Chilloutman

what? they run over their commander in tank? Hard to believe that

Thats true but as you pointed out difference is that defensive side have big advantage. If you want to win this you would have to have like 3-5:1 advantage. I doubt Russians have enough supplies to field such amount of people. They would have to go to war economy and I doubt even Russians are willing to do that for Ukraine. And it would take time to do so. I think that sanctions will hit hard in like 3 months.

I seriously doubt conscripts would be any improvement for Russia in this war. Quite contrary really. You still need to train people for modern war, you need to supply them on front. This is not WW2 where you can give one guy rifle and second ammo and send them to death.

Yeah but bleeding strategy have one weakness - IF Ukraine manage to regroup and counter attack in south supply lines for Russia will be decimated. Of course its big IF

seriously doubt people's uprising in Russia. Young generation is more pro west but rest of population still lives in illusion of great russia and everyone in west wanting to get them. And on top of that most of those pro-west are fleeing Russia in droves

so what do you think his plan is now? Nuke it? Doubt it would help him in any way, quite contrary. Bleed out for months? Does not sounds too good either

Anatoly Chubais left his post as Special Envoy of the President of Russian Federation for Relations with International Organizations and left Russia and no-one saw Shojgu for like 2 weeks. Maybe cards are starting to fall?

would it mean we would be buying barrel of oil for barrel of rubles?

Only thing I used for Oblivion was OOO so I got rid of level scaling

new business is going to open in russia, guess what they are dealing with?

I still don't see what endgoal for Russia in this is. Until they basically bomb Ukraine to the ground they will not get much of what they want. I can see forgoing NATO being only think Zelensky accepts.

don't care about the story much - I have played once 1 or 2, I can't remember

So Haag tribunal requested Russia to cease fire and withdrawal - no idea how they want to press it but oh well

yeah but UI could use some love. Or its really hard for me to get into it

ok you won, they funded them during WW2 which they were not part of yet. Happy? Jesus like it changes anything

but it was before US went into war. thats why I am saying before. You are looking for semantics the point still same. USA gave or traded weapons with all sides of conflict BEFORE they became part of it

https://share.america.gov/america-sent-equipment-to-soviet-union-in-world-war-ii/ there was also trade before what is mentioned in above. America was and is profiteering on any war from WW1.

So yes?

not really fine was only one charge, she still have the second one for 15 years...

lol, that was taking scientists to work for US yeah, they were not funding them because they were nazis, or to promote nazism. Thats crucial point. Anyway you didn't responded to any question I asked you so I think our conversation can be closed

America was 'funding' everyone before WW2 including soviets. What do you mean by 'welcomed after' is again something I totally don't understand

still don't know who is bound to defeat. anyway, are you saying that America and England which fought WW2 against nazis were since end of WW2 proactively funding nazis? Or is anyone who wanted national suverenity 'far right wing'? Was Prague spring 'far right wing' action?

''Losing lives for the benefit of arming Nazi's for the sake of NATO is bound to end in defeat.'' can someone translate this to me please?