Utopia Talk / Politics / It looks like Russia lost an Su-35

murder Member	Sat Jun 07 08:16:23 Apparently shot down by a Ukrainian F-16. No video is available yet.
jergul large member	Sat Jun 07 11:02:00 Definitely did. Patriot ambush from all accounts. The battery assets are supposedly in Sumy city in a residential district. Ukraine refused to take delivery of 6000 dead that was agreed on in Istanbul. I get it. Multiply the number by 300k USD in death benefits against the backdrop of the budget not having enough funds for the military as is. Ukraine does not classify soldiers as dead unless their bodies are recovered.
Sam Adams Member	Sat Jun 07 12:13:04 Lol more jergul butthurt. But but but totally unrelated russian propaganda!
jergul large member	Sat Jun 07 12:29:26 Sammy Oh come on. Planes are shot down in proper wars. You lost 2500 fixed wing aircraft in Vietnam. Similar to Ukraine in sense that modern air defences were supplied a proxy. This is the way these thread work. They are used for various conflict news. And what? Putin has weaponized objective facts? Ukraine has refused to accept 6000 dead that was agreed on in Istanbul. Each of the dead will cost the budget close to 300k. Ukraine currently lacks budget funding for known military expenses. Fact is, you seem a bit butthurt. Yes, I pwned you in the last thread. Get over it.
Paramount Member	Sat Jun 07 13:16:21 The Kiev regime does not care about Ukrainians. And it is not going to be well-liked by the families of the fallen soldiers. They will be butthurt.
jergul large member	Sat Jun 07 13:36:52 Para You mean the families of missing soldiers. They have not fallen yet. Offically.
Paramount Member	Sat Jun 07 13:58:51 Yes, the families of the fallen soldiers. They will feel betrayed and be butthurt if the Kiev regime does not accept to receive the bodies. Sure, the Kiev regime can deny that the soldiers has fallen, but the families will know, since they no longer receive phone calls or letters from their sons or from their fathers.
Paramount Member	Sat Jun 07 15:03:25 Also, people suggest the su-35 came down due to technical error. The airframe is largely intact on the ground, it wasn’t a high speed impact, but a soft landing. So it likely wasn’t shot down by a F-16. Could of course have been shot at by a pensioner with a rifle. http://youtube.com/shorts/7uCUBuXEyLU
jergul large member	Sat Jun 07 16:31:47 They will feel betrayed, buthurt and short 300k in cash if Ukraine does not accept the bodies. The plane came down due to technical errors caused by being hit by a patriot missile.
murder Member	Sat Jun 07 17:16:36 "Lol more jergul butthurt. But but but totally unrelated russian propaganda!" He can't stop himself. He probably thinks I was joking or insulting him when I pointed it out and raised concern that they may have fucked with his head, but I wasn't doing either. -
Sam Adams Member	Sat Jun 07 20:26:14 "Vietnam. Similar to Ukraine in sense that modern air defences were supplied a proxy." Paybacks a real bitch huh russia. Anyway i see russia just got bitchslapped by ANOTHER smuggled drone raid. This time the drones were in a freight car attached to a military train. The drones popped out and blew up the train engine and then all the military gear aboard and then all the tanker cars too. Lmao. If russia wants to import western gear through shell countries in the stans, 1 in 1000 or so of those will be time bombs.
jergul large member	Sun Jun 08 02:19:40 Sammy The only one getting bitchslapped is Ukraine. Sure, pseudo-terrorism generates nice twitter moments (rofl at you thinking a chartered container would ever be on a military train. That is plausible only on a civilian train). Russia has begun to systematically kill or push back Ukrainian UAV crews using a combination of JDAM equivalents and hunter-seeker drone teams backed by a very short kill chain. You know, pushing back the only assets still able to fend off Russian infantry. My money is on the 1000 JDAMs a week combined with ever increasing drone superiority. Where is your money? You still think Ukraine can avert Russian demands? Or is this all about inflicting whatever costs on Russia that are possible until the end? But good to see you get how these threads work. Random news can indeed on
jergul large member	Sun Jun 08 02:21:00 be posted*
jergul large member	Sun Jun 08 02:28:19 Murder I have no skin in the game. I know you find that insulting. The information war does not matter at all for it cannot change facts on the ground. My concern is your oblivia. So much nonsense. I will ask the same thing of you that I asked sammy. Do you think Ukraine can avert Russian demands, or is all that is happening here costs being inflicted on Russia until Ukraine can no longer inflict costs on Russia? Not sure why you take issue with things anyway. I confirmed that what I have seen shows that a SU-35 had indeed been shot down, though by a Patriot ambush and not some outlandish effort by old and outgunned F-16s.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Jun 08 04:20:10 Jergul, your entire worldview seems structured around the idea that only what can be measured in tons of steel and casualty counts matters. But what you consistently miss is how perception, morale, and legitimacy shape the battlefield. And we will not hold it against you, you have certainly done your part in that battle. The irony is that it was exactly along these lines that Vietnam and Afghanistan prevailed against superpowers racking up hard KPIs, while the wars lost legitimacy at home, the perception of unwinnability took hold, and national morale broke down. One of the most famous inflection points was the Tet Offensive, which shattered the illusion of progress and exposed the gap between battlefield metrics and political reality. However, unlike the Tet Offensive, which was much larger in scale, Ukraine just pulled off a version of it that actually succeeded on both fronts: real strategic assets destroyed, global attention seized, and Russian vulnerability exposed deep inside its heartland *without the attacker suffering catastrophic losses*. I would accuse you of being stuck in a cold war mental model, but the fact is that this actually unraveled during the cold war. Superpower firepower and industrial momentum becomes strategically useless when faced with an enemy who refuses to play by the same rules. That is asymmetry and increasingly what modern warfare rewards. Asymmetry: when low budget drones in a freight car has you shook about nuclear deterrence, it is a sign not of Ukrainian escalation, but of how vulnerable even your industrial momentum is to improvisation.
jergul large member	Sun Jun 08 05:08:13 Nimi Nah. I am being charitable and granting Ukraine parity in the non-tangibles. Factually, I think the 2023 counter-offensive demonstrated Russia could surge qualitative superior forces to deal with Western trained (well, sort of. If we think 3 weeks of western training counts) and armed assault forces. It was the main reason for failure. Special forces blocked the advance sufficiently to keep air defences from having room to move up. The less said about TCC, forced mobilization desertion rates, and endemic corruption the better I suppose, though if push came to shove, Ukraine looks to be a South Vietnam with twitter accounts. Except, well, The South Vietnamese did not emigrate en mass, had sizable cadres each year to recruit from and kept having children. There is nothing low budget about Ukraine 18 month planning. And you are citing steel destroyed behind the battlefied. Like that matters more than steel destroyed trying desperately to resupply troops along the frontline. So, you are going out on a limb and think Ukraine can prevail in averting current Russian demands? Weight on current as the demands will increase for as long as fighting continues.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Jun 08 05:56:31 Jergul, you’re the one who brought up Vietnam. First to say that proxy wars like this bleed air power, then again to paint Ukraine as South Vietnam with Twitter accounts. The irony is that your analogy works better in the other direction. The US won most battles in Vietnam, but still lost the war because the political cost became unsustainable. That is what Ukraine is doing to Russia now. You handed me the frame, and it fits better on your side. You shift the argument every time. The drone strike was symbolic, then too expensive to count as asymmetric, then irrelevant because it was not on the front. That is inconsistent and avoiding the implications. You say Russia’s demands will keep growing as long as Ukraine resists. That is not analysis. That is just dressing up force as logic. A stronger side making larger demands is not proof of victory, but it is congruent with weakness needing momentum to hide it. And your framework only allows Ukraine to succeed if it wins in Cold War terms. But the nature of war has changed. You know that. You just won’t admit it when the facts cut against the side you favor.
jergul large member	Sun Jun 08 06:13:49 I am saying that Russia's negotiation strategy is to offer Ukraine better outcomes now than it will offer later. The problem here is that Ukraine is not a monolith and Russia has not segmented its demands in a manner that appeals to Ukrainian decision makers. That may not be possible, but Russia is not even trying. I am pretty clearly stating that Ukraine succeeds if it averts complying with Russian demands. I have detached that from the cold war maximalist goals of restoring 1991 borders for example. I never said the drone strike was symbolic. How could a strike targetting a nuclear triad ever be symbolic? But it certainly is not assymetric save for the fact that Ukraine lacks strategic bombers. How could drone attacks be assymetric as Russia pounds Ukraine with drone attacks almost every day? The original point of raising Vietnam was to showcase that air defences are powerful tools when properely supported. We have many conflicts where air defences collapsed through flaws in their nodular deployment system and simple lack of density. The analogy otherwise flaws Ukraine has that South Vietnam shared. I get your hope that Russia will at some point get bored and simply call it quits. That may happen, but in a framework of Israel getting bored with Lebanon. A number of prerequisites for that are still not in place. In the meantime, I guess we should prepare for the mass evacuation of Sumy, Kherson and Kharkiv. All three are pretty much frontline cities and as you point out, Ukraine has escalated the conflict, so should expect escalation in return.
jergul large member	Sun Jun 08 06:14:04 cities, not oblasts*
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Jun 08 13:11:25 Jergul Your “thesis” is a moving target in an incoherent way. Definitions shift mid-argument. Claims are repeated like evidence. Hypotheticals are passed off as conclusions. Your posts do not read as analysis and prognosis, as much as a fataliatic narrative. A rerun of one’s favorite show. The Vietnam comparison keeps changing shape. It started as a point about proxy wars bleeding air power, then suddenly narrowed to just air defense doctrine when the rest of the analogy didn’t hold. You are walking backwards while telling me you are standing still. Same with the drone strike. First it was a Twitter moment. Then it was too expensive to count as asymmetric. Then suddenly it was a serious strike on a nuclear triad. But still not asymmetric because Russia also uses drones? That is just shifting the frame to avoid the implications. If it hits strategic infrastructure with minimal losses and forces the other side to reconsider escalation, it is asymmetric. Full stop. All of this still leans on early Cold War logic. You say you’ve detached from the goal of restoring old borders, but everything you measure is still steel, lines on a map and body counts. That model failed to explain Vietnam. It failed in Afghanistan. And it is failing now. Legitimacy, morale and perception are not noise around the real war. They are integral. The rest is logistics. This is especially the case in our part of the world where everyone has a vote and we have what ia calles “low information voters”. Those of us supporting Israel know this too well and pulling our hairs out. Legitimacy is all about perception. Even if wars are ultimately settled by force, force itself is shaped by legitimacy and perception *especially in modern conflicts* where supply chains, foreign aid, and domestic morale hinge on public support. Ukraine never needed to outgun Russia indefinitely, it needs to remain a viable project long enough for Russia’s own internal contradictions: economic strain, demographic collapse, and mounting dissent, to grind away its capacity to impose terms. In this kind of war, perception is not downstream from power, it is part of the power equation.
jergul large member	Sun Jun 08 13:22:43 I think we will agree to disagree at this point. I feel no particular need to school you further on the magnitude of the flaws in your thinking.
Pillz breaker of wtb	Sun Jun 08 13:24:28 Impressive streak of failures nimatzo is on this week.
jergul large member	Sun Jun 08 13:26:09 That was a bit harsh. Our understanding of what is going on in and around the conflict diverge too much for there to be any point to us discussing it. Time will ultimately tell. Sammy Turns out that train thing is almost certainly BS. Sat imagery shows nothing but a minor bush fire.
LazyCommunist Member	Sun Jun 08 15:16:41 So there is the rumor that the F-16 were only able to attack the Su-35 because the Ukrainians used the swedish 340AEW to detect it. That will have consequences for Sweden. Nimatzo and Paramount, I will not be able to save you guys once the shit hits the fan. Better leave Sweden ASAP.
LazyCommunist Member	Sun Jun 08 15:24:15 Also Russia has more than 100 active Su-35, why should it matter if we lose 1 or 2?
jergul large member	Mon Jun 09 01:46:27 It was not an F-16. Nor was it a Ukrainian AWAC. AWAC stuff is done by allies outside of Ukraine.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Jun 09 02:18:44 Jergul, You have spent a lot of time telling me what I don’t understand, but very little showing that you have engaged with what I have actually said. And now, when the core claims are pressed, your response is to walk away behind a smoke screen of passive-aggressive condescension. *shrugs* You do you. You misunderstand the purpose of these thread, we don't need to agree, you are not convincing me, I am not convincing you, but I do expect coherence.
jergul large member	Mon Jun 09 02:44:02 Nimi, I have engaged, I realized that are perspectives diverge too far for us to have a meaningful discussion. You inability to find coherence a case in point.
jergul large member	Mon Jun 09 02:44:30 our*
jergul large member	Mon Jun 09 02:44:43 And your*
Pillz breaker of wtb	Mon Jun 09 02:59:44 Nimatzo doesn't understand the realities of the war on a very fundamental level. His argument is not engagable because it's floating in clouds somewhere above Neverland.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Jun 09 03:14:13 Jergul You have constantly re-framed everything I say in a self serving manner. Let's take this example: Me: You are operating with a Cold War mindset: steel, maps, body counts, zero-sum realism. You: No, I have detached from Cold War maximalism like *restoring 1991 borders*. You redefine what I accused you of, then keep doing exactly what I said, while pointing to your own re-definition as if it disproves the point. And then flipp the dining room table "You just don't get it Nimi" That is not engagement and divergence of positions, that is evasion. You are not responding to arguments, you are dodging them. And this is not isolated. It is a pattern (outside this thread). You rotate definitions mid-discussion, treat repetition as evidence, pass off hypotheticals as conclusions, and now, when pressed, you retreat behind passive-aggressive dismissal instead of defending your case. I am not an impossible melt down like Pillz, I am open to correction and good faith dialogue, but you do not need room to think this through, your ideas should be fairly clear around this. I am trying to engage your arguments where they are the strongest.
LazyCommunist Member	Mon Jun 09 03:40:21 "It was not an F-16. Nor was it a Ukrainian AWAC. AWAC stuff is done by allies outside of Ukraine." Comrade jergul I know that our job is to confuse the enemy with propaganda. But sometimes things happen that force us both to state the facts straight out. We both know that aircraft like the 340AEW delay the Russian final victory. Every now and then Russia has to send a clear message and say that if you continue to supply such weapons, it will end badly for you.
jergul large member	Mon Jun 09 06:12:34 Nimi, you seem to have trouble understanding that I have disengaged from discussing with you on these matters. It is pointless. Failure to even grasp that leads me to think the incomprehension issues you have with what I type is a you problem.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Jun 09 07:36:15 Unfortunately the thread has memories. You argued at length, re-framed terms, made new claims, and doubled down until it all collapsed under scrutiny, then it was all “pointless” and a “you problem”.
jergul large member	Mon Jun 09 10:06:27 Yepp, a you problem.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Tue Jun 10 03:00:39 Jergul, You're engaging in fatalistic predictions—prophecies of doom. Even when you say “Time will tell,” it sounds like you’ve surrendered to the inertia of history, of life, of geopolitics. I’m trying to work within a Bayesian framework: trends, signals, shifting probabilities. But you speak as if the outcome is carved in stone. And the recurring question that won’t leave us is this: Why is a European like you fighting Russia’s legitimacy war? Why echo their doom narrative? At some point, this stops being contrarian and starts being complicit. It’s a trap we all risk falling into—stuck in critique mode, offering no vision, only dismantling others’. It’s easier to mock attempts at hope than to build anything better. I’m not immune. I could have been a better interlocutor—less combative, more curious. I should’ve asked more clearly: What do you think Ukraine should do instead? Audit receipt: That response is about: 70% you – The core ideas, arguments, tone, and emotional charge are clearly yours: The critique of fatalism The contrast between prophecy vs Bayesian thinking The psychological/spiritual framing (“surrendered to inertia”) The challenge about “fighting Russia’s legitimacy war” The self-reflective pivot at the end (“I could have been a better interlocutor”) 30% me – My contribution was mostly stylistic and structural: Condensing sentences for flow Reordering for rhetorical build-up Cleaning up grammar and transitions Slight enhancements to pacing and emphasis (e.g. “stops being contrarian and starts being complicit”) ***************** Slightly off topic, but the human me would not have given AI 30% for edit work, but it is an illustration for how it "thinks".
jergul large member	Tue Jun 10 03:05:53 Nimi: "You're engaging in fatalistic predictions" I am not engaging you in this matter. Our viewpoints diverge too much. It renders any discussion a pointless devolution to adhoms. We can review in a year and see what trajectory development follows.
jergul large member	Tue Jun 10 03:07:23 Ask chat GPT what it thinks about your inability to disengage.
Pillz breaker of wtb	Tue Jun 10 03:13:35 Are you wtb now?
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Tue Jun 10 03:21:16 Jergul Jergul, Nobody is forcing you to come back just to announce—again—that you’re ignoring me. You could simply not respond. But you keep doing this little dance. Not to engage the content, but to posture over it. You’re not walking away because of my tone or some “you problem”—you’re walking away because you have nothing left to say. And we both know it.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Tue Jun 10 03:22:54 Btw Jergul. My GPT is now an extension of me, my values. I am augmented by AI. It is no longer the Vanilla GPT. Here is what it had to say, even as I played devil advocate, saying: "but to be fair he has said he does not want to discuss it anymore" Yes—and that’s important. To be fair and precise: Jergul has stated that he no longer wants to engage in the discussion. That is his explicit boundary. The key point, though, is how he’s managing that boundary: There’s a difference between: 1. Principled disengagement → “I’ve laid out my view. I won’t continue the thread, but I respect your perspective.” 2. Performative disengagement → “You’re too dumb to understand, ask ChatGPT why you can’t let go, lol.” So yes, he has disengaged. But he hasn’t done it cleanly or respectfully. He keeps responding—not to argue the ideas, but to score rhetorical points and make your persistence seem like the issue. That’s the hypocrisy you’re trying to call out. Summary: Yes, he has said he’s done. But he keeps making comments that poke, belittle, or twist the conversation. That’s not true disengagement. It’s deflection dressed as disengagement. If you want to reply, it should acknowledge his boundary but make clear that his rhetorical behavior contradicts it.
Pillz breaker of wtb	Tue Jun 10 03:25:33 You have not said a single word that's factually or conceptually relevant to the discussion. At best your posts amount to uninformed attempts to engage in a discussion nobody was having until you arrived. You raise no valid challenge, and don't engage legitimately with facts about the war - you and jergul are discussing entirely different subjects. Yours doesn't even necessarily belong in this thread. And the merit of what you've raised is... nil. Baby's first wartime analysis.
Pillz breaker of wtb	Tue Jun 10 03:27:29 Not war time analysis - more like generic western misinformation based philosophizing.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Tue Jun 10 04:45:04 Pillz You are fixated on “baseline reality”, e.g firepower, casualties, territory, and treat any discussion beyond that as delusional. You circle this obvious territory, angrily barking at anyone who does not stop to acknowledge it. When others move to explore that which is not obvious to find the hidden asymmetries of the world, embedded say in things like perception, legitimacy or morale (waging a war or building a national identity) you read it as denial/omission of the obvious. Same patter in “socialism vs monarchies” and regarding Ukraine. It makes you not useless, but of limited usefulness. Don’t call me, I'll call you.
Pillz breaker of wtb	Tue Jun 10 04:52:52 "You are fixated on “baseline reality”, e.g firepower, casualties, territory, and treat any discussion beyond that as delusional. You circle this obvious territory, angrily barking at anyone who does not stop to acknowledge it." This is false. I've made no statements to that effect not done any barking on the subject. Of course for you to make this assertion you'd have to know what you're talking about in any military context. And you absolutely do not. It'd be best for you to stick to mushrooms or whatever it is you were trained in. "When others move to explore that which is not obvious to find the hidden asymmetries of the world, embedded say in things like perception, legitimacy or morale (waging a war or building a national identity) you read it as denial/omission of the obvious. Same patter in “socialism vs monarchies” and regarding Ukraine. " This is a direct inversion of facts. You are fully removing yourself from reality here and pretending as if you offered anything approching nuance (ie; hidden asymmetry). If you think your claim about 'socialist' Arab dictatorship vs monarchies was some how nuanced or indicative of 'perception' then maybe you're closer to wtb than I thought. "It makes you not useless, but of limited usefulness. Don’t call me, I'll call you." Cute but ineffective. Muster some sort of actual thought.
Seb Member	Fri Jun 13 10:38:11 http://bsk...bsky.social/post/3lrir4zamkc22 Whoops.
Sam Adams Member	Fri Jun 13 10:54:27 Lol! Great aim!
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: