Moonbox Posted June 2 Report Posted June 2 3 hours ago, Boges said: No mention of this yet? https://www.nbcnews.com/world/ukraine/ukraines-massive-drone-attack-deep-russia-lays-bare-putins-vulnerabili-rcna210300 Russian territory needs to be part of the battleground. It seems Putin may want this ceasefire after all. Putin doesn't want a ceasefire. He can't afford one. He's throwing away tens of thousands of lives monthly to advance a couple square kilometers a day because he's not capable of doing anything else. Failing the succeed in his invasion of Ukraine would probably be the end of his regime. The ISW analyzed the other day that it would take 81 years for Russia to overrun Ukraine at the rate they've been going over the last year, but the dopes and quislings on this forum are still convinced of Russia's strength despite the fact that the campaign will go down in the books as one of the most incompetently executed in military history. Russia just lost more than a billion dollars worth of aircraft to a bunch of cheap drones. 👌 Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
Scott75 Posted June 2 Report Posted June 2 (edited) 7 hours ago, Boges said: No mention of this yet? https://www.nbcnews.com/world/ukraine/ukraines-massive-drone-attack-deep-russia-lays-bare-putins-vulnerabili-rcna210300 Russian territory needs to be part of the battleground. It seems Putin may want this ceasefire after all. Ukraine's just poking the bear. I've heard this being referred to as Russia's Pearl Harbor: https://www.firstpost.com/explainers/ukraine-spiders-web-operation-drone-attack-russia-pearl-harbor-us-japan-13893831.html It seems people have forgotten what happened -after- Pearl Harbor: https://dayinhist.com/the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/ What's more, Russia's already been poked plenty. This is just solidifying the inevitable, wherein either Russia or the United States blinks, or we get a nuclear war. I -think- that Trump is wise enough to realize it's not worth that, because I don't see Russia blinking. Guess we'll find out. Edited June 2 by Scott75 Added information Quote
User Posted June 2 Report Posted June 2 16 minutes ago, Scott75 said: Ukraine's just poking the bear. I've heard this being referred to as Russia's Pearl Harbor: Poking the bear? When the bear is already on top of you and mauling you, why would you be worried about poking them at that point? Russia's Pearl Harbor? The United States was not in a declared war or invading Japan at the time of Pearl Harbor. But yeah, sure, other than those major details... totally the same thing. Quote
Scott75 Posted June 2 Report Posted June 2 17 minutes ago, User said: 37 minutes ago, Scott75 said: Ukraine's just poking the bear. I've heard this being referred to as Russia's Pearl Harbor: https://www.firstpost.com/explainers/ukraine-spiders-web-operation-drone-attack-russia-pearl-harbor-us-japan-13893831.html It seems people have forgotten what happened -after- Pearl Harbor: https://dayinhist.com/the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/ What's more, Russia's already been poked plenty. This is just solidifying the inevitable, wherein either Russia or the United States blinks, or we get a nuclear war. I -think- that Trump is wise enough to realize it's not worth that, because I don't see Russia blinking. Guess we'll find out. Poking the bear? When the bear is already on top of you and mauling you, why would you be worried about poking them at that point? If Russia was -really- mauling those in power in Kyiv, I doubt they'd still be making attacks deep into Russia. Perhaps a better example is that there are certainly Russian bears in the Ukrainian front. So whose brilliant plan was it to go attacking the bear's family back home? Anyway, you're right, there are some definite differences in regards to Pearl Harbor and what Ukraine just did, but where it appears they are similar is that both galvanized their respective countries- in the U.S. to start a war with the Axis powers, and in Russia's case to finish one with Ukraine and it's NATO supporters. Quote
User Posted June 2 Report Posted June 2 1 minute ago, Scott75 said: If Russia was -really- mauling those in power in Kyiv, I doubt they'd still be making attacks deep into Russia. Perhaps a better example is that there are certainly Russian bears in the Ukrainian front. So whose brilliant plan was it to go attacking the bear's family back home? Anyway, you're right, there are some definite differences in regards to Pearl Harbor and what Ukraine just did, but where it appears they are similar is that both galvanized their respective countries- in the U.S. to start a war with the Axis powers, and in Russia's case to finish one with Ukraine and it's NATO supporters. Is this where you pretend Russia being engaged in all out full scale war with hundreds of thousands of troops and the majority of their military forces at bear against them is not "really" Russia waging war against them? Perhaps a better example is not saying Ukraine is poking the bear at all. That was an absurdly dumb example to begin with. Russia is currently attacking the family of all the Ukrainians... theirs is fair game too. Oh no... what is Russia going to do, try to invade Ukraine even more? That was the whole point of this strike against them, in that Russia was rumored to be using that base as a strategic staging point for a more massive attack on Ukraine. But in your backwards la la land of lies and propaganda, Ukraine should have just waited for that to happen. Quote
Scott75 Posted June 2 Report Posted June 2 (edited) 44 minutes ago, User said: 50 minutes ago, Scott75 said: If Russia was -really- mauling those in power in Kyiv, I doubt they'd still be making attacks deep into Russia. Perhaps a better example is that there are certainly Russian bears in the Ukrainian front. So whose brilliant plan was it to go attacking the bear's family back home? Anyway, you're right, there are some definite differences in regards to Pearl Harbor and what Ukraine just did, but where it appears they are similar is that both galvanized their respective countries- in the U.S. to start a war with the Axis powers, and in Russia's case to finish one with Ukraine and it's NATO supporters. Is this where you pretend Russia being engaged in all out full scale war with hundreds of thousands of troops and the majority of their military forces at bear against them is not "really" Russia waging war against them? No, I'm just trying to direct your attention to something that -should- be obvious, but actually needs people like Trump, of all people, to remind us about, from time to time. Russia has nukes. A lot of them. Russia has wisely restrained from actually -using- them in this conflict, but if Russia ever feels the need to, I don't see them hesitating. This is why I see no way that Ukraine wins- there are only different degrees of losing. The faster they get to working out a deal that Russia can live with, the faster this nightmare gets resolved. 44 minutes ago, User said: Perhaps a better example is not saying Ukraine is poking the bear at all. That was an absurdly dumb example to begin with. On the contrary, it's particular apt. There's actually a drawn representation that I think is particular illuminating: Edited June 2 by Scott75 Quote
Scott75 Posted June 2 Report Posted June 2 39 minutes ago, User said: Russia is currently attacking the family of all the Ukrainians... I imagine you think it was "unprovoked" as well. The truth: https://scheerpost.com/2022/04/09/former-nato-military-analyst-blows-the-whistle-on-wests-ukraine-invasion-narrative/ 42 minutes ago, User said: Oh no... what is Russia going to do, try to invade Ukraine even more? That was the whole point of this strike against them, in that Russia was rumored to be using that base as a strategic staging point for a more massive attack on Ukraine. I don't know what narrative Ukraine is trying to sell, but I -do- know that Ukraine's strike happened while Russia had started more negotiations with Ukraine. That ofcourse ended shortly after the strike happened: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/ukraine-and-russia-quickly-end-their-latest-round-of-direct-peace-talks-in-istanbul Time and again, Russia has shown that it was willing to negotiate a reasonable deal, and time and time again, Ukraine and its western backers have found a way to derail them. Quote
User Posted June 2 Report Posted June 2 3 minutes ago, Scott75 said: there are only different degrees of losing. The faster they get to working out a deal that Russia can live with, the faster this nightmare gets resolved. If the position is that Russia has nukes... so then every nation on Earth must simply let Russia invade and/or become their puppet state? What a dumb and dishonest argument. 4 minutes ago, Scott75 said: On the contrary, it's particular apt. There's actually a drawn representation that I think is particular apt: Once again... Russia is waging a full-scale war against Ukraine right now. No one was going into Russia and threatening her "cubs" as this ignorant cartoon depicts, nor was that what happened when Ukraine took out over a billion dollars in aircraft. Quote
Scott75 Posted June 2 Report Posted June 2 Just now, User said: 6 minutes ago, Scott75 said: No, I'm just trying to direct your attention to something that -should- be obvious, but actually needs people like Trump, of all people, to remind us about, from time to time. Russia has nukes. A lot of them. Russia has wisely restrained from actually -using- them in this conflict, but if Russia ever feels the need to, I don't see them hesitating. This is why I see no way that Ukraine wins- there are only different degrees of losing. The faster they get to working out a deal that Russia can live with, the faster this nightmare gets resolved. If the position is that Russia has nukes... so then every nation on Earth must simply let Russia invade and/or become their puppet state? That's not what I said. I'm just pointing out that 2 things- one which -should- be obvious- the nukes, and the other less so, which is Russia's determination to complete its objectives in Ukraine. Unlike the United States, which tends to overthrow governments at the drop of a hat, Russia is much more careful when it comes to who it goes to war with. Russia has said for a -very- long time that it wouldn't tolerate Ukraine becoming a part of NATO, which is why American Professor John Mearsheimer predicted 10 years ago that Ukraine would get wrecked if it continued to be led down the primrose path by the U.S. Business Today even wrote an article about this back in March: https://www.businesstoday.in/world/us/story/ukraine-going-to-be-wrecked-after-zelenskyy-trump-spat-john-mearsheimers-2015-prediction-goes-viral-466448-2025-03-03 Quote
User Posted June 2 Report Posted June 2 11 minutes ago, Scott75 said: I imagine you think it was "unprovoked" as well. This is subjective nonsense. "Provoked" can be a kid flipped off someone across the border, and you would be here saying Ukraine provoked a full-scale invasion. 12 minutes ago, Scott75 said: I don't know what narrative Ukraine is trying to sell, but I -do- know that Ukraine's strike happened while Russia had started more negotiations with Ukraine. That ofcourse ended shortly after the strike happened: This is the game Putin plays and just more propaganda. Russia continues every day to wage war against Ukraine and drag out negotiations for months on end. 13 minutes ago, Scott75 said: Time and again, Russia has shown that it was willing to negotiate a reasonable deal, and time and time again, Ukraine and its western backers have found a way to derail them. LOL, another joke. There is little reasonable about what Russia demands or their use of a full-scale invasion to force it. 9 minutes ago, Scott75 said: That's not what I said. No, it is the outcome of what you said. It is me taking the ignorant logic of your argument and applying it elsewhere to show how absurdly ignorant it was. Quote
Scott75 Posted June 2 Report Posted June 2 5 minutes ago, User said: 11 minutes ago, Scott75 said: On the contrary, it's particular apt. There's actually a drawn representation that I think is particular illuminating: Once again... Russia is waging a full-scale war against Ukraine right now. No, it's waging a war where it is clearly exercising significant restraint. It seems I keep on having to remind you that Russia has nukes. It could end the war -very- quickly if it wanted to. But forget about nukes, it is even restraining itself when it comes to hitting Ukrainian targets. The more Ukraine pulls stunts like the one it just did, the more the gloves come off. Even some fairly mainstream media outlets are aware that this can happen: https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/international-relations/ukraine-s-pearl-harbor-drone-strike-on-russia-s-bombers-might-backfire/ar-AA1FWD6a 8 minutes ago, User said: No one was going into Russia and threatening her "cubs" as this ignorant cartoon depicts Ukraine began a renewed assault on the Donbass republics shortly before Russia decided to start its military operation in Ukraine. While I have not seen Putin outright say that this was the main reason that he decided to start his military operation when he did, I haven't seen any other that makes sense. Former Swiss Intelligence Officer Jacques Baud put it quite well in an article I've linked to before. Quoting: ** In fact, as early as February 16 [2022], Joe Biden knows that the Ukrainians began to shell the civilian populations of Donbass, putting Vladimir Putin in front of a difficult choice: to help Donbass militarily and create an international problem or to sit idle and watch Russian speakers. from the Donbass being run over. If he decides to intervene, Vladimir Putin can invoke the international obligation of “ Responsibility To Protect ” (R2P). But he knows that whatever its nature or scale, the intervention will trigger a shower of sanctions. Therefore, whether its intervention is limited to the Donbass or whether it goes further to put pressure on the West for the status of Ukraine, the price to be paid will be the same. This is what he explains in his speech on February 21. That day, he acceded to the request of the Duma and recognized the independence of the two Republics of Donbass and, in the process, he signed treaties of friendship and assistance with them. The Ukrainian artillery bombardments on the populations of Donbass continued and, on February 23, the two Republics requested military aid from Russia. On the 24th, Vladimir Putin invokes Article 51 of the United Nations Charter which provides for mutual military assistance within the framework of a defensive alliance. In order to make the Russian intervention totally illegal in the eyes of the public we deliberately obscure the fact that the war actually started on February 16th. The Ukrainian army was preparing to attack the Donbass as early as 2021, as certain Russian and European intelligence services were well aware… The lawyers will judge. ** Full article: https://scheerpost.com/2022/04/09/former-nato-military-analyst-blows-the-whistle-on-wests-ukraine-invasion-narrative/ Here's something Putin -did- say on the day he started his military operation: ** This brings me to the situation in Donbass. We can see that the forces that staged the coup in Ukraine in 2014 have seized power, are keeping it with the help of ornamental election procedures and have abandoned the path of a peaceful conflict settlement. For eight years, for eight endless years we have been doing everything possible to settle the situation by peaceful political means. Everything was in vain. As I said in my previous address, you cannot look without compassion at what is happening there. It became impossible to tolerate it. We had to stop that atrocity, that genocide of the millions of people who live there and who pinned their hopes on Russia, on all of us. It is their aspirations, the feelings and pain of these people that were the main motivating force behind our decision to recognise the independence of the Donbass people’s republics. ** Full speech: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/statements/67843 Quote
Scott75 Posted June 2 Report Posted June 2 1 minute ago, User said: 17 minutes ago, Scott75 said: I imagine you think it was "unprovoked" as well. The truth: https://scheerpost.com/2022/04/09/former-nato-military-analyst-blows-the-whistle-on-wests-ukraine-invasion-narrative/ This is subjective nonsense. "Provoked" can be a kid flipped off someone across the border, and you would be here saying Ukraine provoked a full-scale invasion. No, I would not, but it's good to know that after 3 years and change of Russia's war with Ukraine that you at least realize that Russia was provoked. It certainly wasn't just some kid flipping someone the bird either. As Putin pointed out in the speech he made on the day he began his military operation in Ukraine, Russia had -tried- to find a peaceful solution to curtail the killing of thousands of Russian speakers in Ukraine. He came to believe that such efforts were in vain. I've quoted it before, but once more: ** This brings me to the situation in Donbass. We can see that the forces that staged the coup in Ukraine in 2014 have seized power, are keeping it with the help of ornamental election procedures and have abandoned the path of a peaceful conflict settlement. For eight years, for eight endless years we have been doing everything possible to settle the situation by peaceful political means. Everything was in vain. As I said in my previous address, you cannot look without compassion at what is happening there. It became impossible to tolerate it. We had to stop that atrocity, that genocide of the millions of people who live there and who pinned their hopes on Russia, on all of us. It is their aspirations, the feelings and pain of these people that were the main motivating force behind our decision to recognise the independence of the Donbass people’s republics. ** Full speech: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/statements/67843 Quote
Scott75 Posted June 2 Report Posted June 2 5 minutes ago, User said: 21 minutes ago, Scott75 said: I don't know what narrative Ukraine is trying to sell, but I -do- know that Ukraine's strike happened while Russia had started more negotiations with Ukraine. That ofcourse ended shortly after the strike happened: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/ukraine-and-russia-quickly-end-their-latest-round-of-direct-peace-talks-in-istanbul This is the game Putin plays and just more propaganda. No, it's a fact. Quoting from the PBS article I linked to: ** ISTANBUL (AP) — Delegations from Russia and Ukraine met Monday in Turkey for their second round of direct peace talks in just over two weeks, but the discussion lasted only slightly more than an hour and produced no major progress toward ending the 3-year-old war, officials said. The talks unfolded a day after a string of stunning long-range attacks by both sides, with Ukraine launching a devastating drone assault on Russian air bases and Russia hurling its largest drone attack of the war against Ukraine. At the negotiating table, Russia presented a memo setting out the Kremlin’s terms for ending hostilities, the Ukrainian delegation said. Defense Minister Rustem Umerov, who led the Ukrainian delegation, told reporters Kyiv officials would need a week to review the document and decide on a response. Ukraine proposed further talks on a date between June 20 and June 30, he said. The memo was not made public. ** Full article: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/ukraine-and-russia-quickly-end-their-latest-round-of-direct-peace-talks-in-istanbul Quote
Boges Posted June 2 Report Posted June 2 1 hour ago, Scott75 said: Ukraine's just poking the bear. I've heard this being referred to as Russia's Pearl Harbor: https://www.firstpost.com/explainers/ukraine-spiders-web-operation-drone-attack-russia-pearl-harbor-us-japan-13893831.html It seems people have forgotten what happened -after- Pearl Harbor: https://dayinhist.com/the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/ What's more, Russia's already been poked plenty. This is just solidifying the inevitable, wherein either Russia or the United States blinks, or we get a nuclear war. I -think- that Trump is wise enough to realize it's not worth that, because I don't see Russia blinking. Guess we'll find out. Cept Pearl Harbour was an unprovoked attack. Russia has been targeting Civilians for Three years. They deserve everything they get. 1 Quote
Scott75 Posted June 2 Report Posted June 2 10 minutes ago, User said: 26 minutes ago, Scott75 said: Time and again, Russia has shown that it was willing to negotiate a reasonable deal, and time and time again, Ukraine and its western backers have found a way to derail them. LOL, another joke. There is little reasonable about what Russia demands or their use of a full-scale invasion to force it. Russia didn't -start- with a full scale war. That came later. American Professor and Statesman Jeffrey Sachs gets into how Ukraine had a chance to actually get Russia to withdraw from all the territory it took since the start of its military operation and squandered it. Quoting from an article on the matter: ** When Zelensky said a few days after Russia’s invasion that Ukraine was ready for neutrality, a peace agreement was in reach. I know the details of this because I talked to key negotiators and mediators in detail and have learned much from public pronouncements of others. Shortly after the start of negotiations in March 2022, a document was exchanged between the parties that President Putin had approved, and that Lavrov had presented. This was being managed by the Turkish mediators. I flew to Ankara in the spring of 2022 to hear first-hand and in detail what happened in the mediation. The bottom-line is this: Ukraine walked away, unilaterally, from a near agreement. End of the Ukraine War Why did Ukraine walk away from the negotiations? Because the United States told them to and because the U.K. added icing to the cake by having BoJo [Boris Johnson, the former U.K. prime minister] go to Kyiv in early April to Ukraine to make the same point. [U.K Prime Minister] Keir Starmer turns out to be even worse, even more of a warmonger. It’s unimaginable, but it is true. Boris Johnson explained, and you can find it on the web, that what’s at stake here is nothing less than Western hegemony! Not Ukraine but Western hegemony. Michael von der Schulenberg and I met at the Vatican with a group of experts in Spring 2022, and we wrote a document explaining that nothing good can come out of continued war. (The meeting at the Vatican was the Fraternal Economy Session on Jubilee 2025: “Hope in the Signs of the Times.”) Our group argued strenuously, but to no avail, that Ukraine should negotiate immediately, because delays will mean massive deaths, risk of nuclear escalation, and possibly an outright loss of the war. I wouldn’t want to change one word from what we wrote then. Nothing was wrong in that document. Since the U.S. talked Ukraine out of the negotiations, perhaps one million Ukrainians have died or been severely wounded. And American senators who are as nasty and cynical as imaginable say this is a wonderful expenditure of U.S. money because no Americans are dying. It’s the pure proxy war. One of our senators nearby New York State, Connecticut’s Richard Blumenthal, said this out loud. Mitt Romney said this out loud. It’s the best money America can spend. No Americans are dying. It’s unreal. Now, just to bring us up to yesterday, the U.S. Ukraine Project has failed. The core idea of the project all along was that Russia would fold its hand. The core idea all along was Russia can’t resist, just as Zbigniew Brzezinski argued in 1997. The Americans thought the U.S. surely has the upper hand. The U.S. will win because we’re going to bluff them. The Russians are not really going to fight. The Russians are really going to mobilize. We’ll deploy the economic “nuclear option” of cutting Russia out of SWIFT. That will destroy the economy. Our sanctions will bring Russia to their knees. The HIMARS will do them in. The ATACMS, the F-16s, will do them in. Honestly, I’ve listened to this kind of talk for more than 50 years. Our national security leaders have spoken nonsense for decades. I begged the Ukrainians: stay neutral. Don’t listen to the Americans. I repeated to them the famous adage of Henry Kissinger, that to be an enemy of the United States is dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal. Let me repeat that for Europe: To be an enemy of the United States is dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal. ** Full article: https://consortiumnews.com/2025/02/27/jeffrey-sachs-the-geopolitics-of-peace/ Quote
Scott75 Posted June 3 Report Posted June 3 11 hours ago, Boges said: 13 hours ago, Scott75 said: Ukraine's just poking the bear. I've heard this being referred to as Russia's Pearl Harbor: https://www.firstpost.com/explainers/ukraine-spiders-web-operation-drone-attack-russia-pearl-harbor-us-japan-13893831.html It seems people have forgotten what happened -after- Pearl Harbor: https://dayinhist.com/the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/ What's more, Russia's already been poked plenty. This is just solidifying the inevitable, wherein either Russia or the United States blinks, or we get a nuclear war. I -think- that Trump is wise enough to realize it's not worth that, because I don't see Russia blinking. Guess we'll find out. Cept Pearl Harbour was an unprovoked attack. No, it wasn't: https://mises.org/mises-daily/how-us-economic-warfare-provoked-japans-attack-pearl-harbor That being said, in Japan's case, I think they -should- have avoided attacking Pearl Harbor. I think even the Japanese would agree at this point that it wasn't in their interests to do so. I don't think that most Russians will ever think that defending Russian speakers in Ukraine's Donbass from getting killed was a bad idea. 11 hours ago, Boges said: Russia has been targeting Civilians for Three years. No, they haven't. Newsweek even pointed this out early in the war: https://www.newsweek.com/putins-bombers-could-devastate-ukraine-hes-holding-back-heres-why-1690494 Now, I think that things have gotten a lot more heated since those early days, when Russia actually said they'd leave all the territory they gathered since the start of the Special Military Operation if Ukraine would agree to some quite reasonable terms, but from everything I've seen, Russia is -not- targetting civilians. The same can't be said for the Ukrainian military: https://www.rt.com/russia/618432-ukraine-terrorist-enclave-train-sabotage/ https://www.donbass-insider.com/2023/04/17/ukrainian-army-bombs-donetsk-centre-during-easter-mass/ https://www.donbass-insider.com/2023/04/30/nato-ukraine-army-bombs-donetsk-centre-killing-nine-civilians-including-a-child/ Quote
Boges Posted June 3 Report Posted June 3 Ukraine attacks the bridge to Crimea. They're now daring Putin to commit war crimes. Quote
User Posted June 3 Report Posted June 3 2 hours ago, Scott75 said: I don't think that most Russians will ever think that defending Russian speakers in Ukraine's Donbass from getting killed was a bad idea. Just more lies. No one was getting killed in the Donbas until Russia pushed a shadow war there. Quote
Scott75 Posted June 3 Report Posted June 3 54 minutes ago, Boges said: Ukraine attacks the bridge to Crimea. So it has: https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-attack-key-bridge-russia-crimea-kerch/33432943.html When will Ukraine and its western allies learn that such provocations are only making the Ukraine war worse :-/. Quote
Boges Posted June 3 Report Posted June 3 Just now, Scott75 said: So it has: https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-attack-key-bridge-russia-crimea-kerch/33432943.html When will Ukraine and its western allies learn that such provocations are only making the Ukraine war worse :-/. Ahh appeasement has worked so well throughout history. Quote
Scott75 Posted June 3 Report Posted June 3 46 minutes ago, User said: 3 hours ago, Scott75 said: No, it wasn't: https://mises.org/mises-daily/how-us-economic-warfare-provoked-japans-attack-pearl-harbor That being said, in Japan's case, I think they -should- have avoided attacking Pearl Harbor. I think even the Japanese would agree at this point that it wasn't in their interests to do so. I don't think that most Russians will ever think that defending Russian speakers in Ukraine's Donbass from getting killed was a bad idea. Just more lies. No, it's the truth, you've just been conditioned to think otherwise, probably by western mainstream media sources. There's a great documentary that gets into the terrible things that the western Ukrainian army did to eastern Ukrainians for 8 years that can be seen here: Quote
Scott75 Posted June 3 Report Posted June 3 1 minute ago, Boges said: 2 minutes ago, Scott75 said: So it has: https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-attack-key-bridge-russia-crimea-kerch/33432943.html When will Ukraine and its western allies learn that such provocations are only making the Ukraine war worse :-/. Ahh appeasement has worked so well throughout history. I think we can agree that it has not. Putin himself now says that he should have started his military operation in Ukraine sooner, instead of allowing the western Ukrainian army to kill eastern Ukrainian Russian speakers for 8 years first: https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cpw2yw0nr7qt It stands to reason, considering what the German Chancellor at the time of the Minsk Agreements had to say as to her motivation to support them: https://www.donbass-insider.com/2022/12/10/angela-merkel-admits-that-the-minsk-agreements-were-only-signed-to-give-ukraine-time/ Quote
User Posted June 3 Report Posted June 3 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Scott75 said: I think we can agree that it has not. Putin himself now says that he should have started his military operation in Ukraine sooner, instead of allowing the western Ukrainian army to kill eastern Ukrainian Russian speakers for 8 years first Once again... it was a Russian-backed movement for Eastern Ukraine to be taken by separatists to begin with. The only reason anyone was being killed was because of Putin. Edited June 3 by User Quote
Boges Posted June 3 Report Posted June 3 19 minutes ago, Scott75 said: I think we can agree that it has not. Putin himself now says that he should have started his military operation in Ukraine sooner, instead of allowing the western Ukrainian army to kill eastern Ukrainian Russian speakers for 8 years first: https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cpw2yw0nr7qt It stands to reason, considering what the German Chancellor at the time of the Minsk Agreements had to say as to her motivation to support them: https://www.donbass-insider.com/2022/12/10/angela-merkel-admits-that-the-minsk-agreements-were-only-signed-to-give-ukraine-time/ It's disinformation for anyone to believe those forces were not Russian-backed, if not outright Russian troops themselves. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.