Russia

>Tremendous ground casualties.
So the Japs were just shilling Tsushima?

No wonder the USA managed to swing the diplomatic dealings in favor of Russia. Japan was a weak at land. Explains Nomonhan a couple of decades later too.

Holy fuck this is actually very cool.
Any books on the topic?
Also, if the duel was set during or near the Russo-Japanese war, wouldn't the "Samurai" be a former samurai at that?

Attacking entrenched enemy positions in situations where you can't outmaneuver them always leads to bigger casualties for the attacker, it's nothing surprising.
It's a rule of thumb for military operations - if you are attacking an enemy position you need at least 2:1 numbers advantage.

Where's the Georgian war?
>Georgia sperges out and tries to attack Russia
>Russia defeats them and wins the war in 5 fucking days
Also didn't they beat Chechnya second time around?

While yeah they lost an embarrassing amount I'd keep it fact based.

Russia lost face in the Winter War but Finland definitly lost that war.

They lost a lot of (empty) territory.

Why don't you show the finale? At least the Japanese were actually capable of winning a war against them.

>Baltic states being given independence by Lenin is a military victory

They've also won against Finland and Chechnya.

He wasn't an "official" samurai, but I think the guy wore the full samurai armor and fought with a katana so it's the close you'll get

Found this neat pic that depicts it

Nigga you what? Estonia managed to advance into Russian territoriality, the Latvian war of independence saw them fend of both Bolsheviks and the West Russian volunteer army. Lithunian too had an invasion targeted against it.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estonian_War_of_Independence
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latvian_War_of_Independence
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithuanian_Wars_of_Independence#War_against_the_Bolsheviks

>Why don't you show the finale? At least the Japanese were actually capable of winning a war against them.
You aren't unironically implying Sweden never were capable of winning a war against Russia? For most people it would be unlikely but considering the other parts of your post...

someone should make a movie about this.

...

>Poland
What?
>Pooland tried to Conquer Kiev while Russia was in a middle of a brutal Civil war
>Get their ass kicked all the way to their own capital and somehow manage to avoid being conquered
>""""Victory""""

>They've also won against (...) Chechnya.
Svetovid again with his Slavic bullshit. They lost in Chechnya.

> Finland
> Won The War
And seceded territories to Russia as all winners of all wars clearly done.

Chechnya is still a part of Russia, how do the lost?

You've misunderstood, Lenin's Soviet Union agreed on the terms of secession, thus legitimizing your independence and the sovereignty of your countries.

>You aren't unironically implying Sweden never were capable of winning a war against Russia?

I've specifically spoken of the Great Northern War, hence the "why don'you show the finale" part.

They've won the second war, I've meant that one.

Chechens pretty much govern themselves. Putin has to bribe Kadryov to keep the Chechens in check.

How isn't gaining your fulfilling your goals after beating your enemy forces a military victory?
>you
Stop assuming anyone defending to a certain ethnicity belongs to said ethnicity. My country have been independent for several hundreds of years by now.

>I've specifically spoken of the Great Northern War, hence the "why don'you show the finale" part.

You said "At least Japan could win a war", a war do unless I am gravely mistaken refer to wars in general. If you refereed to the wars in question you should have said "the" war.

The Soviets wanted to conquer Finland, you pleb.

And Finland wanted to keep all their territory.

The point?

Finland's main goal was to keep their independence, Russia's main goal was to annex Finland. Finland fulfilled their wargoal, Russia didn't.

Okay. So if everywhere in Finland was ceded to Russia except Helsinki that would mean Finland won because they managed to stay independent?

>~25,000 died of disease
>japanese medical knowledge

Here, this rice and seaweed should heal that infection.

This is your speculations. Their official demands are pretty well documented. They didn't got time for conquering all of Finland anyway between all Hitler activity and potential opposition from more democratic west countries.

listen
finland wasnt annexed
for finland, thats a huge fucking victory especially compared to the motherfucking soviet union
so what they lost some territory, they achieved their political goal of independance

Why does this guy (I know who he is) look so white?
I could see him being a truck driver in the Midwest

>being led by a Georgian manlet

He has him in his pocket.

>beating your enemy forces a military victory
Because the Russians have only yielded because of Lenin's decision, with great protest, If I may add.They most likely would've continued with the fighting if someone else was in charge.

>a war do unless I am gravely mistaken refer to wars in general

I've only referred to a single war, the Great Northern one.

>Because the Russians have only yielded because of Lenin's decision, with great protest, If I may add.They most likely would've continued with the fighting if someone else was in charge.
Got any sources on that?

>I've only referred to a single war, the Great Northern one.
And then you would have said "the war", to clarify it.

is this what vatnik textbooks taught you?

>And then you would have said "the war", to clarify it
In a normal situation, absolutely, but I've made a typo and I couldn't delete the comment anymore to rewrite it again.

>Got any sources on that?
The only source I currently got is "With Stalin", by Enver Hoxha. In his long talks with Stalin, Enver got the information that he, the leaders of the Red army and even Trotsky saw Lenin's decision to give up on the Baltic coast as something foolish and downright idiotic.

According to Enver, Stalin also said that their early losses in World War II would've been surely mitigated by a steady supply of food, military equipment and other necessities arriving through the ports at the Baltic sea, if only Lenin didn't give up on them so easily.

>According to Enver, Stalin also said that their early losses in World War II would've been surely mitigated by a steady supply of food, military equipment and other necessities arriving through the ports at the Baltic sea, if only Lenin didn't give up on them so easily.

But the USSR posessed the Baltics in 1941, what does that mean?

They wasn't conquered. People democratically decided to join in.

>victory
thats what winning is called, especially when you kill more of the enemy. It surely wasnt a USSR victory, even saying it was a tie is debatable

Like said. Chechnya is more independent than after the victory 1996.

>They've won the second war, I've meant that one.
They didn't. Russia bombed Chechnya and overthrowed the Ichkerian government, which was recognized by no other state, making it easy. Then the war was mostly pro-Russian Chechens vs Chechen separatists.

>Also didn't they beat Chechnya second time around?
They bribed the Kadyrov clan into keeping Chechnya under check.

>At least the Japanese were actually capable of winning a war against them.

Japan didn't have to fight on three fronts with limited manpower

I am not sure how much of a good source Hoaxa is, and the Estonians did come pretty close to St.petersburg and they had the support of the UK now.

I also don't get how it's not a Estonian victory whenever or not Lenin was far to lenient, besides you can't be sure if the predictions of Trosky and company would even have been right. Didn't he think the revolutions would spread like rings in the water and Poland wouldn't prove much of a problem?

That is not a sound victory to you?

In other words, Japan was smartly led?

Enver was one of closest associates and friends, so yes, he was a good source.

> it's not a Estonian victory whenever or not Lenin was far to lenient
Because the fighting would've lasted far longer and the entire country would rally behind them, refreshing the Red army with new recruits, something to which the Estonians simply couldn't respond.

>Because the fighting would've lasted far longer and the entire country would rally behind them, refreshing the Red army with new recruits, something to which the Estonians simply couldn't respond.
Or maybe it would draw away resources from fighting on other fronts?
And it's still a baltic victory, or would you say the Afghanistan wasn't an Afghanistani victory or Vietnam a North Vietnam victory because both the USSR and USA could really have fought on longer but chose not to?

>That is not a sound victory to you?
Giving money to the former enemy so he can do what ever he wants as long as Chechnya is officially part of Russia? Nope.

Also let Chechen cuck Russians as they wish while at it. At least according to the stories i heard.

Can't make this shit up

Chechnya
Caucasus
...

What battle is this?
And was this one of the battles where the Chechen used reformed toasters as weapons?

It's the Battle for Bamut

>Srbija do Tokija

Did you think white people magically turn into shitskins if they become muslim?

>Russia

>this entire thread

LGTSS
>russia
>standing in breadlines
when will they learn?

...

...

...

...

...

What is Pyrrhic victory?

A battle that they won, but came out weaker anyway.

I've only found this article in English.
telegraf.rs/english/1474153-the-world-trembled-from-his-sword-this-man-killed-japanese-samurai-in-an-epic-battle-video

It's from a shitty daily newspaper, and the youtube link doesn't work.
However they were kind enough to state that their source was a weekly newspaper, from which i actually learned the story.
It's a weekly Serbian magazine.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politikin_Zabavnik
And the magazine regularly has a history section.
I always buy it when i'm going somewhere by intercity bus/train.
I found the online article, but it's in Serbian.
politikin-zabavnik.co.rs/pz/tekstovi/samuraјu-na-crtu
It's from 2009, boy how time flies.

It was Russia that attacked Poland to spread Red Cancer.

Of course it is, I'm merely telling you what would've most likely happened if Lenin wasn't the one in charge back then.

No, but manipulating one side to slaughter the other while you suffer minimal losses and establish a loyalist regime that is able to eliminate dissidents and opposing parties unopposed is.

Where the Chechen insurgents have used inhabited civilian builds and shields, with UN observers taking note of the entire operation, so Russians couldn't respond properly by leveling your buildings to force you to fight them head-on.

What is the point of presenting minor victories as an alleged proof of their lack of competence if they've were capable of winning most battles, including the defining ones and win the war?

>Of course it is, I'm merely telling you what would've most likely happened if Lenin wasn't the one in charge back then.
So you agree it wasn't a Baltic military victory or not? If not, would Lenin ahve given the Baltic states their independence had they not defeated the Soviet forces in said countries?

>your
Not him, but how do you even know he is a Chechen?

Wrong.

Ahahahah, is that Russian version of German "we lost, but muh k/d"

I agree it was military victory and no, Lenin wouldn't have given them their independence if they had not defeated the Soviet forces in said countries.

>Not him, but how do you even know he is a Chechen?
Because it's obvious, he knows far too many details of obscure battles that happened in the first Chechen War, plus he posted a link on Russian, the second most spoken language in Chechnya.

Russia

>No, but manipulating one side to slaughter the other while you suffer minimal losses and establish a loyalist regime that is able to eliminate dissidents and opposing parties unopposed is.
Thats not whats happening there.

>Where the Chechen insurgents have used inhabited civilian builds and shields, with UN observers taking note of the entire operation, so Russians couldn't respond properly by leveling your buildings to force you to fight them head-on.
>implying Russians care about civilians

And regarding your "argument" with Chechens using >civilians (as) shields
Thats completely made up. Russians did this. And there is proof to this in radiograms where Russian commander tell there soldiers to use civilians as shields.

May I get any sources for that human shields part?
To use it in future discussions.

Montenegrin Serbs were raging Russophiles until 1948 and Tito raping Stalinists.
And people were Stalinist here simply because Stalin ruled Russia.

You also had this guy.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Šćepan_Mali