Calling your bluff. Let’s talk about you and why you don’t want to engage. Are you willing to engage or is this just a drive-by ? If not, explain to me how and why I’m wrong about this war. Oh, and none of this “LOL, dude thinks Russia’s winning the war! Clearly then he has nothing worthwhile to say!” Show me that you’re better than that.
Yeah, it isn't a straw man to use your arguments and assumptions and show they are contradictory. You stated that the notion that their force could have attacked and held the capital city was laughable (you literally laughed at the notion). You stated that they made this laughably small attack to get Ukraine to negotiate. Why would a laughably small and ineffective attack push anybody towards an agreement? Kind of seems more like the attack failed and you need to cover up for the failure.
I never said they could have attacked and held the city. I simply guessed, and it was only a guess, that a show of force might have forced Zelensky to the bargaining table. And guess what ? It appears to have done just that! But keep on whacking away at your protective straw man.
I know, I pointed out that you said it was laughable. I am discussing your supposition that the strategic plan was to attack with too small of a force to do anything meaningful and that somehow this would get Ukraine to do what Russia wanted them to do, which would consist of regime change and likely giving up territory. Again, you clearly don't know what a straw man argument is. You just think it sounds good when the lack of logic of your position is exposed.
Okay, let’s say my logic is bad. Let’s say the Russian logic was bad. Let’s say they really thought they really could capture a city of four million with 30k troops and discovered they couldn’t and that this just happened to coincide with brokered peace talks commencing and then falling apart. So ? And ? Hell, I bet you’ve forgotten your point in all this.
The point is that you are so busy trying to cover for a series of failures that your arguments don't even begin to have internal consistency or logic.
Okay, let’s reasonably assume that Russia has experienced some failures. Are you running out of stuff to swing at ?
Its not a bluff. I, like many here, have no interest in your rabbit hole. Because I am better than that
Every first of January. I unblock everybody and attempt to give everyone a fair chance again. Duggars dad sometimes makes it a week. There was a poster, maybe MattinOhio who may be the only worse poster on the sight.
Not trying to pull anyone into a hole. Am trying to drag people, kicking and screaming, into reality.
If I didn’t know any better, all this seemingly coordinated mass-squawking belies some sort of projection.
Not really. Exhausted from trying to convince everybody of the strategic genius of Russia as they retreat?
So as not trigger, I’m happy to proceed with America’s great proxy getting ground to dust by bumbling gas station masquerading as a country.
They are getting ground to dust by all that strategic retreating? And BTW, Russia isn't a gas station. They are the financiers/money launderers of global criminal organizations.
You missed the rules for discussion ... Whenever Ukraine is beaten back it’s repositioning. Whenever Russia repositions it’s called being defeated.
There is a big difference between military personnel and fighting troops. The supply clerks and clerical staff usually don't mass on the border for an invasion.
