Ukraine - Russia Conflict


He was avoiding answering the question. There is no imagining of Russian victory in Ukraine could even look like.

As for the whole Neo-Nazi crap, that line is only working in a few countries with an average IQ <85.

It's the only country where Nazis have their own armies and have pretty much complete influence over the country's leadership.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: BMD
It's the only country where Nazis have their own armies and have pretty much complete influence over the country's leadership.
You mean Russia, right? Wagner was funded by Dmitri Utkin, the guy who has an SS uniform tattooed on his body, and who chose the name Wagner because it was "Hitler's favorite composer". Russia is the Naziest country today, and that's what makes their claim of Nazism in Ukraine so absurd. The only Nazis in Ukraine are Russian invaders.

Far-right parties get 10% of the votes in Russia, and always side with Putin's party. Far-right parties got less than 2% of the votes in Ukraine and they have no influence at any level, despite what Russian shills like to pretend. The far-right militias like Azov have been forcibly folded in the regular army, and their composition changed; the people who joined the militia when it was independent being now just a tiny minority.
 
An EV lorry could conceivably drive for a trucker's maximum legal hours before rest. A whole day. Mostly they don't change drivers, they sleep in the cab.

No, not a whole day. There are legal limits. In the US, a driver cannot drive for more than 11 hours on the dot. And in a 24-hour work day he needs to rest for 10 hours on the dot.

And trucks cannot exceed 65mph or 105kmph. So that's 715mi or 1155Km max a day. So nope EVs are not there yet.

Recharging tech isn't there as well. So if a driver is on the road for 11 hours and is then replaced by another drivers for another 11 hours, a hydrogen truck would cover over 2000Km in 22 hours. It's impossible for EV to match this.

From lifecycle PoV too, a fuel cell lasts the entire life of the vehicle, Li-ion requires 2 or 3 replacements.

Batteries are also less safe in comparison.

Hydrogen uses more electricity overall which increases prices for home use. You use twice as much electricity producing hydrogen than you get out of it in energy. Then you have the risks of transporting a volatile chemical.

There's usually a pause at either end of a journey when drivers change, you can use fast recharge then and contactless recharging in bus lanes. Charging is also getting faster.

The weight doesn't necessarily get in the way of cargo and I'm yet to see any real weight advantage with hydrogen fuel cells anyway. Failing transmissions and ICE servicing will be more expensive than battery replacement every 10-15 years.

EV will continue developing and remain ahead.

Electric motors allow long periods of continuous usage without significant wear and tear. It's 'cause the main moving parts are reliable. Anyway, hydrogen will use the same motor as an EV. Instead of batteries, the electricity will come from fuel cells.

Basically, both hydrogen and battery cars are EVs. Hydrogen car is called FCEV, for fuel cell. With batteries, it's called BEV. The transmission system and other parts that make the car move are exactly the same.

EV is fine for average users, but power users need fuel cells.

The only real criticism against FCEV is it's less efficient. But the cost to produce and improving efficiency is what will determine who will dominate the energy market ultimately, 'cause hydrogen isn't powering just vehicles, it has the ability to provide sustained power.

All other criticisms are country-specific, depending on investment, the infrastructure in place and alternate sources of energy.

In India, hydrogen will be cheaper than gas and coal 'cause it will be produced in-house, we won't have to rely on the international market. Like how petrol in Saudi costs half that of India.
 
Ukraine would turn into a neo-Nazi hellhole if Russia was successful in conquering and annexing it, since Russia is a neo-Nazi hellhole.

There's no way to describe Russia as anything else than that. The enforced leader worship, the hyper-militarisation of society complete with brainwashing kids at school, and the rapid, usually violent, quelling of any dissenting voice.

Ukraine will turn into exactly the opposite: a free and prosperous country part of the EU, adhering to the same values of freedom, democracy, the rule of law, and human rights. All the things that Russia hates.

There's a reason why Russian literature excels at depicting depression, grinding despair, and powerlessness against brutal and unjust authorities. Hopelessness is the most defining factor of the "Russkiy Mir".

It's also the clearest proof that Russian and Ukrainian are not "brotherly people", as the Ukrainians have never lost hope. That's why they wanted independence, that's why they fought against corruption in their government, and that's why they're fighting against Russia's invasion.

When you ask Russians what they hope for, they never say they hope for things to be better for themselves. They are only capable of hoping that things will be worse for others, so that the rest of the world can become as miserable as the Russians are. They have ceased thinking they can elevate themselves, and their only ambition is instead to drag other people down to their level.

Russia is communist, not neo-Nazi.

While the MO is similar, the ideologies are still very different.

After WW2, the fight in Europe was democracy vs communism. Within a decade, it will be democracy vs communism vs Nazism. The issue is Nazism is similar to radical Islam, it brings tribalism and race into the equation. A Nazi French guy will sympathise more with a Nazi Russian/Ukrainian than a Democratic French. Nazism is basically a Christian version of radical Islam.
 
Could be the result of hacking. Japan opposes Russia.

 
No, not a whole day. There are legal limits. In the US, a driver cannot drive for more than 11 hours on the dot. And in a 24-hour work day he needs to rest for 10 hours on the dot.
That's why I said maximum legal hours.
And trucks cannot exceed 65mph or 105kmph. So that's 715mi or 1155Km max a day. So nope EVs are not there yet.
Recharging tech isn't there as well. So if a driver is on the road for 11 hours and is then replaced by another drivers for another 11 hours, a hydrogen truck would cover over 2000Km in 22 hours. It's impossible for EV to match this.
Never happens in practice. The driver sleeps in the cab, 1 driver per lorry.
From lifecycle PoV too, a fuel cell lasts the entire life of the vehicle, Li-ion requires 2 or 3 replacements.
Not really.


As an example, a number of Tesla Model S taxis operating from Gatwick airport racked up over 300,000 miles each over three years, with all retaining at least 82 percent of their batteries’ health.
Do that kind of range in an ICE car and you'll be replacing the clutch and flywheel several times and the entire transmission twice. You'll also see some companies offering warranties up to 8 years. Won't get that on any other car engine.

For instance, Audi, BMW, Jaguar, Nissan and Renault cover the cells for 8 years and 100,000 miles, while Hyundai ups the mileage limit to 125,000. Tesla has the same 8 year timeframe but a mileage limit of 150,000 on the Model S and Model X
Batteries are also less safe in comparison.
Only if they're badly designed.
Electric motors allow long periods of continuous usage without significant wear and tear. It's 'cause the main moving parts are reliable. Anyway, hydrogen will use the same motor as an EV. Instead of batteries, the electricity will come from fuel cells.
Not all hydrogen cars work that way.
Basically, both hydrogen and battery cars are EVs. Hydrogen car is called FCEV, for fuel cell. With batteries, it's called BEV. The transmission system and other parts that make the car move are exactly the same.
Toyota has a hydrogen ICE.
EV is fine for average users, but power users need fuel cells.
:ROFLMAO:

1690811453080.png



The only real criticism against FCEV is it's less efficient. But the cost to produce and improving efficiency is what will determine who will dominate the energy market ultimately, 'cause hydrogen isn't powering just vehicles, it has the ability to provide sustained power.
But you use over twice the energy to make it as you get out. For X amount of electricity, an EV actually deploys roughly the same amount as the fuel cell wastes, which is several times what the fuel cell actually deploys usefully. How the f*ck could that ever make sense?
All other criticisms are country-specific, depending on investment, the infrastructure in place and alternate sources of energy.

In India, hydrogen will be cheaper than gas and coal 'cause it will be produced in-house, we won't have to rely on the international market. Like how petrol in Saudi costs half that of India.
You could use nuclear power to produce electricity instead and transmit it via the grid rather than driving trucks full of hydrogen around, which incidentally means you'll need more trucks too (which you need energy and resources to build), which means more congestion and more wear and tear on road surfaces.
 
It's the only country where Nazis have their own armies and have pretty much complete influence over the country's leadership.
Sure, Zelensky, a Jew, is a Nazi. Incredible how Russia has redefined everything to justify this invasion. Oh, Jews can be Nazis now, and according to Lavrov, Hitler was a Jew. And oh, Article 51 now applies to territory that nobody else even recognises as yours.


How can people like you be so gullible?

Take a look at Wagner's coups in Africa. Will any of the new dumba55es leaders' be holding OCSE-monitored elections any time soon do you think? Locking people up for 7 years for criticising the war in a private phone call? Not even sure the actual Nazis went that far. Invading a country, which nearly the entire planet condemned.

All Ukraine is guilty of is opposing Russian influence in their own country.
Russia is communist, not neo-Nazi.
Go to Eastern Europe and ask them if there's a difference. The different flag is about all really.
While the MO is similar, the ideologies are still very different.
Not much. Communism is based on a lie of equality. Meanwhile a corrupt inner circle robs the people and lives in luxury while they all live in poverty. Nazism is probably less oppressive against religion. Communism happily oppresses minorities while lying about it and is probably more oppressive against national identities.
After WW2, the fight in Europe was democracy vs communism. Within a decade, it will be democracy vs communism vs Nazism. The issue is Nazism is similar to radical Islam, it brings tribalism and race into the equation. A Nazi French guy will sympathise more with a Nazi Russian/Ukrainian than a Democratic French. Nazism is basically a Christian version of radical Islam.
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO: @Ashwin Seriously, I'm really not allowed to insult a person who posts horseshit like this?

There are more Nazis in Russia than anywhere else in Europe and it's now getting problems from its right sector who promoted this war in the first place but aren't happy with how its being fought. Meanwhile Russia's state media openly promotes genocide nearly every day, as well as wiping out nationhood and recreating mass famines. Then you have the destruction of grain exports. They don't even hide it, yet you still can't see it!
 
Russia is communist, not neo-Nazi.
Nope. Russia is a mafia state run by a kleptocracy that uses nationalism as its justification and legitimation.

While the MO is similar, the ideologies are still very different.
You must have missed the exaltation of Russian nationalism. Communism was internationalist at its core; Russian ideology is nationalist instead. It's a form of neo-Nazism, you find all the ingredients -- irredentism, revanchism, belief in a National Destiny to become again a great empire through military conquest, belief that the West is a bunch of degenerates and decadents that will easily be vainquished by the Superior Will of the Superior Race... And of course, brutal oppression and repression.

Japan seems to have the right idea.
Yeah, yeah, we heard the same calls to appeasement eight decades ago. The idea that you can stop the war by siding with the aggressor is long-lived among cowards and the fifth columnists' sheep herd. But the only way to stop a war is to inflict defeat on the aggressor, not to reward him for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RASALGHUL

After WW2, the fight in Europe was democracy vs communism. Within a decade, it will be democracy vs communism vs Nazism. The issue is Nazism is similar to radical Islam, it brings tribalism and race into the equation. A Nazi French guy will sympathise more with a Nazi Russian/Ukrainian than a Democratic French. Nazism is basically a Christian version of radical Islam.
Radical Islam comes directly from certain paragraphs in the Qu'ran. What exactly in the Bible promotes Nazism or white supremacy? Jesus wasn't even white FFS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMD
Bet this building is a troll farm.


Russians hit a mock-up. :ROFLMAO:

Since the Russian offensive from Kremina was stopped and most of the captured land was reconquered by Ukraine, it seems this gambit was unsuccessful for the Russians.
Yes, nobody mentions the fact that the Russians have also been on the offensive and made much less progress than Ukraine in the same period.