How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

[Jayjay]

If they wanted to protect the statue, they could just take it to a bunker or something.

Or do what they did.

Or not. Russia knows that the statues wouldn't be shelled. But they also know that if Ukraine takes the city back, then Russian historical figures may disappear from the public streets, like they have in many other cities. So they're nicking what they can while fleeing. They're also taking whatever valuables they can find from museums and shops.

And I notice you didn't explain why Russia is taking fire trucks and ambulances.

And don't forget that according to US/Ukraine narrative crimean bridge was blown damaged by ..... Russia

Ukraine is just trolling everyone while winking. Obviously everyone knows it was Ukraine, but because it was a cell inside Russia, they're obviously not going to make a goddamn documentary about how it was done.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Amazing how two sides have completely opposite perspectives on this war.
You still think that Ukraine is winning or can win. Your propaganda must be very strong.
Ukraine can't take anything. All their (multiple) attempts at taking anything were bloody (literally) failures.
Meanwhile, latest estimates of ukrainian losses surfaces and they are horrendous.
They use open sources from Ukraine to do the estimation. And the number is 400K, including 50K mercenaries. They are thinking about mobilizing 60 year olds.
These ukrainian imbeciles die for nothing.

Your sources are mixing up Russia and Ukraine.

The situation on the ground shows that Ukraine is taking back territory. Russia's supply problems are getting worse and worse.

 

[barbos]

If they wanted to protect the statue, they could just take it to a bunker or something.

Or do what they did.

Or not. Russia knows that the statues wouldn't be shelled. But they also know that if Ukraine takes the city back, then Russian historical figures may disappear from the public streets, like they have in many other cities. So they're nicking what they can while fleeing. They're also taking whatever valuables they can find from museums and shops.

And I notice you didn't explain why Russia is taking fire trucks and ambulances.

And don't forget that according to US/Ukraine narrative crimean bridge was blown damaged by ..... Russia

Ukraine is just trolling everyone while winking. Obviously everyone knows it was Ukraine, but because it was a cell inside Russia, they're obviously not going to make a goddamn documentary about how it was done.

Good, so, ukrainian millitary used terrorism and murdered a civilian driver to achieve their objective.

What about american farts, still smell like roses?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

We tend to think of this war as confined to Ukraine, but it is really a war between Russia and Europe--a war whose violent side has not spread beyond the borders of Ukraine yet. And one could, of course, include the entire Western alliance, because Europe is a vital part of that. The main weapons used on the nonviolent fronts are primarily economic and diplomatic. The sabotage of the Russian pipeline in the Baltic was part of Russia's economic front, as it seeks to cut off the delivery of essential LNG supplies. The defensive reaction has been to ship LNG into Europe, which is not prepared for that form of delivery. Here is an article from the front lines of that economic war:

Dozens of LNG-laden ships queue off Europe's coasts unable to unload​

True, reliance on Russian resources complicates illegal western war on Russia.

The fact that the ships are sitting there unable to unload is proof there isn't a war against Russia. If there actually was a war against Russia those ships would have eaten Hellfires and now be small bits on the ocean floor.

 

[barbos]

Amazing how two sides have completely opposite perspectives on this war.
You still think that Ukraine is winning or can win. Your propaganda must be very strong.
Ukraine can't take anything. All their (multiple) attempts at taking anything were bloody (literally) failures.
Meanwhile, latest estimates of ukrainian losses surfaces and they are horrendous.
They use open sources from Ukraine to do the estimation. And the number is 400K, including 50K mercenaries. They are thinking about mobilizing 60 year olds.
These ukrainian imbeciles die for nothing.

Your sources are mixing up Russia and Ukraine.

The situation on the ground shows that Ukraine is taking back territory. Russia's supply problems are getting worse and worse.

Ummm, no, they are not taking any territory, a while ago they took some which was left and suffered disproportionate losses while doing so.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Not much progress near Kherson either, but a lot of talk about Russians evacuating that city, like for Svatove and Kreminna and Troitske in the north.

Yes, they talk civilians into evacuating because nazi scam keep shelling them.
It's better to move people out of range.

Think about it for a moment, heroic ukrainian army is shelling their own people.

Ah, you admit Russia is the Nazis!

And the purpose of moving them out is genocide. This is round 2 of the Holodomor.

 

[barbos]

We tend to think of this war as confined to Ukraine, but it is really a war between Russia and Europe--a war whose violent side has not spread beyond the borders of Ukraine yet. And one could, of course, include the entire Western alliance, because Europe is a vital part of that. The main weapons used on the nonviolent fronts are primarily economic and diplomatic. The sabotage of the Russian pipeline in the Baltic was part of Russia's economic front, as it seeks to cut off the delivery of essential LNG supplies. The defensive reaction has been to ship LNG into Europe, which is not prepared for that form of delivery. Here is an article from the front lines of that economic war:

Dozens of LNG-laden ships queue off Europe's coasts unable to unload​

True, reliance on Russian resources complicates illegal western war on Russia.

The fact that the ships are sitting there unable to unload is proof there isn't a war against Russia. If there actually was a war against Russia those ships would have eaten Hellfires and now be small bits on the ocean floor.

You are late, I already answered that.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If the west was at war with Russia... you would no longer have the capacity to transmit your energy resources anywhere.

That's the best west can do right now. And yes it's a war west started.

Dude, the west (US and Britain) would lay waste to your pipeline infrastructure from subs up north. If the West wanted to hurt Russia badly, it could. You are deluding yourself if you think the West is even trying. Right now, the main thing holding the West back is fear of Putin going scorched Earth.

Yup. Russia doesn't have very many points of connection with the rest of the world and most of what it does have are coastal--and thus in range of sub-launched Tomahawks.

 

[barbos]

Not much progress near Kherson either, but a lot of talk about Russians evacuating that city, like for Svatove and Kreminna and Troitske in the north.

Yes, they talk civilians into evacuating because nazi scam keep shelling them.
It's better to move people out of range.

Think about it for a moment, heroic ukrainian army is shelling their own people.

Ah, you admit Russia is the Nazis!

Really?

And the purpose of moving them out is genocide. This is round 2 of the Holodomor.

Oh, I see, you have been eating some fine nazi shit

 

[Tigers!]

I've got a better question. What guarantees are there that Russia will adhere to the cease fire conditions this time? Creating a cease fire just so we can do all this again in five years isn't a cease fire - it's a shitty pause. And all indications show any cease fire that Putin is willing to agree to now makes war a certainty in the not too distant future.

The only guarantee would be defensible borders Right now that's not the case: the Russian bridgehead in Kherson would threaten Odessa as well as give Russia ability to hit Ukraine's supply lines to Zaporizhzhia.

But let's say Ukraine takes Kherson. I think that might work out. But Ukraine isn't going to surrender the remaining areas without trying to liberate them. That would be a political impossibility and any leader in Ukraine who tries it would be branded a traitor. Meanwhile in Russia, Putin still probably harbors illusions about complete control of Ukraine or at least land connection to Transnistria. So unfortunately even though I think that the eventual border will be roughly the current frontline, it will take a long time before that's going to be accepted by both sides.

Amazing how two sides have completely opposite perspectives on this war.
You still think that Ukraine is winning or can win. Your propaganda must be very strong.
Ukraine can't take anything. All their (multiple) attempts at taking anything were bloody (literally) failures.
Meanwhile, latest estimates of ukrainian losses surfaces and they are horrendous.
They use open sources from Ukraine to do the estimation. And the number is 400K, including 50K mercenaries. They are thinking about mobilizing 60 year olds.
These ukrainian imbeciles die for nothing.

Barbos
Welcome back. Did you enjoy your tour of Ukraine with your conscript comrades? Did the locals (The non-existent nazi -Ukrainians) appreciate your presence?

 

[Jayjay]

Funny that you should mention it, because Serbia was one of the countries who voted for the UN resolution that condems the fake "referendums" in Ukraine.

It's funny both ways.
So, are you prepared to restore Serbian sovereignty over Kosovo?
And Mexico over Texas?

Kosovo is an independent state recognized by a hundred or so countries, and has been striving for independence for three decades. The occupied territories of Ukraine never asked to be part of Russia, they were invaded and annexed by force, and hardly anyone has recognized that annexation.

Actually they asked in 2014. Putin said no.
And you are doing piss poor job advocating for Kosovo independence.
Countries who recognize Kosovo are all occupied by US. Basically only one country recognized Kosovo - Neoconstan (US)

Yeah right. Half the countries on Earth are just "occupied by US". But I guess that's the Russian way of seeing the world: everything that is not Russia, is "occupied" by someone else and thus not sovereign.

The thing about Kosovo is that I don't have to advocate for anything. Even if there was something fuzzy about Kosovo's independence, even though there wasn't, it still wouldn't justify Russia's invasion and genocide. And Russia itself doesn't recognize Kosovo's independence, which makes it hypocritical to use it as a precedent for recognizing puppet states. And lastly, nobody except Serbia is trying to annex Kosovo. The west recognizes its independence, for its own sake, and not because we want to add it to the US as a 51st state or force it into becoming a town in France or something. Russia never intended any of the parts of Ukraine to be independent states, they were just tools to mess with the rest of Ukraine.

 

[barbos]

Yeah right. Half the countries on Earth are just "occupied by US". But I guess that's the Russian way of seeing the world: everything that is not Russia, is "occupied" by someone else and thus not sovereign.

Yes, That's fairly common view, even in US itself. There are even Hollywood movies about that.

 

[barbos]

The thing about Kosovo is that I don't have to adcovate for anything. Even if there was something fuzzy about Kosovo's independence, even though there wasn't, it still wouldn't justify Russia's invasion and genocide.

Actually Russian invasion is much more justified than anything US NATO ever did.
Well, Afghanistan invasion was justified, i give you that, the rest was not.
And Kosovo is, in fact, used as precedent for justification for russian "invasion".
So it is relevant here, even though it was not justified.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Show me one piece of evidence that Ukraine is using "western operators", rather than just having been trained to use the equipment?

LOL. Last time I checked you needed 6 months to learn how to operate HIMARS.
Poles are operating it.
Ukrainians complained that they had to use google fucking translate to read instructions for these useless anti-tank systems in the early days of war.

And here you want to translate HIMARS to russian and then teach ukrainians to use them in a matter of weeks.

6 months to teach a basic recruit to use HIMARS. However, they were teaching people who already knew how to put artillery on target, the only training needed was on how the HIMARS system itself worked--and that's much less training. Especially as HIMARS uses a sealed-pod system, the people using them do not need to know anything about the missiles themselves, merely how to load the pods onto the launcher.

 

[Jayjay]

The rest of us are just helping out a bit.

That's cute. No, you were made to believe that crap. In reality what we have here is neocons waging a war on Russia. They don't care about ukrainian idiots. They pay them money to hurt Russia and die.

If Putin hadn't invaded, there wouldn't be a war. Is Putin one of these neocons?

NATO invaded first

Which Russian oblast or territory did NATO invade?

Crimea. And Eastern Ukraine as well.

Those are neither part of Russia, nor invaded by NATO.

And whole Ukraine was in Russian sphere of interests (security, economy, etc)
Russia can not allow anti-russian coups nearby.

So? the whole world is everyone's "sphere of interest". That doesn't justify starting wars left and right.

If a country next to Russia has an "anti-Russian coup" i.e. a democratic election, it's none of Putin's goddamn business. Russia has had an anti-western coup since Putin came to power, but we didn't do anything about it. And still won't. Even after all this is done, NATO or the US will still respect Russia's sovereignty and will compel Ukraine not to cross your border. Even if Russia uses a dirty bomb, blows up the Nova Kakhovka dam, or even uses a tactical nuke, the western reaction wil, be limited to helping Ukraine regain its own territory, not to take anything away from Russia. And that's the difference between us and you.

 

[barbos]

Show me one piece of evidence that Ukraine is using "western operators", rather than just having been trained to use the equipment?

LOL. Last time I checked you needed 6 months to learn how to operate HIMARS.
Poles are operating it.
Ukrainians complained that they had to use google fucking translate to read instructions for these useless anti-tank systems in the early days of war.

And here you want to translate HIMARS to russian and then teach ukrainians to use them in a matter of weeks.

6 months to teach a basic recruit to use HIMARS. However, they were teaching people who already knew how to put artillery on target, the only training needed was on how the HIMARS system itself worked--and that's much less training. Especially as HIMARS uses a sealed-pod system, the people using them do not need to know anything about the missiles themselves, merely how to load the pods onto the launcher.

6 months! and it has to be native speaker, not some random ukrainian idiot.
Ukraine/Russia are not Netherlands, they barely speak english.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The rest of us are just helping out a bit.

That's cute. No, you were made to believe that crap. In reality what we have here is neocons waging a war on Russia. They don't care about ukrainian idiots. They pay them money to hurt Russia and die.

If Putin hadn't invaded, there wouldn't be a war. Is Putin one of these neocons?

NATO invaded first

When was this???

1984.

 

[barbos]

If a country next to Russia has an "anti-Russian coup"

It was a violent coup led by CIA&Co

 

[Jayjay]

What "evidence"?

The one which russian defence minister provided to his US/british/french counterparts.
There is indirect evidence of that. That is, western and especially ukrainian reaction suggest that.

If Shoigu's phone call is the only evidence there is, then it most certainly means there is no real evidence at all. Only thing this proves is that Russia wants to frame Ukraine.

Reaction to the phone call is the evidence of evidence.

The reaction is perfectly consistent with Russia threatening to use a dirty bomb and frame Ukraine for it. For the sake of the argument, imagine a world where Shoigu is just making stuff up and calling western governments that Ukraine is using a dirty bomb (the rest of us call this "the real world", but you can call it whatever you want), and where Ukraine has no such plans. How would you expect them to react?

Look, Ukrainian regime is the one losing and desperate, not Russia (CNN is lying to you)
Russia can dial up bombing tomorrow. Why would Russia use dirty bomb?

To blame Ukraine and show it can get away with anything.

If Russia could dial up bombing, it would have done so months ago. The story you're telling yourself that Russia is just not firing missiles because it's so darn nice is delusional. Why go for mobilization and declaration of war if you could have just "dialed up bombing" anytime during the past 8 months of the 3-day war? It doesn't make any sense.

The simplest explanation is usually true: Russia isn't firing more missiles because it can't. Or if it did, it would run out very fast.

Same with Syria, chemical attacks happened when terrorists were losing.
Use your brain sometimes. BBC staged chemical attack footage and then banned RT when they talked about it.

You keep bringing this up but I think it's just another bullshit propaganda story like all the other false stories you're telling about Ukraine.

And if Russia is losing, then by the same logic, it's not far fetched that Russia might use chemical weapons. You're basically arguing against yourself here, if you think that the chemical attacks in Syria were "staged" by the losing side.

 

[barbos]

The rest of us are just helping out a bit.

That's cute. No, you were made to believe that crap. In reality what we have here is neocons waging a war on Russia. They don't care about ukrainian idiots. They pay them money to hurt Russia and die.

If Putin hadn't invaded, there wouldn't be a war. Is Putin one of these neocons?

NATO invaded first

When was this???

1984.

2.71