3 ms·
> I think System of a Down asked this same question: "Why don't presidents fight the war?" This war is already lost by Russia precisely because the generals an
by nine_zeros 4y ago
> I think System of a Down asked this same question: "Why don't presidents fight the war?"
This war is already lost by Russia precisely because the generals and leaders are too far from the frontline. They are using people as pawns.
The only reason this war appears so dangerous is because of nukes. This will be the first time in history that a non-American nuclear power is losing a war.
- loeg 4y ago> This war is already lost by Russia precisely because the generals and leaders are too far from the frontline. They are using people as pawns. I thought Russia was losing generals left and right in Ukraine?[1] Certainly, Putin and his sycophants are not on the front lines. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Russian_generals_killed_during_the_2022_invasion_of_Ukraine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Russian_generals_kille...
- daveevad 4y ago> This will be the first time in history that a non-American nuclear power is losing a war. That is hard to believe but I am unable to contradict it.
- comprambler 4y agoThey "lost" Afghanistan as well.
- philistine 4y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakistani_War_of_1971 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakistani_War_of_1971
- logical_ferry 4y ago> This will be the first time in history that a non-American nuclear power is losing a war. Soviet invasion of Afganistan?
- hef19898 4y agoThe French in Vietnam and the Algerian civil war lost as well. As did both, the UK and France along side Israel, in the Suez crisis (granted, Israel did pretty well on their part).
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]