671–680 of 1001 posts
Really sad news. But if you really think that he was killed - why now? He was "under control" in a prison for multiple years, so why kill him now? It worsens Russia's public image even more My assumptions: 1) He was killed, but why now? 2) He died because Russians' prison has a really bad conditions of detention - so his health was declining over time
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Countries like Poland will no longer buy US weapons but increase European defense spending - they fear just like Ukraine that US congress just turns around and will stop delivering parts for F-35s in a conflict That's absolutely not the sentiments among Poles. If anything, there's a belief we can only rely on US when poo hits the fan.
Looking at it historically, you are going to be short changed again... Suddenly the following scenario, is not far fetched anymore: Russia will find an excuse around Kaliningrad Oblast, and a NATO hostile US president will negotiate a cease fire in the name of stopping a Nuclear conflict...
It's an extremely cynical take but US + EU can pretty much afford to "wage" this war indefinitely as long they give just enough to Ukraine for it not to collapse and both sides continue throwing their men into the grinder. Russia is on a timer; it might take an extra few years and even if they don't run out of shells they'll run out of soldiers sooner or later (of course unfortunately the same applies to Ukraine..).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Russia really is not to be feared. The Ukraine war is a tragedy and I hope it ends soon. But they have no economical & military power to really do any harm the Europe & the US. Putin makes a lot of noise but really can't even win a few km's in Ukraine. But the real threat is further east. China is slowly building it's empire, and it's a scary one. Taking over parts of Africa. Migrating it's people. Integrating it's t…
You underestimate how Russia is playing the long game while everyone else thinks in election cycles.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US has provided more funding to Ukraine than the world combined by a large margin, and the lesson you take away is that the US is somehow at fault. The one bill that was blocked by Congress would be more support than Europe as a whole has provided to Ukraine to date. While I agree that European countries should start to take their defense seriously I don't see how you fault US support of Ukraine.
“America bad” is the opium of the masses. IMO, if any random country’s government whom we are not allied with through NATO publicly criticizes the USA’s response to helping them out in a war that we have no obligation to help with, I believe we should immediately cease any and all financial aid and let them feel the squeeze. When they publicly apologize and recognize that the United States is truly the only thing kee…
If anything US should take a view of self interest as they are losing the credibility as an important international power very rapidly and are instead seriously helping their most dangerous adversaries to gain momentum.
Russia was in a very bad position a year ago, Putin's power was crumbling, but US withholding of critical help let him to sustain his power. Where are we now? Russia is threatening US space assets. Authoritarian powers all over the world are becoming more and more cocky as they see that US is becoming week and impotent.
It is sickening for me to watch how US is hurting itself out of stupidity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure about the US providing more funding (especially not by a large margin): This chart shows EU outspending the US. https://www.statista.com/chart/28489/ukrainian-military-huma... .
Total aid, yes. Military spending no. In fact this war has highlighted that NO ONE was ready for the fight that came about. Skip the money for a moment. Ukraine right now is marginally fucked for one reason: 155mm artillery shells. There isnt enough global production to have a war. The US is far and away the largest producer. EU can not keep up and did not bring on anywhere near enough capacity to defend itself in a…
There is no need to fire tens of thousands of shells with this equipment, and no one would ever do that. These shells cost thousands of dollars each.
The upside is that they are incredibly accurate, with an error radius of something like 100m at 25km, using the standard dumb shells. (Things like Excalibur are markedly more accurate, but cost $100k each).
Add in counterbattery radar, and there's just no reason Ukraine would ever need to fire 25,000 shells a day like Russia does.
Clearly Ukraine needs more 155mm ammunition, but there's no reason to directly compare the numbers of shells launched by Russia and Ukraine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US has provided more funding to Ukraine than the world combined by a large margin, and the lesson you take away is that the US is somehow at fault. The one bill that was blocked by Congress would be more support than Europe as a whole has provided to Ukraine to date. While I agree that European countries should start to take their defense seriously I don't see how you fault US support of Ukraine.
Not sure about the US providing more funding (especially not by a large margin): This chart shows EU outspending the US. https://www.statista.com/chart/28489/ukrainian-military-huma... .
The US provides a huge military shield in Europe and it costs a lot and none of it gets counted toward helping Ukraine. That shield enables European nations to shift resources relatively safely into helping Ukraine. If you remove that shield, those nations can no longer safely give to such a great extent, they'd have to think with far greater scrutiny of their own defense.
US spending on European defense makes it possible for smaller European nations to give military funds and weapons to Ukraine.
Our massive air force protection enables European nations to provide their F16s to Ukraine, as one example.
Go ahead and staple $100 billion more to that military figure for the past two years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He answered that question: "I have my country and I have my principles, and I'm not willing to give up either."
Dying like that seems like a computer who can't avoid but to crash when it hits a single wrong bit on an ocean of memory. Why? Why choose rigid principles that might lead you straight to doom? Why people think this is honorable? His enemy lost nothing, and the allies left behind have to fight with less men.
His death and the circumstances will remain in your mind (buried, perhaps) for years to come and affect your decisions and thinking. And you're not alone.
In the end it's advertising for change, and we have data on advertising's usefulness. It can change minds.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US has provided more funding to Ukraine than the world combined by a large margin, and the lesson you take away is that the US is somehow at fault. The one bill that was blocked by Congress would be more support than Europe as a whole has provided to Ukraine to date. While I agree that European countries should start to take their defense seriously I don't see how you fault US support of Ukraine.
> and the lesson you take away is that the US is somehow at fault Genuine question as someone who has no connection to either government of the Russia-Ukraine war: didn't the US push Ukraine into not accepting terms with Russia, under the promise that it would support Ukraine in case of war? In other words, it pushed Ukraine into the war, using it as a proxy to fight Russia.
The answer is "no" on both counts. The US did not "push" them into anything.
And the US made absolutely no such promise. In fact it made explicit statements to the contrary on the eve of the invasion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Martyrdom. Navalny calculated that this process would be watched and documented through to the very end. He hoped that might be significant, perhaps even sufficient.
He will be forgotten in a week, at least by the West. Do you remember the guy who flew over Belarus and his plane was redirected to seize him? Any news? I do not even remember his name. Going back to Russia was a stupid move, he could have had much more visibility from the EU.
Not all bravery is stupid. When people point to so-called inevitabilities of human character, as Putin and his ilk often do, I'll recall Navalny's name.
I'll also recall the victories that were only possible thanks to people of similar courage. Things looked as helpess for Václav Havel, but without him we wouldn't have had the Velvet Revolution.
I remember their names.