• harc@szmer.info
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Yeah, absolutely no invasions going over these forests whatsoever, apart for say these;

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_War
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heimosodat

    But I guess it’s only an invasion and imperialism if it happens to Russia?

    Oh, and most effective ones against Russia itself? Never bothered with Ukraine;
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_invasion_of_Russia
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish–Russian_War_(1609–1618)

    Even for nazis Ukraine was one of three axis of attack, but they never reached as far as the earlier two, partially due to the massive distances over the steppes.

    So the fuck you talking about? Especially claiming to know any of the history of the region? Kiev Rus? Yeah, Moscow basically did not exist when it was at it’s height of power ffs. If you bothered to learn any history every surrounding country, including China, considers them a imperialist dangerous neighbor willing to invade given any chance, and always working toward that. With the small difference China is probably already marking Siberia as it’s territory nowdays.

    And obviously you’re pretending that neither has the technology changed, and obviously 1000km of steppe is the best possible approach, since aircraft, drones, satellites and tactical missiles of nukes are not an option… This NATO bullshit was clearly checked when Scandinavians joined, Královec by the Baltic is now surrounded by it, borders extended in a tarain much harder to secure, a key new possible lifeline for Russian economy is threatened by Finish and Norwegian proximity, but no, somehow Ukraine would be a threat, and that’s why the fighting focuses not on a direction of capital, but on the resource rich areas. How can you be so blind?

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Maybe should read the wiki links you’re spamming? 😂

      What I’m talking about, is that Ukraine is a big wide open steppe through which majority of the invading forces attack. The fact that you can’t understand this really is phenomenal.

      And obviously you’re pretending that neither has the technology changed, and obviously 1000km of steppe is the best possible approach, since aircraft, drones, satellites and tactical missiles of nukes are not an option

      And obviously you’re ignorant of how actual warfare works given then you think you can win a war without ground invasion. You’re like a poster child for the Dunning-Kruger effect.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Oh look, the same clown who’s cheering for Ukrainians to keep dying in a senseless war pretends to give a fuck about people in Sudan. You ain’t fooling anybody.

          • harc@szmer.info
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Out of 2 forces that reached Moscow, which one went through Ukraine?

              • harc@szmer.info
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                You’d do anything not to accept the fact, that your argument is absolute bullshit, wouldn’t you?

                Poles raided Moscow, and set their Czar btw, going straight through current day Belarus. So did the French reach it. So attempted the Germans. The argument of Ukraine being needed for that has no basis neither in history nor modern warfare.

                • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  It’s obvious that you’re not interested in honest or rational discussion here and just keep deflecting. I love how you think you’re being clever while being utterly transparent.

                  • harc@szmer.info
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 month ago

                    What’s “deflecting” about giving you very simple, clear historical evidence your argument is invalid?