Masterviolence's Posts
Nairaland Forum › Masterviolence's Profile › Masterviolence's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 (of 61 pages)
dvkot: ![]() This is one reason they're easily deceived. Too many gullible folks on this thread. |
WrriterNig:When over 10million are ready to pick up arms to defend their country at any second of the day, you'll think twice before attacking. ![]() |
Stoplying:The one goal that Russia wants to achieve is to demilitarized Ukraine, on the other hand, Nato's goal in Ukraine is to demilitarized Russia. This goal has not been completely achieved by both sides, but why? Let me break it down. It is more feasible for Russia to achieve this objective than for NATO to demilitarized Russia. The number one reason is because Russia is the second largest defense exporter in the world. They can manufacture any weapon faster than any single NATO member. Russia can manufacture ammunitions faster and better than NATO as an entity. They have all the resources needed for their armaments. The only problem Russia has is in their financial capacity: they don't have the budget to mass produced these armaments and maintain them at the same time. Ukraine on the other hand has been demilitarized of it own defensive capabilities, they are completely relying on donations and lend-lease from the west. If the west stop to support Ukraine, the goal of the Russians will be achieved, because the remaining weapons will be completely destroyed after another year of fighting, for this reason the west has decided to support Ukraine as long as it takes, so the Russians has decided to resort to option 2: demilitarization of their manpower. For the fact that every Ukrainian tank that is destroyed can be easily replaced the Russians are going after the manpower that cannot be replaced. This is the reason there's increasing use of anti-personnel weapons in the Frontlines. This options that the Russians are forced to use is called the battle of attrition, in this type of war there's no quick gains but a slow and permanent one. It all boils down to who fire the most shots and sustains the lesser casualty that becomes the winner at the end of the war which points towards Russia. |
CanadaOrBust:Continue licking the a** of the u.s. The same reason the USSR left Afghan is the same reason the u.s left. They're simply undefeatable, no matter how long it takes you'll run home. |
Watch how nairaland ministers of defense will come and tell you that he is wrong including his uncle. One was arguing with me the other day that it was the u.s that came to rescue Russia and it was the u.s that turned the tide of the war. Too many illiterates and zombies on this forum. |
seunny4lif:Prior today, the influence that France have over Africa is something that doesn't get talked about. Although the British must have left Nigeria and other colonies to govern themselves even though they still interfere but France is not letting those francophone countries go. It is through this Ukraine war that some countries have the guts to challenge them. |
Watcharena:I think you mistake iphones for apple products overall, there are more iphones in china than the u.s. But there are more apple products in the u.s than any country in the world. |
FreeStuffsNG:Boldness without knowledge is nothing, go and correct this statement. Besides anything coming from a foreign power can be used as a weapon all in the name of protection of national security. |
WrriterNig:History can attest to this. |
Ekemeze:I don't know how you define victory. But if you think a nuclear wasteland is a victory so be it. |
donjazzet:The emboldened made me laugh out : The west is not dragging their feets, they know better than you that if they escalate this war Russia might strike a strategic location because they're unpredictable at the moment. The west is pouring all they have into this war but you don't want to admit it. The west has dug too deep into this war but you think they're holding back, the only escalation that they're holding back on is the declaration of putting boots on ground which is liken unto the declaration of their on death. Wait all of a sudden the west don't have appetite for war? or is it because they're facing Russia? a near-peer rival. The west throughout history has profited more during wartime than peacetime but when the case is against Russia they calculate their moves in other not to piss Russia off because of fear. So you think if the collective west fight against Russia they will win? It is still a fact that Russia produces more ammo in 3months than what the west can afford to produce in a year even though the collective west is far richer than Russia. Please let's stop this endless discourse, the fact that the west who claim to spread democracy, freedom and always get directly involved in all that happens around the world is yet to get boots on ground or even declare a no-fly-zone shows they're dealing with something huge. |
Ekemeze:The other questions to ask is: will NATO be able to win a war against Russia? |
Some of you here, because of your hatred for Russia you can't simply say the truth. How do you expect Israel to win a war against Russia? Israel respect Russia too much for them to go to war. |
PurpleHouse:I understand your point, but those people making this statements are inside nuclear bunkers, If Putin unleash hell in Ukraine the majority that'll suffer are the civilians. I believe what will stop this bragging is if Putin go after these people. If there's a record number of top political and military officers eliminated, everyone will be mindful of what they say. |
Watcharena:Thank you for noticing this. It basically show who's right and wrong in this war. |
joyandfaith:You need to understand that protocols, rules and laws are for the less powerful. Is it that you turn a blind eye to everything or don't you see that the u.s breaks protocols, rules and laws but get away with it? There's something that protocols, rules and laws understands and that's the language of power. If SA tells Putin not to come that's different but if it is because of the ICC, then Putin will go to SA. There's one called diplomatic immunity. There's another called the most powerful leader on the planet. And there's another called the biggest nuclear power on earth. Think about these three points and tell me if it is worth the risk. |
I really don't know why there are so many noise about Putin going to SA. Putin will go to South Africa and nothing will happen. Even if the u.s was a member of the ICC and Putin visited Washington I don't think the u.s is crazy enough to arrest Putin. We are not taking about mere leaders here, or are we talking about Muammar Gaddafi or Saddam Hussein we are talking about Putin The most powerful leader on earth. Because of this noise i can bet on it that Putin will go to SA. Except there's an adjustment somewhere. |
obedience4:Being logical doesn't make me a Pro-russian, i don't care if you say so. For the first time i think we're almost on the same page. The only problem is that you're using the wrong connotation. Saying the u.s turned the tide for the allies is the same as saying the u.s played the most crucial role in the fall of Nazi Germany. At least this discourse is the most productive we've ever had. |
obedience4:I don't know which historian you listened to or read about, but the one i know and read about said the Soviet union was the reason the allies won in WW2. The emboldened contradicts the initial write-up that the coming of the u.s turned the tide for the allies. Every single nation or league in the allies played their parts. The u.s played their part in the provision of lease which was not free . The British empire also played their part. But who turned the tide of the war, by doing the most crucial part of the work in WW2 is the Soviet union, there's no two ways about that. Come to think of it: If the u.s never provided those armaments to the Soviet, do you think the Soviet wouldn't have won? Infact the tide was already in favor of the Soviet before those armaments arrived, didn't you know that the lend-lease arrived late? The only downside to not receiving the lend-lease is that the Soviet union would've suffered more casualties than they did, but they would've still won. The other side to look at is this: Now imagine that Nazi Germany did not invade the Soviet union, would the allies excluding the Soviet union had won? Maybe by now the entire Europe including over 50% of the world would've been called Nazi Germany today. But thanks to the Soviet union and the allies. Listen there are events where the u.s should be highly praised but not in this matter. Without being myopic let's give honor to who deserves it. |
obedience4:They where part of the allies, but played the crucial role in the fall of Nazi Germany. The fact that people talk little about their contribution and even downplayed their role is what i call ignorance. You and i know that if we should rank them, the Soviet union comes first. The reason i quoted him was his last statement: 'that the Nazï was about to capture Moscow before the u.s came to their rescue ' That's the highest level of ignorance coming from a person who has at least read something concerning the history of WW2. |
Hotice085:Is that all you've got to say? |
doncartel:Stay in class and study you said no. Now look at the shame you've brought to your parents. |
Vlad the great. This guy has brought sanity to Russia. |
dvkot:I think it's time to create a thread of false prophecies for that guy ![]() |
Watcharena:Correct yourself. He prophesied not predicted. |
okeysoninv: ![]() |
okeysoninv:I had to check the meaning of thus says the lord: guess what?
|
They're trying to make Russia go on a full scale attack. In war, if you do what your enemy wants then you're doom. It is more advantageous for Russia to continue this war systematically and more aggressively than for them to go on a full scale war at the moment. In the beginning of this hostile, if Russia invade to capture Ukraine it would have been better but they didn't. They took few men and match towards kyiv expecting a Georgia kind of scenario but something else came. I bet the world is learning from that mistake. For those clamoring for a full scale invasion please listen: Ukrainians are not Finnish, or Americans or brits or mujahideens or Germans or enemies to Russia, they are the same people with almost identical culture. Putin is a human and not Stalin. The escalation I'm expecting from the Russian side is a more aggressive approach towards the Ukrainian military and political system. If Russia can treat the Ukrainian military and political system as terrorist i bet you all, this war will end in no time. |
donjazzet:I know you remember what happened the last time. ![]() |
donjazzet:There's no nation on earth that can manufacture weapons as fast as Russia. The distant second is china. |
Kingsnairaland:Let's speak reality, what is happening in Ukraine is not a football competition, the Russians are already killing their cousins and vice versa this is a fact. This is not because they wanted it or liked it but because reality sometimes can't be manipulated. What i was pointing out is that, if truly you understood the ways of Soviet Russia then what's happening in Ukraine is a training exercise. The history of Russia including Soviet Russia don't embrace provocation and if they find themselves in war, they always act inhumane it doesn't matter if you're their cousin or not, the Chechnya can explain exactly what i mean. What we're seeing is modern day Russia fighting strategically and not barbarically. |
donjazzet:So the u.s invest in these countries without getting anything back? There's something called 'trade' Besides the u.s has never done anything for another country without getting something back, except for some aid to which won't transform an economy. Can we say the USAID to Africa has transformed any African economy to a first world economy? If not for bad leadership, Africa especially Nigeria would've ranked top 20 in the world. I repeat everything the u.s does is for are own interest, if the leadership of that country is wise enough that opportunity can be used to transformed it economy, this decision is made by the country's leadership not the u.s. Because china, mexico and Canada are u.s largest trading partners doesn't make the u.s the 'transformer' of their economy. If you say the u.s transformed those countries you list militarily, i.e provision of national security, to a large extent I'll understand but not economically. |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 (of 61 pages)


