121–130 of 287 posts
I’m surprised there is no technical solution to shell-ing. Some kind of autonomous anti-shell gun that shoots them down mid flight? It seems like a fairly common problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I highly recommend looking into the history of Ukraine over the last 20-30 years in this case. The West/EU/NATO doesn’t court. And they’re extremely careful about generating the impression or sending a message that they’re actively pulling countries into their “sphere of influence”. For the process of inclusion to work there has to be undeniable proof that it is a democratic process that shows that the people of that…
This is from 2008: > NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO. [1] [1] Item 23: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_8443.htm
It's also not so difficult to imagine that this was a response within a larger picture of two-way communication at the time. All the above says is 'welcoming aspirations' - basically 'we're happy that you want to join the club, you will be allowed in in the future if you stay on track'.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/evacuation-rou... However looking at your other activity, I would have to present article from Russia Today. First and foremost Russians shouldn't be there. How evil they were exactly, can be assessed later, when they go back to their side of the border.
Mined by whom?
> However looking at your other activity, I would have to present article from Russia Today
Mainstream western media now is heavily biased for the simple fact that it most of the time even don't report what the Russians are saying on the same matter.
I'm checking al jazeera which at least reports both sides.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The red line was the expansion of the West. Putting troops in Ukraine is one way of satisfying that. The encroachment of NATO was another. Whether that is true or not, it would have given more weight to Russia/Putin’s argument than stuff about Nazis.
> red line Only relevant red line is border of sovereign nation. No NATO member was forced to join - they actually asked to join in order to prevent invasion like the one which is in Ukraine now. > expansion of the West Isn't is cynical to call it expansion of the West while no-one except Russia expanded beyond borders of Russia? It is just expansion of Russia.
Nope, no one is denying Russia's expansion, nor China or the next superpower.
The only hypocrisy would be recognizing Russia's expansion and not the West.
The conservative argument is that the world should be kept as is, and whoever makes the first move is to blame for breaking that balance. Putin thinks the West did it first, before this Ukrainian invasion. The West thinks the Ukrainian invasion is the first move of any party, and its done nothing this whole time
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We could have put troops in the country before the invasion.
Isn’t that exactly the kind of the arrogance of the West pushing the boundaries as the East has argued is its red line ?
[1]: https://www-capital-bg.translate.goog/politika_i_ikonomika/v...
The number of warcrimes committed by the Russians is astounding. But shooting at fleeing civilians has to earn you a very special place in hell. This is pure blackmail, and it won't stop here.
>Ukrainian forces were engaged in clashes nearby, but not at the site where civilians were moving along the street. Outgoing mortar rounds could be heard from a Ukrainian position about 200 yards away.
>The shelling suggested either targeting of the evacuation routes from Irpin, something of which the Ukrainian authorities have accused the Russian army after a railroad track used for evacuations was hit on Saturday, or disregard for the risk of civilian casualties.
So the ukrainians were launching mortars from the area and civilians got caught in the crossfire ... it's not exactly russians blackmailing civilians. Still their fault I guess for invading in the first place but this is not exactly a war crime, the ukrainians knew they were also firing from a civilian position.
Edit: there's also evidence of Ukrainian soldiers being in the same street, because keep in mind all the videos of the aftermath don't match always the videos of the shooting either. In some of the videos in which we don't see any Ukrainian soldiers, the russians seem to be shooting warning shots in the air, while in those with confirmed casualties there seem to be Ukrainian soldiers in the same street (meaning there was probably a crossfire situation)
The number of warcrimes committed by the Russians is astounding. But shooting at fleeing civilians has to earn you a very special place in hell. This is pure blackmail, and it won't stop here.
Well yes. Artillery bombardment is THE Russian military doctrine. Any uncertainty on the headline would mean assuming Russia had developed some unusual qualms on the subject. And why would they? It seems to me that among the moral outrage people kind of lost touch with reality. There is some basic facts, take it here from the German public broadcast >According to its president, Russia is seeking the "denazification"…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>That's not so obvious. For instance: the US failed to win against much weaker opponents than the Ukrainians. Those were opponents in a tribalistic society practicing guerilla warfare hiding across deserts spreading thousands of miles. Ukraine is a developed country with infrastructure that's well documented and known by their enemy. If they take out their vital infrastructure like hospitals, water, power, schools, t…
Guerillas, and partisans, were quite successful in places like Yugoslavia (WW2), Afghanistan (against the USSR and NATO), Ireland (against the British), Belarus (WW2), Poland (WW2), the Finish used some Guerilla style tactics (WW2 against the USSR). Ukraine was less a Guerilla hot bed in WW2 (it was early on, and then again after Stalingrad). None of those places were tribal societies (exception: Afghanistan to a deg…
We’re not talking about fighting only. There has to be a local support for guerilla to eat and sleep. That might work in primarily agricultural countriside but not in cities built around industry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. In Chechnya the Russians continued to bomb Grozny until the whole city was a ruin and people surrendered. The UN called Grozny 'the most destroyed city on earth'. But there were almost no consequences for Russia, the world just stood by and did nothing.
That's how urban warfare goes. Either prolonged Sarajevo-style siege waiting for surrender, or brutal block by block demolition until there's no place where defenders can fire from. The logic of urban warfare hasn't really changed since Stalingrad or Berlin It's also likely the reason the Russian advance stalled. Neither party really wants to go through that hell