Big C said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

I've been away for a while. I'm caught up. The thread is like a microcosm of the war. Back and forth, back and forth, back and forth…no real progress by either side….no end in sight.

---

Hey, that right there is about 10% of the entire reason I'd like to see this war end!

---

As we learn over and over, one side will continue with misinformation indefinitely because they are radicalized. They don't need the back and forth to spew propaganda.

I do agree the back and forth is tiresome which is why I ignore the trolls/shills/bots entirely. No point in engaging with them.

I do still share info from time to time that I think people enjoy but we could also just squirrel this thread and let it go that way of the crazy anti-vaxxer thread.

Excellent RFK Jr interview with Colonel Douglass McGregor. I'll concentrate on new information for some.

3:30 - no strategy; we have no military-political objectives
2014 - with our assistance in the Ukrainian coup, Russia worried we would place our navy in Crimea, hence why Putin moved.
2014 - 2022 - 14,000 killed in Russian oblasts in Ukraine

7:30 - Minsk Accords discussion
RFK Jr - the Minsk Accords reveal what Russia would accept - a neutral Ukraine; Ukraine intact, not 300K killed

Crimea part of Russia since 1776 (actually 1783)

Russian expansion? Then why such a small military force in Feb 2022?

Boris Johnson told Zelensky not to negotiate peace.
Austria is neutral - Eisenhower actually wanted more neutral countries bc we couldn't defend them all. We pushed NATO expansion.

JFKs philosophy: We have to understand the other sides position; Russia won WWII for us, has been invaded multiple times; Colonel DM -- helped us in Afghanistan (2001-2).

26:00 nuclear war positions
Russia and China have said nuclear weapons are off the table.
The Biden Administration rewrote our NW position: could be used under "certain conditions" and "may use NW".
McGregor: "CATASTROPHE".
McGregor compliments RFK Jr for taking on the Big Pharma lies (vaccines / labs?) and the "UniParty cabal after $$$".

movielover said:

---

Edit.

---

It took you 6 tries to misspell Edith? Who is she anyway?

Has as much credence ever been given to a guy who won a single war game, succeeded against a pathetic opponent and couldn't rise above the rank of Colonel?

tequila4kapp said:

---

Has as much credence ever been given to a guy who won a single war game, succeeded against a pathetic opponent and couldn't rise above the rank of Colonel?

---

Dunno. Lloyd Austin, who worked in private industry for a defense contractor, said our goal was to weaken Russia. By all credible accounts the exact opposite has happened. NATO is hallowed out, the US is humbled and ammo stockpiles reduced, debt skyrocketing, and Russia is approaching a million man army with experience while we prioritize gender fluidity and hurt feelings.

Israel is considered one of the top militaries in the world. They've had the Colonel out to speak and consult with their top people. I'm pretty sure they're not seeking the advice of our desk jockeys, or afirmative action hyphenated Generals with no live action in theater.

Writing five books is no joke. He wouldn't be the first who wasn't promoted bc he doesn't brown nose.

But instead of personal attacks, can't you deal with his facts or logic? RFK Jr is impressed by him, but doesn't fawn. A YouTube commenter noted he got a year wrong, and one item which put a Ukrainian decision in better context.

tequila4kapp said:

---

Has as much credence ever been given to a guy who won a single war game, succeeded against a pathetic opponent and couldn't rise above the rank of Colonel?

---

MacGregor is definitely not your run-of-the-mill MSM MIC talking head general.

I reckon this is the kind of military analysis you are comfortable with, delivered by neocons like KKR's Petraeus - Russian military is a complete mess, and Ukraine is going to prevail and conquer Crimea, the Russian regime is going to fall etc. :



We'll see who is right.

MSM taking note of Russia's precision-guided glide bombs, which have been used for the last few months, though their use has been stepped up recently:

Russia's new weapon 'changing course of war' in Ukraine

Moscow's new 'glide bomb' has a regular range of between 30 and 45 miles and can evade radar-controlled defence systems by travelling at low altitude. Experts say Kyiv must adjust its operational planning to deter the new threat and stop Russia from gaining air superiority.

A new weapons system threatens to change the course of the war in Ukraine, according to experts.

Russian fighter jets are employing so-called "glide bombs", which are equipped with wings to give them an extended range and can fly below radar-controlled air defences. Their range varies drastically but more are fired over a distance of approximately 30 to 45 miles.

The gliding technology means that Russian jets can avoid flying to clsoe to the front lines to fire their weapons.
Colonel Ihnat said: "At the moment the enemy is using tactical aviation for combat missions along the border with Russia, the front line, and the sea coast. In all those regions the enemy has for about a month been intensely using glide bombs."

Ukrainian officials estimate that Moscow is firing at least 20 glide bombs per day on the battlefield, causing Western and Ukrainian analysts to suggest that Kyiv may need to rethink its military strategy in order to deter the new threat.

Cruise bombs, which are cheaper and easier to produce than ballistic and cruise missiles, have become Russia's weapon of choice. Radars do not always pick up objects flying at low altitude, and the small size of gliding bombs makes them difficult to detect.

For now, Kiev will have to re-plan its offensive to avoid a breakdown. Ukraine will need "significant air defense" on the front line when its forces run into bottlenecks like river crossings or heavily fortified Russian positions, where they become vulnerable to air attack."

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1767610/Russia-s-new-weapon-changing-course-of-war-in-Ukraine

Here's some more evidence about the massive disarray among Russian forces. Their complete lack of functional command and control combined with a variety of poorly trained and disorganized factions is a big reason their winter offensive failed so spectacularly and why they've made almost no progress in this war in which they had a massive advantage in firepower.

"All against all...complete disunity of the front" - Russian volunteer Anastasiya Kashevarova explains what happened between Wagner and the 72nd Brigade in Bakhmut in a long Telegram post.

She says Russian Forces are not allowed to communicate with Wagner. Wagner was forced to… pic.twitter.com/rtZyJlj8x1

— Dmitri (@wartranslated) May 10, 2023

Wagner's continuing struggles are more evidence of the above.

Another summary from Prigotzhin on Bakhmut as of 10 May: no ammunition given despite the instructions of the past few days; says Bakhmut was necessary for the Russian army to regroup. Does not add much context as to why the shell hunger might be happening apart from… pic.twitter.com/PLHjwPXlDj

— Dmitri (@wartranslated) May 10, 2023

For those unfamiliar, Ukraine's 3rd Assault Brigade made significant progress in a recent maneuver against Wagner and Russia's 72nd leading to massive freakouts by the Russians.

Here's one tweet but there are tons out there with video, etc.

Gnarly video published by Ukraine’s 3rd Assault Brigade, purportedly outside of Bakhmut. Unconfirmed reports that units from Russian 72nd MRB were decimated. Ukrainians claim 500 corpses; Azov killed 64 plus. (unverified for now). pic.twitter.com/I0cWunjI74

— Mike Eckel (@Mike_Eckel) May 10, 2023

And yes, I'm well aware that this post will be followed by firehose of falsehoods with a bunch of disinformation. I will never be able to outpost the propagandists. I suggest anyone who is wondering whether the pro-Russian propagandists have truth on their side should go back and look at their prior posts since my recollection is that virtually everything they predict has failed to come true.

Here's one example I saw recently in another forum where some disingenuous shill was pretending that Ukraine had taken heavy losses in Bakhmut in the last few months (during a time when the same shills repeatedly claimed Bakhmut had been taken). 8 to 1 sounds really bad! And it would be if it wasn't a made up number from last summer that sometimes gets arbitrarily upgraded to 10 to 1. I'm not sure why they don't just go whole hog and say that the losses are really 1,000 to 1 and that Russia won the war before it started.

Quote:

---

Here is a brief summation of the Russian tactical approach to the Battle of the Donbass:

Quote:

---

Step #1: Advance reconnaissance units (often in force, with dozens or hundreds of drones overhead) to assess the situation; draw fire; relay to commanders raw video and geo-coordinates.
Step #2: With target-correcting drone swarms overhead, relaying real-time strike video, proceed to savage the fortifications with towed and mobile artillery, Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (in gradations of strength and precision), and even horrific thermobaric munitions for particularly suitable targets.
Let smoke clear.
Repeat Step #1.
Still something moving there?
Repeat Step #2.
Repeat Step #1.
Dead bodies everywhere?
Step #3: Send in tanks and infantry to mop up.
Move to next series of fortifications.
And so on and so forth …

---

This is why Ukraine now suffers hundreds of battle deaths every single day. And why, for months, the Russians have suffered very few casualties likely as low as a 1:8 ratio, and quite possibly even lower.
Artillery, airstrikes, and precision guided munitions are doing almost all the fighting.

---

As you can see this originated last summer and unless you think this Russian propagandist can see the future, you would have to recognize that anyone posting this is either extremely dumb, disingenuous or both.

Step #2: with target-correcting drone swarms relaying real-time strike video, proceed to savage the fortifications with towed and mobile artillery, MLRS in gradations of strength and precision, and even horrific thermobaric munitions for particularly suitable targets.

10/

— Will Schryver (@imetatronink) June 28, 2022

Cal88 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Has as much credence ever been given to a guy who won a single war game, succeeded against a pathetic opponent and couldn't rise above the rank of Colonel?

---

MacGregor is definitely not your run-of-the-mill MSM MIC talking head general.

I reckon this is the kind of military analysis you are comfortable with, delivered by neocons like KKR's Petraeus - Russian military is a complete mess, and Ukraine is going to prevail and conquer Crimea, the Russian regime is going to fall etc. :



We'll see who is right.

---

This is why I stayed away from OT for a while...and now I am questioning why I came back.

Is it possible to be critical of someone (MacGregor) on the merits of their qualifications instead of the nature of their views?

Per Wiki, MacGregor has ZERO education or professional background which gives him ANY special knowledge of Russia, Ukraine, issues related to the region, etc.

He has formally been out of the military for nearly 20 years. He apparently served as a pentagon advisor for a short period of time. Even if we accept that he - as a Colonel who wrote 1 meaningful book - has valuable knowledge relative to the military, weaponry, tactics, etc., one might conclude his distance from those institutions for 2 decades mitigates the value of those opinions.

So what we have is a talking head with a particular PERSONAL world view. As it relates to Russia and Ukraine, that's really about it. Yet some people in this thread treat his every word as if it is the gospel.

For ****s and giggles let's contrast his qualifications with say Condeleza Rice, who was our nation's highest diplomat, has a PhD in political science with an emphasis on issues related to the former eastern block and, I believe, speaks Russian. I have no idea what her views are relative to this war (and I don't really care). But objectively, her education, experience and expertise dwarf MacGregor's...which isn't hard because MacGregor doesn't really have any qualifications in this area.

It is really unfortunate that Russia's insistence on destroying Ukraine continues via tactical and strategic changes. We can see where this is heading... How does Ukraine 'evolve' its military strategy? With new and different weapons, of course. And (eventually) approval from the west to attack targets inside Russia to damage Russia's military capabilities, plus the new weapon systems to execute that strategy. In other words, escalation.

tequila4kapp said:

---

oski003 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Has as much credence ever been given to a guy who won a single war game, succeeded against a pathetic opponent and couldn't rise above the rank of Colonel?

---

MacGregor is definitely not your run-of-the-mill MSM MIC talking head general.

I reckon this is the kind of military analysis you are comfortable with, delivered by neocons like KKR's Petraeus - Russian military is a complete mess, and Ukraine is going to prevail and conquer Crimea, the Russian regime is going to fall etc. :



We'll see who is right.

---

This is why I stayed away from OT for a while...and now I am questioning why I came back.

Is it possible to be critical of someone (MacGregor) on the merits of their qualifications instead of the nature of their views?

Per Wiki, MacGregor has ZERO education or professional background which gives him ANY special knowledge of Russia, Ukraine, issues related to the region, etc.

He has formally been out of the military for nearly 20 years. He apparently served as a pentagon advisor for a short period of time. Even if we accept that he - as a Colonel who wrote 1 meaningful book - has valuable knowledge relative to the military, weaponry, tactics, etc., one might conclude his distance from those institutions for 2 decades mitigates the value of those opinions.

So what we have is a talking head with a particular PERSONAL world view. As it relates to Russia and Ukraine, that's really about it. Yet some people in this thread treat his every word as if it is the gospel.

For ****s and giggles let's contrast his qualifications with say Condeleza Rice, who was our nation's highest diplomat, has a PhD in political science with an emphasis on issues related to the former eastern block and, I believe, speaks Russian. I have no idea what her views are relative to this war (and I don't really care). But objectively, her education, experience and expertise dwarf MacGregor's...which isn't hard because MacGregor doesn't really have any qualifications in this area.

---

Has MacGregor been doing anything over the last 20 years that gives him insight or expertise on this situation. You took a time machine back to the year 2000 for him. Has he done anything since?

---

From Wiki

Macgregor left the Army in June 2004.

Macgregor is the vice president of Burke-Macgregor, LLC, a consulting firm

In 2012, he challenged general JF Amos' stance on the USMC. ***

Macgregor has appeared as a regular guest on Fox News, with at least 60 Fox weekday appearances from August 2017 to early 2022, ***

When John Bolton was removed *** Macgregor was one of five finalists under consideration for selection as President Trump's NSA

*** On February 17, 2020, Macgregor traveled to Israel as a guest of the IDF Chief of Staff to meet with the IDF General Staff, and many of his senior officers to discuss General Kohavi's ongoing initiative to transform the IDF for future warfighting missions in the 21st century.

In April 2020, Macgregor was reportedly Trump's second choice candidate to succeed John Rood as undersecretary of defense for policy***

Senior Advisor to the Acting Secretary of Defense from Nov 2020 to Jan 2021

(And we know he has written 4 books. It isn't clear which books when but presumably much of that occurred in this timeframe. None of the books appear to be topical to Russia/Ukraine:

• Breaking the Phalanx: A New Design for Landpower in the 21st Century
• Transformation Under Fire: Revolutionizing How America Fights
• Warrior's Rage: The Great Tank Battle of 73 Easting
• Margin of Victory: Five Battles that Changed the Face of Modern War)

---

Thank you for filling in the holes of your prior post. He definitely appears qualified to comment on the war.

With all that being said, we have learned two things:
1) Outside of Crimea and the Donbass, Russia doesn't have the support that they seemingly counted on when the war started; and
2) If the USA and Russia were actually at war, the USA would annihilate Russia. Right now, NATO can mostly keep Russia in check by just supplying Ukraine money, intelligence, and weapons.

Of note, I assumed when this started that Russia would be able to take over the Ukrainian skies. That was far from the truth. Cal88 attributes this to Russian AA (which Ukraine has but apparently is finally running out of) being a huge threat to all aircraft. I suppose that could be true. However, I imagine the US in Russia's shoes would have found ways to take out the AA much much sooner.

On this day in 2003, the US and its allies asked UN Sec.Council to consider the invasion of Iraq legal and issue permission to use Iraq's oil reserves for reconstruction of the country.
After years,Iraq was never rebuilt and no one knows where all revenue from oil reserves went. pic.twitter.com/PaW2AdBix9

— Richard (@ricwe123) May 10, 2023

tequila4kapp said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Has as much credence ever been given to a guy who won a single war game, succeeded against a pathetic opponent and couldn't rise above the rank of Colonel?

---

MacGregor is definitely not your run-of-the-mill MSM MIC talking head general.

I reckon this is the kind of military analysis you are comfortable with, delivered by neocons like KKR's Petraeus - Russian military is a complete mess, and Ukraine is going to prevail and conquer Crimea, the Russian regime is going to fall etc. :



We'll see who is right.

---

This is why I stayed away from OT for a while...and now I am questioning why I came back.

Is it possible to be critical of someone (MacGregor) on the merits of their qualifications instead of the nature of their views?

Per Wiki, MacGregor has ZERO education or professional background which gives him ANY special knowledge of Russia, Ukraine, issues related to the region, etc.

He has formally been out of the military for nearly 20 years. He apparently served as a pentagon advisor for a short period of time. Even if we accept that he - as a Colonel who wrote 1 meaningful book - has valuable knowledge relative to the military, weaponry, tactics, etc., one might conclude his distance from those institutions for 2 decades mitigates the value of those opinions.

So what we have is a talking head with a particular PERSONAL world view. As it relates to Russia and Ukraine, that's really about it. Yet some people in this thread treat his every word as if it is the gospel.

For ****s and giggles let's contrast his qualifications with say Condeleza Rice, who was our nation's highest diplomat, has a PhD in political science with an emphasis on issues related to the former eastern block and, I believe, speaks Russian. I have no idea what her views are relative to this war (and I don't really care). But objectively, her education, experience and expertise dwarf MacGregor's...which isn't hard because MacGregor doesn't really have any qualifications in this area.

---

Macgregor has a PhD in International Relations from UVA. He also has a BS in Engineering from West Point, which is a somewhat rare quality in your basic military brass, it gives him more of an insight on military technology matters.

He has served as the chief of strategic planning and director of the Joint Operations Center, Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers, Europe. In 1995 he developed the zone of separation that became part of the Dayton framework agreement. He is currently a research fellow in the Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University in Washington, D.C.

Battles/wars

• Gulf War
  
  • Battle of 73 Easting
• Kosovo War

Awards
Defense Superior Service Medal
Bronze Star (with Valor)
Meritorious Service Medal (4)
Army Commendation Medal
Army Achievement Medal
National Defense Service Medal (2)
Southwest Asia Service Medal (2 Bronze Stars)
Kuwait Liberation Medal
Kosovo Campaign Medal
Humanitarian Service Medal
French Meritorious Service Medal (Bronze Star)
Parachutist Badge
Ranger Tab

From my perspective, what sets him apart from the Condy Rices is that he hasn't lied on matters of public policy or on facts about foreign policy.

tequila4kapp said:

---

Has as much credence ever been given to a guy who won a single war game, succeeded against a pathetic opponent and couldn't rise above the rank of Colonel?

---

Setting aside qualifications, McGregor has been wildly, enthusiastically wrong about the war from the very get go. The people who like him like him because he 100% backs the Putin propaganda that they favor. He's not a credible commenter on this war unless you are seeking to know what Putin wants us to hear.

Former Trump Advisor Douglas MacGregor says we need to stop demonizing Putin, lift all sanctions, stop providing weapons and aid, that it’s “hopeless,” and just let Putin take whatever part of Ukraine that he wants. pic.twitter.com/HBnLWVdVgD

— Ron Filipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) February 28, 2022

"What's happening right now in Donbas is the final annihilation of what remains of Ukraine's best forces."
- Macgregor, April 21, 2022

[...]

"Whatever nonsense comes out of my dim mind."
- Macgregor, Any Date Whatsoever

— vitz (@osmnactej) April 8, 2023

tequila4kapp said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Has as much credence ever been given to a guy who won a single war game, succeeded against a pathetic opponent and couldn't rise above the rank of Colonel?

---

MacGregor is definitely not your run-of-the-mill MSM MIC talking head general.

I reckon this is the kind of military analysis you are comfortable with, delivered by neocons like KKR's Petraeus - Russian military is a complete mess, and Ukraine is going to prevail and conquer Crimea, the Russian regime is going to fall etc. :



We'll see who is right.

---

This is why I stayed away from OT for a while...and now I am questioning why I came back.

Is it possible to be critical of someone (MacGregor) on the merits of their qualifications instead of the nature of their views?

Per Wiki, MacGregor has ZERO education or professional background which gives him ANY special knowledge of Russia, Ukraine, issues related to the region, etc.

He has formally been out of the military for nearly 20 years. He apparently served as a pentagon advisor for a short period of time. Even if we accept that he - as a Colonel who wrote 1 meaningful book - has valuable knowledge relative to the military, weaponry, tactics, etc., one might conclude his distance from those institutions for 2 decades mitigates the value of those opinions.

So what we have is a talking head with a particular PERSONAL world view. As it relates to Russia and Ukraine, that's really about it. Yet some people in this thread treat his every word as if it is the gospel.

For ****s and giggles let's contrast his qualifications with say Condeleza Rice, who was our nation's highest diplomat, has a PhD in political science with an emphasis on issues related to the former eastern block and, I believe, speaks Russian. I have no idea what her views are relative to this war (and I don't really care). But objectively, her education, experience and expertise dwarf MacGregor's...which isn't hard because MacGregor doesn't really have any qualifications in this area.

---

It's easy to take down Col. MacGregor but somehow you failed. As a comparison you chose easily the worst National Security Advisor in the history of the country. She took her eye off the ball and failed to protect us from 9/11 and then she helped lie us into the tragic Iraq War.

Her legacy is 20 years of awful, awful foreign policy for America.

tequila4kapp said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Has as much credence ever been given to a guy who won a single war game, succeeded against a pathetic opponent and couldn't rise above the rank of Colonel?

---

MacGregor is definitely not your run-of-the-mill MSM MIC talking head general.

I reckon this is the kind of military analysis you are comfortable with, delivered by neocons like KKR's Petraeus - Russian military is a complete mess, and Ukraine is going to prevail and conquer Crimea, the Russian regime is going to fall etc. :



We'll see who is right.

---

This is why I stayed away from OT for a while...and now I am questioning why I came back.

Is it possible to be critical of someone (MacGregor) on the merits of their qualifications instead of the nature of their views?

Per Wiki, MacGregor has ZERO education or professional background which gives him ANY special knowledge of Russia, Ukraine, issues related to the region, etc.

He has formally been out of the military for nearly 20 years. He apparently served as a pentagon advisor for a short period of time. Even if we accept that he - as a Colonel who wrote 1 meaningful book - has valuable knowledge relative to the military, weaponry, tactics, etc., one might conclude his distance from those institutions for 2 decades mitigates the value of those opinions.

So what we have is a talking head with a particular PERSONAL world view. As it relates to Russia and Ukraine, that's really about it. Yet some people in this thread treat his every word as if it is the gospel.

For ****s and giggles let's contrast his qualifications with say Condeleza Rice, who was our nation's highest diplomat, has a PhD in political science with an emphasis on issues related to the former eastern block and, I believe, speaks Russian. I have no idea what her views are relative to this war (and I don't really care). But objectively, her education, experience and expertise dwarf MacGregor's...which isn't hard because MacGregor doesn't really have any qualifications in this area.

---

This is what MacGregor's "expertise" told him, more than a year ago.

Col. Douglas MacGregor predicted on March 5 that Russia would have the Ukrainians defeated in 10 days after they'd initially been "too gentle." (2/x) pic.twitter.com/wPpExdHoWX

— Nick Rizzuto (@Nick_Rizzuto) March 25, 2022

Regarding the credentials of so-called experts (not just MacGregor... both sides):

From my studies of the Cold War and the Vietnam War (and one could argue that Vietnam was part of the greater Cold War, domino theory and all), I concluded that somebody can have all the smarts, education and experience in the world, and still get things wrong. And it happens surprisingly often!

A must-read on this topic: "The Best and the Brightest" by the late David Halberstam.

Big C said:

---

Regarding the credentials of so-called experts (not just MacGregor... both sides):

From my studies of the Cold War and the Vietnam War (and one could argue that Vietnam was part of the greater Cold War, domino theory and all), I concluded that somebody can have all the smarts, education and experience in the world, and still get things wrong. And it happens surprisingly often!

A must-read on this topic: "The Best and the Brightest" by the late David Halberstam.

---

Sounds like a good read.

WRT bolded part, that's very much true, especially when hubris clouds their judgment However, there are definite instances when officials or analysts willfully lie, as was the case with Condi Rice or Westmoreland, whether this is driven by politics and/or being stuck in an ideological extreme. Sometimes people fall into falsehood driven by the "noble lie" impulse, lying for the good of the "greater cause".

Unit2Sucks said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Has as much credence ever been given to a guy who won a single war game, succeeded against a pathetic opponent and couldn't rise above the rank of Colonel?

---

Setting aside qualifications, McGregor has been wildly, enthusiastically wrong about the war from the very get go. The people who like him like him because he 100% backs the Putin propaganda that they favor. He's not a credible commenter on this war unless you are seeking to know what Putin wants us to hear.

Former Trump Advisor Douglas MacGregor says we need to stop demonizing Putin, lift all sanctions, stop providing weapons and aid, that it’s “hopeless,” and just let Putin take whatever part of Ukraine that he wants. pic.twitter.com/HBnLWVdVgD

— Ron Filipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) February 28, 2022

---

Macgregor is right in that 1min excerpt, Ukraine's cause is hopeless, there is no military solution for them. Prolonging the war by feeding their military will only prolong the agony and extend the carnage. This doesn't make him a Putin stooge, he is just being incensed at the relentless pushing of a hopeless cause and the level of carnage, as well as the massive risks of escalation into WW3 and nuclear war, which are the highest in 50 years.

In that sense Macgregor is one of the few US military analysts who actually gets it right.

As to the rest, his prediction of quick Russian victory after their massive early March territorial gains did turn out to be wrong, though at the time that was a commonly held belief, based on the fact that Russia was able to conquer nearly a quarter of Ukraine in a matter of days. I think he was wrong because he projected what he would do as a military leader, based on his prior military campaigns in Iraq and Yugoslavia, rather than what the Russian military doctrine was, though he quickly came to understand what they were doing.

He's been right even since. Most of his detractors like Petraeus above are still pushing the notion that Ukraine is going to reconquer Crimea, they are either driven by hubris, or are willfully pushing Ukraine in a lost cause in order to weaken Russia.

🚨 Trump when asked on if he wants Ukraine or Russia to win the war: “I want everybody to stop dying. Russians and Ukrainians… and I’ll have that done in 24 hours.” pic.twitter.com/44FEth326z

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) May 11, 2023

BearHunter said:

---

🚨 Trump when asked on if he wants Ukraine or Russia to win the war: “I want everybody to stop dying. Russians and Ukrainians… and I’ll have that done in 24 hours.” pic.twitter.com/44FEth326z

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) May 11, 2023

---

Only an idiot would believe this post.

Agreed. And there are a ton of idiots on this board who do believe that crap. Go away already 45, your 15 minutes of 'fame' are over.

calpoly said:

---

BearHunter said:

---

🚨 Trump when asked on if he wants Ukraine or Russia to win the war: “I want everybody to stop dying. Russians and Ukrainians… and I’ll have that done in 24 hours.” pic.twitter.com/44FEth326z

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) May 11, 2023

---

Only an idiot would believe this post.

---

You're unhinged.

Ron F. purposefully misquotes the Colonel. Fail.

calpoly said:

---

BearHunter said:

---

🚨 Trump when asked on if he wants Ukraine or Russia to win the war: “I want everybody to stop dying. Russians and Ukrainians… and I’ll have that done in 24 hours.” pic.twitter.com/44FEth326z

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) May 11, 2023

---

Only an idiot would believe this post.

---

The POTUS can absolutely at the very least impose a cease fire. Ukraine is almost completely dependent on military aid from NATO, which is run by the US, without which that country would collapse in a matter of weeks. Kiev takes its orders from Washington. From there, a Minsk 3 agreement that is similar to the one discussed last year at the Istanbul peace talks can be formulated.

The broad lines of such an agreement involve Russia formally annexing the territories it currently holds, the Donbass, Crimea and the land bridge, areas which are majority Russian, as well as Ukraine being neutral (no NATO membership), along the lines of pre-2022 Finland or current-day Austria.

This would put an end to the war, it's actually the only way out for Ukraine. The alternative is further destruction of its military, economy and infrastructure, and the death of several hundred thousand more Ukrainian soldiers in a vain attempt to weaken Russia.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Great thread from Mick Ryan about one of the biggest flaws in Putin's command and control structure - Gerasimov. Just like with the soviets, Gerasimov's power flows from his loyalty to Putin not from his competence. Throughout the Kremlin, the story is the same. They simply aren't built to win.

---

Surovikin is the main military architect of the Russian war in Ukraine, Gerasimov is the administrator, sort of like a hands off head coach, with Surovikin being the hands-on offensive coordinator.

Surovikin has had success running Russia's intervention in Syria, a lot of his strategies used in this war were developped in Syria.

Speaking of military leaders in this war, there are some (unconfirmed) rumors that one of the top three military leaders of Ukraine, general Tantsyura, has been hit earlier this week in an aerial bombing.

Wagner hit an AFU convoy en-route to Bakhmut, and they claim that General Igor Tantsyura - commander of Ukraine’s territorial defense formations - may have been a passenger and KIA.

Unconfirmed, but an interesting rumor to keep tabs on. pic.twitter.com/psgGRihni5

— Big Serge ☦️🇺🇸🇷🇺 (@witte_sergei) May 2, 2023

Cal88 said:

---

calpoly said:

---

BearHunter said:

---

🚨 Trump when asked on if he wants Ukraine or Russia to win the war: “I want everybody to stop dying. Russians and Ukrainians… and I’ll have that done in 24 hours.” pic.twitter.com/44FEth326z

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) May 11, 2023

---

Only an idiot would believe this post.

---

The POTUS can absolutely at the very least impose a cease fire. Ukraine is almost completely dependent on military aid from NATO, which is run by the US, without which that country would collapse in a matter of weeks. Kiev takes its orders from Washington. From there, a Minsk 3 agreement that is similar to the one discussed last year at the Istanbul peace talks can be formulated.

The broad lines of such an agreement involve Russia formally annexing the territories it currently holds, the Donbass, Crimea and the land bridge, areas which are majority Russian, as well as Ukraine being neutral (no NATO membership), along the lines of pre-2022 Finland or current-day Austria.

This would put an end to the war, it's actually the only way out for Ukraine. The alternative is further destruction of its military, economy and infrastructure, and the death of several hundred thousand more Ukrainian soldiers in a vain attempt to weaken Russia.

---

Kremlin to Cal88, your case of vodka is on its way!

Vodka is glorified rubbing alcohol, tell Vlad to send gold instead.

Cal88 said:

---

Vodka is glorified rubbing alcohol, tell Vlad to send gold instead.

---

Tell me you only buy cheap booze without telling me you buy cheap booze.