Hacker News Reader

Comment by sprash | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

Wouldn't it be much more effective theater if they actually succeeded? Why pretend to be incompetent?

They've been trying for ~13months already and haven't done so, why do you think they could do it now? Especially after losing 150,000+ soldiers (dead and/or wounded), and thousands of tanks and other armored vehicles? They've lost tens of thousands of troops and dozens/hundreds of vehicles just trying to take one town since August (Bakhmut).

They could push more soldiers and machines to war, make a zerg-rush on Ukraine with everything they have, going in an all-out war. Going by the known numbers, Russia's army should have/had(?) 4-5 times the size of Ukraine's army, or something like that.

Of course, this would be very expensive to bring back their army from all around the world. They would lose all strategic positions they have, and would probably still suffer great loses... But they could (maybe) conquer that single country, or relevant parts of it.

Just, would it be worth?

Fog of war. You can't know what is happening. The only numbers I believe is the additional cost in $ and € the western taxpayer is burdened with. Because that is guaranteed.

This is the least foggy war of all time. There is a constant barrage of tiktok and telegram videos of exactly what is going on in this war. Every video is geolocated to show where battles are taking place. We don't know what is going to happen, but we pretty well know what is happening.

Time to look up some other numbers, like 9970 photo documented destroyed and captured pieces of russian equipment.

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-docum...

Be as precise as possible, exactly what number of £€$ do you believe the western taxpayers are burdened with?

Is this comment a joke? Do you really believe that?

While the GP is obviously wrong now, that was the common take among analysts prior to the invasion. The underperformance of the Russian military has been stunning to say the least.

Yeah, I’m not sure what timeline you’re posting from, but in this one the Russian invasion isn’t going so well.

With what? They have barely anything worthy left at this point. And their remaining money is melting like ice in the desert

> Russia could also take over all of Ukraine in about a week.

I think that qualifies for a great big [Citation Needed].

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba

A Soviet experimental nuclear bomb that never was produced outside of a prototype. What is your point?

At this point, I'm moderately confident that their corruption has sold off the uranium (in most of their arsenal) to the power stations and many of the important aircraft parts to whoever wants them, while any tritium (or non-nuclear maintenance) involved has only been done on paper.

Also, if they used that, there wouldn't be a county left to take over. Look where Chernobyl is, and its fallout zone, and ask how many other similar would happen as a result of using nukes to try to win.

You understand Russia doesn't have these bombs because it was judged to be impractical?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevailing_winds

And you feel the most probable outcome of using that is “Russia takes over Ukraine”? You think that’s what would happen?

If Russia starts to """lose""" the war, the above is what will happen.

Maybe, but this was in response to a commenter claiming that Russia could take over Ukraine in a week if they really wanted to. Which is something very different than what you’re claiming.

https://youtu.be/o861Ka9TtT4

Reply on news.ycombinator.com