Nobody interested in the Russia-Ukraine conflict?

Page 114 of 126 [ 2014 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117 ... 126  Next

magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,847
Location: Poland

06 Oct 2022, 9:50 am

Nades wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
There was no reason for Russia to invade Ukraine.

Russia made up excuses all along. And they constantly lied about their true intentions before they invaded.


Russians have always been like that but meh. What did Ukraine expect?

Protection.
And NATO denied it several times.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,847
Location: Poland

06 Oct 2022, 10:02 am

Nades wrote:
Perhaps they would be less willing to "intervene" if they knew there wasn't a domino effect towards NATO.
I see no history backing this assumption. Germany has been blocking access to NATO for Georgia and Ukraine since 2008. Russia annexed Crimea when perspectives of Ukraine in NATO were nearly non-existent.

Actually, Russian "interventions" are exactly what revives NATO - including Finland and Sweden deciding to join now despite having been "neutral" for all the Cold War. As long as Russia wasn't agressive, NATO was just a meaningless table-top meeting place.

Why aren't we discussing Finland and Sweden dropping their neutrality and how this would provoke Russia? Isn't it a double standard?


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


carlos55
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Mar 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,297

06 Oct 2022, 11:55 am

magz wrote:
The problem is - we don't want to be buffer / neutral / demilitarized zone. Not when we have a neighbour who readily "intervenes".
I know USA are not saints but if their trigger-happines can help protect us from an invasion - so be it.
It's our interest.

Elon is just a dreamer. To make any valid referendum, you need peace first. Otherwise, it's impossible to organize it fairly.
But why stop at this? Why not ask people in Sachalin if they want to join Japan? North Russia if they want to join Norway or Finland? Buryats, Chechens and Dagestani if they want independence? Or, our beloved meme here, organize a referendum for Kaliningrad District to change the name to Kralovec and join Czechia.
Why not go further with referenda? Does Tibet want to remain in China? Wouldn't North Koreans like to re-unite if they could safely vote for it? Maybe redraw the Indian-Pakistani border? Or give independence to areas controlled by Boko Haram? Why didn't we propose a referendum to accept ISIS as a state?

Can you imagine how many more wars that attitude would spawn?


First of all I wasn’t referring to Poland rather the countries that border the Russian mainland excluding Kaliningrad.

The other parts of the world are not war zones so not really relevant even Chechnya is rather peaceful today.

In N Ireland which was a war zone we had a kind of referendum in the form of local elections where those that wanted to split had the opportunity to voice that democratically.

It’s either peace or back to the risk of nuclear war.

I don’t think Russia is as bothered about NATO as a treaty or article 5 rather US bases on the territory of members that border it that could be used aggressively.


_________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends upon the unreasonable man."

- George Bernie Shaw


magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,847
Location: Poland

06 Oct 2022, 12:10 pm

carlos55 wrote:
First of all I wasn’t referring to Poland rather the countries that border the Russian mainland excluding Kaliningrad.
That's Baltic States, Norway and Finland.

Chechnya is a brutal police state, not peaceful.

carlos55 wrote:
I don’t think Russia is as bothered about NATO as a treaty or article 5 rather US bases on the territory of members that border it that could be used aggressively.
Do they have any precedent of such an action from NATO members?
Or maybe fear of hypothetical invasion would in your opinion justify actually invading others?


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,820
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

06 Oct 2022, 1:37 pm

Maybe NATO should just hurry up and accept Ukraine and tell russia to gtfo and if they don’t, level all of their military facilities and logistics systems utilized by their military.

Maybe.


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.


magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,847
Location: Poland

06 Oct 2022, 2:15 pm

goldfish21 wrote:
Maybe NATO should just hurry up and accept Ukraine and tell russia to gtfo and if they don’t, level all of their military facilities and logistics systems utilized by their military.

Maybe.
Days before the full-scale invasion, our former president Kwaśniewski (the one who successfully negotiated accession of Poland to both NATO and EU) suggested it as the only way to avoid an attack he could think of.
But it was already unrealistic.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,820
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

06 Oct 2022, 9:28 pm

2 Russians land in Alaska by boat, seek asylum:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/alaska-r ... f8f36bb67d


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.


ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 29,677
Location: Long Island, New York

07 Oct 2022, 6:55 am

Biden: Nuclear ‘Armageddon’ risk highest since ’62 crisis

Quote:
President Joe Biden said Thursday that the risk of nuclear “Armageddon” is at the highest level since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, as Russian officials speak of the possibility of using tactical nuclear weapons after suffering massive setbacks in the eight-month invasion of Ukraine.

Speaking at a fundraiser for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Biden said Russian President Vladimir Putin was “a guy I know fairly well” and the Russian leader was “not joking when he talks about the use of tactical nuclear weapons or biological or chemical weapons.”

Biden added, “We have not faced the prospect of Armageddon since Kennedy and the Cuban Missile Crisis.” He suggested the threat from Putin is real “because his military is — you might say — significantly underperforming.”

U.S. officials for months have warned of the prospect that Russia could use weapons of mass destruction in Ukraine as it has faced a series of strategic setbacks on the battlefield, though Biden’s remarks marked the starkest warnings yet issued by the U.S. government about the nuclear stakes.

It was not immediately clear whether Biden was referring to any new assessment of Russian intentions. As recently as this week, though, U.S. officials have said they have seen no change to Russia’s nuclear forces that would require a change in the alert posture of U.S. nuclear forces.

“We have not seen any reason to adjust our own strategic nuclear posture, nor do we have indication that Russia is preparing to imminently use nuclear weapons,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Tuesday.

Biden also challenged Russian nuclear doctrine, warning that the use of a lower-yield tactical weapon could quickly spiral out of control into global destruction.

“I don’t think there is any such a thing as the ability to easily use a tactical nuclear weapon and not end up with Armageddon,” Biden said.

He added that he was still “trying to figure” out Putin’s “off-ramp” in Ukraine.

“Where does he find a way out?” Biden asked. “Where does he find himself in a position that he does not not only lose face but lose significant power within Russia?”

Putin has repeatedly alluded to using his country’s vast nuclear arsenal, including last month when he announced plans to conscript Russian men to serve in Ukraine.

“I want to remind you that our country also has various means of destruction ... and when the territorial integrity of our country is threatened, to protect Russia and our people, we will certainly use all the means at our disposal,” Putin said Sept. 21, adding with a lingering stare at the camera, “It’s not a bluff.”

White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan said last week that the U.S. has been “clear” to Russia about what the “consequences” of using a nuclear weapon in Ukraine would be.

“This is something that we are attuned to, taking very seriously, and communicating directly with Russia about, including the kind of decisive responses the United States would have if they went down that dark road,” Sullivan said.

Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said earlier Thursday that Putin understood that the “world will never forgive” a Russian nuclear strike.

“He understands that after the use of nuclear weapons he would be unable any more to preserve, so to speak, his life, and I’m confident of that,” Zelenskyy said.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 29,677
Location: Long Island, New York

07 Oct 2022, 6:20 pm

Russia is beginning to 'prepare their society' to launch a nuclear attack, Zelenskyy says, but adds Putin is 'not ready to do it'

Quote:
The Russian government is laying the groundwork to use nuclear arms, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Friday, adding that he did not think a decision on whether to use such weapons had been made but that even talking about it was "dangerous."

Speaking with the BBC, Zelenskyy said Russia had begun "to prepare their society" for a nuclear strike in Ukraine, where Russian forces have been retreating in the wake of a Ukrainian counteroffensive in which the country recaptured territory that was annexed by Moscow a week ago. Zelenskyy added of the prospect of nuclear warfare: "That's very dangerous."

Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons, recently saying the US had set a "precedent" by dropping atomic bombs in World War II. While their use is still deemed exceedingly unlikely by analysts, Western officials are taking the threats seriously and monitoring Russia for any signs it may be preparing to use a smaller, tactical nuclear weapon on the battlefield — a possibility that one expert told Insider was "extraordinarily" concerning.

While noting he shared such concerns, Zelenskyy said there was no reason to be fatalistic about a Russian threat designed to make Western nations think twice about supporting Ukraine.

"They are not ready to do it, to use it. But they begin to communicate. They don't know whether they'll use or not use it," he said, adding: "I think it's dangerous to even speak about it."

Zelenskyy said Russia was already threatening the world with its actions at Ukraine's Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, which it occupied in early March. The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency last month said the situation at the plant was "untenable," adding: "We are one step away from a nuclear accident." The standoff has raised fears of another Chernobyl disaster, the 1986 nuclear-reactor meltdown that spread dangerous radiation across Europe.

The Ukrainian president urged his allies to impose additional sanctions on Russia to discourage any sort of nuclear duress.


White House tries to walk back Biden's comments on nuclear 'Armageddon'
Quote:
Since invading Ukraine in February, Putin has made multiple nuclear weapons threats, recently vowing to use “all available means” in the war.

“The U.S. wants to warn Russia that the use of any nuclear weapon would be a blunder of strategic dimensions," said Sharon Squassoni, a research professor at George Washington University.

The White House and the Pentagon tried walking back Biden's “Armageddon” comments Friday, saying there is no 'imminent' threat and no new indication that Putin is planning to launch this kind of attack.

"The president’s comments have been very consistent. He was reinforcing what we have been saying, which is how seriously we take these threats about nuclear weapons," press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters while en route to Hagerstown, Maryland. "The kind of irresponsible rhetoric we have seen is no way for the leader of a nuclear-armed state to speak and that’s what the president was making very clear."

Putin is facing tough talk from his own advisors. The Washington Post reports that according to U.S. intelligence, a member of Putin's circle confronted him over his handling of the war.

“I believe that at this point his position in Russia is weaker than it was before, and he gets more and more weak every day,” said Boris Bondarev, former counselor at the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations.

Just this week, the U.S. purchased $290 million of anti-radiation drugs. The Department of Health and Human Services says that the drug supply was part of ongoing efforts to be better prepared following radiological and nuclear emergencies.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,820
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

08 Oct 2022, 10:53 am

Bridge to Crimea go BOOM!

Looks like it needs another truck bomb or two, maybe an air strike - really bust it up and make it impassible. 8)

https://www.salon.com/2022/10/08/massiv ... la-crimea/


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.


Worthless
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Sep 2022
Gender: Male
Posts: 567

08 Oct 2022, 11:06 am

Finally. I was wondering when someone would knock out that bridge.



Jakki
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,504
Location: Outter Quadrant

08 Oct 2022, 1:21 pm

Effective start to interrupting infrastructure of the Russian War machine in this War . But this bridge if it were hit by some of the better more effective remote weapons supplied by the US to Ukraine . Probably would have done
A much more thorough job of destruction I feel . Even as this minor disruption on the bridge , The Ukrainians could have struck it with a more high explosive weapon almost simultaneously. In a ideal Assault situation. But can do Armchair soldiering from the safety of my couch all day. :roll:


_________________
Diagnosed hfa
Loves velcro,
Quote:
where ever you go ,there you are


magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,847
Location: Poland

08 Oct 2022, 1:54 pm

It probably wasn't hit by any weapon.
Currently, the scenario considered most likely is a truck full of explosives remotely detonated - exactly at the time when it was passing a train full of fuel.
Damage is substantial.
Image
Half of the road bridge is down, the fire on the train lane has probably caused structural damage.

It's important because trains and trucks on this bridge supply Russian army in Kherson region. Now their capacity is very limited.
Also, Russians are very sensitive to symbols - similarily to Moskva warship, this bridge was their big symbol. And yesterday was Putin's 70th birthday. It's another blow to morale.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,820
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

08 Oct 2022, 2:28 pm

:chin:

Why would Ukrainians vandalize this bridge when they're the ones who welcomed the russians to liberate them from nazis?

:chin:

Seems like the whole truth isn't being told by at least one side..


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.


magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,847
Location: Poland

08 Oct 2022, 2:38 pm

Oh, come on, no one believes this "liberating" crap, even the ones telling it.
Current narrative is that they are not fighting Ukraine but NATO. Because it would be less painful to be defeated by the most powerful military alliance than to be defeated by "not even a nation", as they present Ukraine.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,820
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

08 Oct 2022, 2:50 pm

magz wrote:
Oh, come on, no one believes this "liberating" crap, even the ones telling it.
Current narrative is that they are not fighting Ukraine but NATO. Because it would be less painful to be defeated by the most powerful military alliance than to be defeated by "not even a nation", as they present Ukraine.


The above was sarcasm, hence the emojis.

There’s a slight bit of truth to them fighting NATO, though. NATO countries have shipped $Billions worth of weapons. There are also many volunteers fighting alongside Ukrainian forces, and the probability that there are some professionals in the mix is.. 100%, IMO - just not officially, of course.

But if they were full on fighting NATO there’d be serious numbers of boots on the ground and the russians would be completely clobbered pretty damned quickly.

Partial truth to it, though, even if you only count the official on the record support of weapons.


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.