• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Russia using inferior equipment. (1 Viewer)

justoneman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2022
Messages
11,268
Reaction score
2,688
Something is very odd odd about Russia's attack of Ukraine. It is well acknowledged that much of the equipment is old. It is also noted that many of the troops are outlying region states, specifically Chechnya and Dagestan. Also noted is the lack of air support. Why is this?
I think Putin has planned it this way for a reason. The main force is held in reserve. I think Putin planned on all of the sanctions and the blocked banking.
 
Something is very odd odd about Russia's attack of Ukraine. It is well acknowledged that much of the equipment is old. It is also noted that many of the troops are outlying region states, specifically Chechnya and Dagestan. Also noted is the lack of air support. Why is this?
I think Putin has planned it this way for a reason. The main force is held in reserve. I think Putin planned on all of the sanctions and the blocked banking.

The facts to support your claim is for you to provide or your claim is unfounded and dismissed for lack of evidence. I'll give you the benefit of a minute's worth of research and provide you with evidence refuting your claim outright.


Maybe you can come up with more valid evidence to support your "inferior" and "old" claims.

I can't imagine anyone disagreeing with your saying Russia has much greater forces in reserve, depending on your definition of "reserve".

It doesn't matter whether or not Putin anticipated, planned and prepared for "sanctions and the blocked banking" when he can't beat them back, anyway. The whole thing is not going over well with his oligarch partners and the Russian people. Did he plan for that, too? Putin's plan, that Trump called genius, is a failure.
 
All of the evidence points to an absolute faith in the invasion taking 2-3 days, thus the terrible supply line situation. Combine this with lack of vehicle maintenance and bad terrain and you’ve got yourself a disaster. As for “anticipating” the sanctions, there’s no reason to think this is true. By the way, the Russian stock exchange is down for the fourth day.
 
All of the evidence points to an absolute faith in the invasion taking 2-3 days, thus the terrible supply line situation. Combine this with lack of vehicle maintenance and bad terrain and you’ve got yourself a disaster. As for “anticipating” the sanctions, there’s no reason to think this is true. By the way, the Russian stock exchange is down for the fourth day.

I think there might be something said that inferior troops and equipment were/are used in Ukraine by the Russians with the following purpose.

#1 Appear weak with the invasion to prompt NATO to react with direct support (i.e. combat troops, tanks, aircraft, etc.) to support Ukraine,

#2 Once NATO was directly engaged, then Putin could send large numbers of better trained and better equipped forces.


The justification would be based on NATOs escalation of a non-NATO event because Russia sent in "peacekeeping" forces.

WW
 
There is no reason to think that Putin is an idiot. He is a successful politician in a system where they put weak politicians out quickly. He has to have expected that the western world would put sanctions against him, and what those sanctions would most likely be. So, I highly doubt that anything we have done in response to his invasion has been a surprise. To think differently would be underestimating him. One of the big questions is how well China is going to back up his play. There is a chance that China can help him out economically to enough of a degree that our sanctions are going to have minimal effect.

There is no reason to think that Putin hasn't already thought three steps ahead of us, and that things are actually going well for him.
 
The tanks are T72s from 1970 and soldiers said to be captured by the Ukrainians carry basic AK47s with no advanced optics. Most of those soldiers are from Dagestan and Chechnya.
 
Last edited:
There is no reason to think that Putin is an idiot. He is a successful politician in a system where they put weak politicians out quickly. He has to have expected that the western world would put sanctions against him, and what those sanctions would most likely be. So, I highly doubt that anything we have done in response to his invasion has been a surprise. To think differently would be underestimating him. One of the big questions is how well China is going to back up his play. There is a chance that China can help him out economically to enough of a degree that our sanctions are going to have minimal effect.

There is no reason to think that Putin hasn't already thought three steps ahead of us, and that things are actually going well for him.
Do you admire Putin? Do you support his unprovoked invasion of Ukraine?
 
I think there might be something said that inferior troops and equipment were/are used in Ukraine by the Russians with the following purpose.

#1 Appear weak with the invasion to prompt NATO to react with direct support (i.e. combat troops, tanks, aircraft, etc.) to support Ukraine,

#2 Once NATO was directly engaged, then Putin could send large numbers of better trained and better equipped forces.


The justification would be based on NATOs escalation of a non-NATO event because Russia sent in "peacekeeping" forces.

WW
I’m not saying you’re wrong, but that seems a little too “Bond Villain Plot”-convoluted. Nor am I saying that I have any brilliant theories of my own for why such untrained and inferior troops were sent, I’m just saying that your theory seems to rely on an extremely narrow and specific set of reactions by his opponent to unfold.
 
I think there is a next step planned by Putin. Maybe a response to NATO forces. I think China is waiting for something. Some big event to take advantage of, for their own territorial conquest.
 
Stop with this crap. It's a discussion about events.
Are you attempting to play mod in your thread?

IMO, someone's opinion about Putin and the invasion is absolutely pertinent to the discussion. YMMV
 
Are you attempting to play mod in your thread?

IMO, someone's opinion about Putin and the invasion is absolutely pertinent to the discussion. YMMV
I am saying that this stupid attempt to pin support for Putin on others like that is not right and it stifles a frank discussion. You are the one attempting to shut someone's mouth.
 
All of the evidence points to an absolute faith in the invasion taking 2-3 days, thus the terrible supply line situation. Combine this with lack of vehicle maintenance and bad terrain and you’ve got yourself a disaster. As for “anticipating” the sanctions, there’s no reason to think this is true. By the way, the Russian stock exchange is down for the fourth day.
There are stories of russians puncturing their own gas tanks. The commitment isn't there for many of them.
 
Something is very odd odd about Russia's attack of Ukraine. It is well acknowledged that much of the equipment is old. It is also noted that many of the troops are outlying region states, specifically Chechnya and Dagestan. Also noted is the lack of air support. Why is this?
I think Putin has planned it this way for a reason. The main force is held in reserve. I think Putin planned on all of the sanctions and the blocked banking.
There are multiple reports that ~6000 Russian troops have died. Russia's economy is tanking. Brilliant plan so far.
 
Do you admire Putin? Do you support his unprovoked invasion of Ukraine?
Like many cons, he did but now he doesn't. Because the latter is more politically convenient. And he doesn't want to admit having made any change.
 
There are stories of russians puncturing their own gas tanks. The commitment isn't there for many of them.
Lots of stories. Yes. Angel of Kiev and all. Even what I posted, all of it, needs to be taken with a grain of salt.
 
I think there might be something said that inferior troops and equipment were/are used in Ukraine by the Russians with the following purpose.

#1 Appear weak with the invasion to prompt NATO to react with direct support (i.e. combat troops, tanks, aircraft, etc.) to support Ukraine,

#2 Once NATO was directly engaged, then Putin could send large numbers of better trained and better equipped forces.


The justification would be based on NATOs escalation of a non-NATO event because Russia sent in "peacekeeping" forces.

WW
This doesn't make sense to me. What is gained over using the best to quickly overwhelm the the Ukranian military?
 
I am saying that this stupid attempt to pin support for Putin on others like that is not right and it stifles a frank discussion. You are the one attempting to shut someone's mouth.
Asking questions is attempting to shut someone's mouth? That makes no sense.
 
This doesn't make sense to me. What is gained over using the best to quickly overwhelm the the Ukranian military?
Speculate. Diversion could be one reason. Attack in Ukraine then use main forces somewhere else.

Or, perhaps Putin anticipates NATO forces invading Russia.

Or, he has old equipment and soldiers he does not care about losing.
 
Like many cons, he did but now he doesn't. Because the latter is more politically convenient. And he doesn't want to admit having made any change.
Your evidence for this? Prior to this thread, @gino has made only one single post this year mentioning 'putin,' 'russia' or 'ukraine.' Seems like you might be attributing opinions to him purely because you have decided he is a "them" rather than an individual person.
 
Your evidence for this? Prior to this thread, @gino has made only one single post this year mentioning 'putin,' 'russia' or 'ukraine.' Seems like you might be attributing opinions to him purely because you have decided he is a "them" rather than an individual person.
My post was not in reference to @gino nor anything @gino said. My bad. I mixed up gino's post with a justoneman post.
 
This doesn't make sense to me. What is gained over using the best to quickly overwhelm the the Ukranian military?

Because that's not what I said.

I said Putin could possibly be using the "non-best" (conscript troops, older equipment, etc.) to invade Ukraine which is not a member of NATO. If NATO intervenes via direct combat, that could be justification (in Putin's eyes) and then escalate and throw in better troops and better equipment in massive numbers.

WW
 
Because that's not what I said.

I said Putin could possibly be using the "non-best" (conscript troops, older equipment, etc.) to invade Ukraine which is not a member of NATO. If NATO intervenes via direct combat, that could be justification (in Putin's eyes) and then escalate and throw in better troops and better equipment in massive numbers.

WW
I think Putin is keeping his best troops where he's at because he's afraid to get assassinated.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom