Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
franco
Khepesh wrote:I think this is a false analogy as Russia is not at war, is not retreating. Rodzhers also conveniently completely misses out the important facts that the Prussian and Austro-Hungarian armies, while technically part of Napoleon's alliance, even after seeing what happened at Borodino never made any attempt to fight on Napoleon's side, and infact the Prussian Army were in collusion with Russian Army. To transpose the analogy of 1812 to 2015 would need a scenario where US forces are attacking Russia but their major battlefield allies in Europe, UK and Germany, were hanging about on the sidelines not taking part.PapaDragon wrote:US financial bubble part might be up for debate, but the rest of this historical comparison and analysis is spot on, especially last paragraph.
Borodino--2015
http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/07/borodino-2015.html
Another point is what is Russia supossed to be waiting for? Russia is not about to attack Ukraine, Russia is not at war, Russia has no forces in the combat area. Despite the "northwind", which cannot be proved or disproved, it is DNR and LNR that are at war with Ukraine. While the bombardments are not reported in western MSM, their politicians, no matter now cynical they are, will know the reality, and if VSN do eventually mount a limited operation to try to stop the bombardments, the western politicians will know this to be a fact and not a "Russian invasion" no matter what noises they and their media shout. This issue of the ongoing bombardments is incorrectly inflated with some fantasy about marching on Kiev and so is shouted down as "warmongering" or being to hasty. On this subject of bombardments ukrops and "cunning plan" advocates are hand in hand as both want it ignored. Rodzhers also flails about accusing some of wanting "instant victory", yet I do not see this except in a tiny minority of people who likely have ulterior motive, but it suits his purpose to paint any opposition as rabid dogs, or even rabid raccoons.
Until today I have had no objection to fortruss, but to see Hawks comments to this article have changed my opinion. He lies about Boris Rozhin and clearly does not want people to read him. He has tried to say that Rozhin originated the article about Polish T-72 being imported into Ukraine, when I know 100% that is was not him, it was dadzi. Hawk then flails about and waffles that if the T-72 article was not by Rozhin, then some other nonsense about T-64 from Bulgaria was his. This is lies and Rozhin certainly knows that Bulgaria does not have any T-64. That Hawk tells deliberate lies and tries to blacken Rozhin shows an agenda and that he is as biased as anybody and his articles should be put under microscope. I do not say fortruss should not be believed, or that all it's articles are wrong, as in fact many are correct, but it should now be seen as part of a concerted effort to tell people what to think.
Who calls for "instant victory" ? who calls for a march on Kiev in the foreseable future? What is the wait for in terms of limited tactical action by VSN?
Astute observations
