• ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    5 months ago

    Pretty much none of those were actually stated by Russia. The trend has been that it’s the west that make up these red lines, then crosses them and says, see nothing happened. Last I checked, the actual red line Russia set out was Ukraine joining NATO, and when that red line was ignored the war started. This notion that you can just keep pushing a nuclear superpower and nothing bad will happen is imbecilic beyond belief.

    • sweng@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      5 months ago

      There are sources given for the claims. If they are inaccurate you should remove the sources, and the claim itself if there are no good sources supporting it anymore.

    • Zetta
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      5 months ago

      Russia is well aware that if they use nuclear weapons it’s over for them, will the rest of the world fall too is another question.

      Either way I truly don’t believe they will do it simply because that ends Russia in its current form, and I don’t think we should allow them to be an aggressor just because they have nukes. Russia needs to be stopped and their saber rattling should rightly be ignored.

      Feel free to @ me if you die in a nuclear apocalypse to prove me wrong. Till then let’s keep enabling Ukraine to fight back and continue Russias massive embarrassment and degradation of power and capabilities.

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        This is the most unhinged thing I’ve read in a while. Also, what degradation are you talking about?

        Pretty much every western news source now admits that Russia is stronger than at the start of the war, and that it’s massively outpacing the west in terms of weapons production.

        • M0oP0o
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          5 months ago

          Mind sharing some sources on that? Since it is a bit of a bold statement.

            • M0oP0o
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              5 months ago

              The first one is from Thu April 27, 2023 more then a year ago. And does not state what you think it does. I mean it ends with: "“[A]ccording to the modeling that we’ve very carefully done with them, the Ukrainians are in a good position,” he said. “They have some weaknesses that I prefer not to talk about in public … But we are confident — in terms of their surprise and things like that. of course, we’ve worked on all that with them.” "

              The second one is literally called “The Attritional Art of War” and is trying to sell russia losing men and equipment as a good thing, basically as practice for when they go up against the west “for real”. This is not saying they are stronger.

              The third one is about russia replacing losses faster with new troops. Oh and the whole statement is from a US general trying to get congress to release money with the dire warring that Ukraine could lose if they don’t. And even after all that the statement is: "The overall message I would give you is [Russia’s military has] grown back to what they were before,” not stronger.

              The forth one is about how with russia’s managed economy they have been able to ramp up shell production faster then any other nation (no shit) and now are set to make 3,000,000 shells a year. This does not say they are “stronger” then before since russia has used about 10,000 shells a day on average (according to the western estimates) making a short fall of about 650000 shells a year.

              The fifth one is about the IMF upgrading its forecast, really?

              The last one is neat but does not back your claims up. It even says things like: "The Russian Armed Forces’ inability to realise the Kremlin’s imperialist ambitions in Ukraine within the initially planned timeframe in early 2022, coupled with the resilient Ukrainian resistance to the invasion, has led to significant losses for Russia not only in terms of personnel but also in military equipment. The need to compensate for equipment losses and to produce the required artillery ammunition[1] to sustain the conflict in Ukraine has posed a serious challenge to the Russian military-industrial complex "

              • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                11
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                5 months ago

                So, just to sum up. Russia is producing more weapons ammunition than NATO, has a bigger army than before the war that’s actually seen real combat unlike any NATO army, and Russian economy is growing. You wrote a whole giant rant that doesn’t actually contradict anything I said or what the sources I linked say.

                • M0oP0o
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  9
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  Rant? I read everyone of your sources (none that where primary) and could not find where anyone claimed russia is stronger then they where in 2021. Yes they are producing more shells then any one NATO nation but as their deal with north Korea shows it is not enough to maintain the level of shelling they want to do. The russian economy is in tatters (according to russains) so yeah it should grow, that would be what most would think would happen. They have seen combat yes, but by that rational so has Ukraine.

                  I mean just from the navel losses alone russia has taken a beating. The tank losses massively outstrip production (highest production numbers I found was 1500/year vs 4400/year losses). I just don’t get how they are somehow stronger then before this 3 day special operation. I am not even saying they are out of the fight but come on.