was the USA invaded Afghanistan and overthrew the Taliban and weakened al Qaeda significantly. Where the US failed was geo-strategically- in establishing a healthy, “democratic” regime in AFGHANISTAN

In terms of failures maybe, but in strict military terms, no.

They didn’t lose this war militarily at all. They lost it Becuase they were too pussy to understand the real effects of war. While they were active in SV, they repulsed all invasions of the NVA, even the tet offensive, which was supposedly the cause of the withdrawal, was beaten back with massive NV casualties. Wars are fought in objectives, USA political leadership is too corrupt to understand the cost and benefits, hence they are called “PHD in geostragetic failure”, but not military.
Military objectives keep changing though.... Korean war?
 

Kumaoni

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2022
Messages
8,307
Likes
22,824
Military objectives keep changing though.... Korean war?
Strategic stalemate or slight defeat.
USA achieved the creation of South Korea, but China achieved the creation of North Korea, but the USA losing much of their Nk gains makes it a slight strategic defeat.

Tactically, USA performed well, but China hit way above its weight
 

mokoman

Senior Member
Joined
May 31, 2020
Messages
6,198
Likes
33,802
Country flag
Can S-400 radar track such UAVs?
i think low flying objects are detected with this . its on a mast so it can see over trees , houses.

anyway Russians claim the drone came from inside sevastopol , probably from east away from front lines.


 

Varzone

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Mar 2, 2022
Messages
2,914
Likes
5,484

What a shame.... What a shame... This country will defeat NATO? Getting their ass handed by a country with 'no sizeable airforce'.
It'd be a miracle for them to even force Poland to use all their might.

The 'best' of their stuff is getting swatted. I guess they are saving the 7 prototypes of Su-57 for NATO. :pound: :pound: :pound:
 

GaudaNaresh

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2022
Messages
2,911
Likes
9,295
Country flag
No, what happened was the USA invaded Afghanistan and overthrew the Taliban and weakened al Qaeda significantly. Where the US failed was geo-strategically- in establishing a healthy, “democratic” regime in AFGHANISTAN
Yes. that is called winning the battle, losing the war. The objectives of the war were control of afghanistan, destruction of the taliban. They failed in both missions.

In terms of failures maybe, but in strict military terms, no.
Strategic failure *IS* strict military terms. Military terms is not just tactics.

They didn’t lose this war militarily at all. They lost it Becuase they were too pussy to understand the real effects of war. While they were active in SV, they repulsed all invasions of the NVA, even the tet offensive, which was supposedly the cause of the withdrawal, was beaten back with massive NV casualties. Wars are fought in objectives, USA political leadership is too corrupt to understand the cost and benefits, hence they are called “PHD in geostragetic failure”, but not military.
Failing at strategic objectives, is strict military failure - tactics are there to serve the strategic goal. Say if the gallic allies of vincengetorix had actually defeated caesar at Alesia but Alesia still starved and everyone in it died, it would STILL count as strict military failure, as it is failure of the strategic military objective ( to lift the seige).

USA failed in its strategic military objective in vietnam - to defeat the NVA an vietcong. No two ways about it.
Wars being won or lost are determined by strategic objectives being met/not met. Not by performance on the battlefield.
they are instuments to serving the strategic goal. Nothing more.

Same way, if i just show up and you surrender in fright and give in to my demands, i have won the war. Because my strategic objectives will be met and yours won't be.

The adversaries of USA in vietnam, Iraq-II, Syria and Afghanistan met their strategic objectives. hence they won the war.
USA failed in its strategic objective. Hence it lost the wars.
 

GaudaNaresh

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2022
Messages
2,911
Likes
9,295
Country flag

What a shame.... What a shame... This country will defeat NATO? Getting their ass handed by a country with 'no sizeable airforce'.
It'd be a miracle for them to even force Poland to use all their might.

The 'best' of their stuff is getting swatted. I guess they are saving the 7 prototypes of su-57 for NATO. :pound: :pound: :pound:
This is called ukrainian propaganda. They have produced only 1 wreckage of Su-35 so far this war. What happened to your impartial standards of 'gib wreckage of HIMARS' ?!?
 

GaudaNaresh

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2022
Messages
2,911
Likes
9,295
Country flag
Military objectives keep changing though.... Korean war?
no. the strategic objectives rarely, if ever change. They did not change during the korean war either. Tactical objectives change daily. If i sit 5 miles from Lahore, then move next day to 5 miles out of jaisalmer, the tactical objective of the pakis have just changed.

The strategic objective - defeat thy enemy and establish control over their land, still remains constant.
 

Dark Sorrow

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
4,988
Likes
9,931
no. the strategic objectives rarely, if ever change. They did not change during the korean war either. Tactical objectives change daily. If i sit 5 miles from Lahore, then move next day to 5 miles out of jaisalmer, the tactical objective of the pakis have just changed.

The strategic objective - defeat thy enemy and establish control over their land, still remains constant.
True, strategic objective only change if you realize you can't achieve currently established strategic objectives.
This happens mainly due to failure to achieve military objective.
 

Varzone

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Mar 2, 2022
Messages
2,914
Likes
5,484
This is called ukrainian propaganda. They have produced only 1 wreckage of Su-35 so far this war. What happened to your impartial standards of 'gib wreckage of HIMARS' ?!?
Agreed, I'm better than you people who keep writing HIMARS destruction without proof.

I take back that claim.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top