- Joined
- Oct 23, 2002
- Messages
- 29,852
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Democratic Socialist Atheist
Those are reasonable arguments. The US tax payers are not immediately affected even if Russia is allowed to fuck with its neighbors and grab more land. Those trillions of aid could be used to provide services, or tax cuts, to American citizens.CNN, it's right there in the link, Dude.Dude: where do you get the news!?The Democratic-led House of Representatives voted 368-57 on Tuesday evening to pass a roughly $40 billion bill to deliver aid to Ukraine as it continues to face Russia's brutal assault. All 57 votes in opposition were from Republicans.
The measure will next need to be passed by the Senate before it can go to President Joe Biden to be signed into law. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said earlier in the day on Tuesday that after the House approved the package, the Senate "will move swiftly" to get the measure passed and sent to Biden's desk.
CNN
The “aid” is primarily weapons. Our tax dollars at work. WTF ?
"Everyone wins"? I'm not quite seeing how giving billions of $ to a war/regional conflict is a win for the citizens of the USA.Of course. The Russians are bombing Ukranian cities and ports. The Ukrainians don't like that. So, they are trying to push the Russian artillery and navy away from Ukranian cities as possible. Asking Russians to stop isn't working. So we're sending military weapons to Ukraine to help push out Russian invaders. Push them back, stop the war, everyone wins!
A business is usually a for profit endeavor. Is the US taxpayer going to see more money, i.e. profit in return? Seems the only people making a profit would be the arms makers. Is this the business you are talking about?Seriously, we're going to be in the weapons business for a long time due to Russia.
Doesn't seem to have worked. What's so special about Ukraine for the USA to get this involved?We need to send tons of defensive weapons to the border countries (Finland, Sweden, Poland, Lithuania, and etc. We need to encourage Russia to keep their troops at home.
Why do "we" (US tax payers) need to get anything in Eastern Europe? Why is meddling in Eastern Europe a good thing but meddling in the Middle East frowned upon? After 20 years in Afghanistan and less than a year after getting out the USA has found something else to throw gobs of US citizens' tax money at.On the other hand, not supporting Ukraine would get us what in Eastern Europe?
Furthermore it’s important for our Allies as well. If we didn’t try to stop Putin in Ukraine he could have decided we wouldn’t in Estonia. Then we could just abandon all of Europe to Russia as well. Last time someone tried to do that we got sucked into it at a much later stage and had to fight our way across North Africa, Italy and northwest Europe.Those are reasonable arguments. The US tax payers are not immediately affected even if Russia is allowed to fuck with its neighbors and grab more land. Those trillions of aid could be used to provide services, or tax cuts, to American citizens.CNN, it's right there in the link, Dude.Dude: where do you get the news!?The Democratic-led House of Representatives voted 368-57 on Tuesday evening to pass a roughly $40 billion bill to deliver aid to Ukraine as it continues to face Russia's brutal assault. All 57 votes in opposition were from Republicans.
The measure will next need to be passed by the Senate before it can go to President Joe Biden to be signed into law. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said earlier in the day on Tuesday that after the House approved the package, the Senate "will move swiftly" to get the measure passed and sent to Biden's desk.
CNN
The “aid” is primarily weapons. Our tax dollars at work. WTF ?
"Everyone wins"? I'm not quite seeing how giving billions of $ to a war/regional conflict is a win for the citizens of the USA.Of course. The Russians are bombing Ukranian cities and ports. The Ukrainians don't like that. So, they are trying to push the Russian artillery and navy away from Ukranian cities as possible. Asking Russians to stop isn't working. So we're sending military weapons to Ukraine to help push out Russian invaders. Push them back, stop the war, everyone wins!
A business is usually a for profit endeavor. Is the US taxpayer going to see more money, i.e. profit in return? Seems the only people making a profit would be the arms makers. Is this the business you are talking about?Seriously, we're going to be in the weapons business for a long time due to Russia.
Doesn't seem to have worked. What's so special about Ukraine for the USA to get this involved?We need to send tons of defensive weapons to the border countries (Finland, Sweden, Poland, Lithuania, and etc. We need to encourage Russia to keep their troops at home.
But I'd think that morally, it'd be nicer if 44 million people in Ukraine weren't thrown under the bus just because there isn't immediate profit to be made.
Very good point. You’re right. Actions in Ukraine will only affect Americans who consume food; use gas and oil; or who are impacted by inflation. No effect for anyone else.CNN, it's right there in the link, Dude.Dude: where do you get the news!?The Democratic-led House of Representatives voted 368-57 on Tuesday evening to pass a roughly $40 billion bill to deliver aid to Ukraine as it continues to face Russia's brutal assault. All 57 votes in opposition were from Republicans.
The measure will next need to be passed by the Senate before it can go to President Joe Biden to be signed into law. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said earlier in the day on Tuesday that after the House approved the package, the Senate "will move swiftly" to get the measure passed and sent to Biden's desk.
CNN
The “aid” is primarily weapons. Our tax dollars at work. WTF ?
"Everyone wins"? I'm not quite seeing how giving billions of $ to a war/regional conflict is a win for the citizens of the USA.Of course. The Russians are bombing Ukranian cities and ports. The Ukrainians don't like that. So, they are trying to push the Russian artillery and navy away from Ukranian cities as possible. Asking Russians to stop isn't working. So we're sending military weapons to Ukraine to help push out Russian invaders. Push them back, stop the war, everyone wins!
A business is usually a for profit endeavor. Is the US taxpayer going to see more money, i.e. profit in return? Seems the only people making a profit would be the arms makers. Is this the business you are talking about?Seriously, we're going to be in the weapons business for a long time due to Russia.
Doesn't seem to have worked. What's so special about Ukraine for the USA to get this involved?We need to send tons of defensive weapons to the border countries (Finland, Sweden, Poland, Lithuania, and etc. We need to encourage Russia to keep their troops at home.
And yet you keep posting it.Gibberish.
This is ultimately a war between fascists and democracy, between the terror that is russian ganster-state rule and freedom. Some people will never get that because their rational faculties have been emotionally short-circuited. The Russian Hitler just kills those who disagree with him whether he poisons them and their children or has them hacked to death or hanged. It's mob violence and intimidation, terrorism at it's most basic. Don't just kill them, kill their families and reduce their lives to rubble. Send a message to those who might also disagree that you will be ruthlessly murdered.And yet you keep posting it.Gibberish.
Better to smash the Russian army without taking the damage that would result from war and better to smash it in a way that isn't likely to go WWIII. The Ukrainian conflict is actually very good for us.The Democratic-led House of Representatives voted 368-57 on Tuesday evening to pass a roughly $40 billion bill to deliver aid to Ukraine as it continues to face Russia's brutal assault. All 57 votes in opposition were from Republicans.
The measure will next need to be passed by the Senate before it can go to President Joe Biden to be signed into law. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said earlier in the day on Tuesday that after the House approved the package, the Senate "will move swiftly" to get the measure passed and sent to Biden's desk.
CNN
The “aid” is primarily weapons. Our tax dollars at work. WTF ?
Those charts are not a meaningful comparison.I know. It beggars belief that the USA might spend money on weapons. Whatever next?The “aid” is primarily weapons. Our tax dollars at work. WTF ?
The US benefits from 'meddling' in both regions by getting cheap fuel out of it, without being beholden to suppliers who actively and openly despise the USA.Why do "we" (US tax payers) need to get anything in Eastern Europe? Why is meddling in Eastern Europe a good thing but meddling in the Middle East frowned upon? After 20 years in Afghanistan and less than a year after getting out the USA has found something else to throw gobs of US citizens' tax money at.On the other hand, not supporting Ukraine would get us what in Eastern Europe?
The Middle East is basically a mix of bad guys--fundamentally, most conflict there is Sunni/Shia. Ukraine is clearly the good guy here, except you're listening to Moscow-friendly sources.Why do "we" (US tax payers) need to get anything in Eastern Europe? Why is meddling in Eastern Europe a good thing but meddling in the Middle East frowned upon? After 20 years in Afghanistan and less than a year after getting out the USA has found something else to throw gobs of US citizens' tax money at.On the other hand, not supporting Ukraine would get us what in Eastern Europe?
They show that the US spends shitloads of money on weapons, both before and after the bill under discussion.Those charts are not a meaningful comparison.
Why do "we" (US tax payers) need to get anything in Eastern Europe? Why is meddling in Eastern Europe a good thing but meddling in the Middle East frowned upon? After 20 years in Afghanistan and less than a year after getting out the USA has found something else to throw gobs of US citizens' tax money at.On the other hand, not supporting Ukraine would get us what in Eastern Europe?
if we don't help.A reconstituted Soviet Union by time Trump runs for office again in 2024? Halfhearted sanctions knowing the US was not going to throw in with Ukraine. And a Russia with all of Ukraine’s economic output at its disposal.
I guess the USA never tires of getting involved in regional conflicts and lobbing gobs of tax payer $ at it. I really don't see what benefit to the US citizen there is in getting involved in yet another foreign adventure. For all intents and purposes the USA has been dragged into another proxy war with Russia in Ukraine similar to Afghanistan and Syria. And weirdly, a lot of people are getting a proper hard on for it.Why do "we" (US tax payers) need to get anything in Eastern Europe? Why is meddling in Eastern Europe a good thing but meddling in the Middle East frowned upon? After 20 years in Afghanistan and less than a year after getting out the USA has found something else to throw gobs of US citizens' tax money at.On the other hand, not supporting Ukraine would get us what in Eastern Europe?
We don't "need" to get anything. We will get
if we don't help.A reconstituted Soviet Union by time Trump runs for office again in 2024? Halfhearted sanctions knowing the US was not going to throw in with Ukraine. And a Russia with all of Ukraine’s economic output at its disposal.
Is it not enough we have to spend billions on military security against China. You want to let Putin strengthen Russia's military on the backs of the Eastern European nations he absorbs?
Or is it your assumption if we let our military wither, China and Russia would not bully the rest of the world?
The utter blindness of isolationists arguing that we have nothing to do with Ukraine (or anyone else) is astonishing to me. It's like they have never traveled off the tourist track in any other Country, if they've traveled at all, and have zero awareness of how the daily lives of unnamed people in say, Bangladesh, impacts their own blinkered existence. I suspect that such people nests are sufficiently feathered that they think they don't have to worry about what happens to anyone else. In the short term, that would probably be correct, but here's to hoping that wiser heads prevail before those very nests are raided by the less-well-feathered and all hell breaks loose.Why do "we" (US tax payers) need to get anything in Eastern Europe? Why is meddling in Eastern Europe a good thing but meddling in the Middle East frowned upon? After 20 years in Afghanistan and less than a year after getting out the USA has found something else to throw gobs of US citizens' tax money at.On the other hand, not supporting Ukraine would get us what in Eastern Europe?
We don't "need" to get anything. We will get
if we don't help.A reconstituted Soviet Union by time Trump runs for office again in 2024? Halfhearted sanctions knowing the US was not going to throw in with Ukraine. And a Russia with all of Ukraine’s economic output at its disposal.
Is it not enough we have to spend billions on military security against China. You want to let Putin strengthen Russia's military on the backs of the Eastern European nations he absorbs?
Or is it your assumption if we let our military wither, China and Russia would not bully the rest of the world?
The point is that it's telling only part of the story--which you conveniently clipped out of the quote.They show that the US spends shitloads of money on weapons, both before and after the bill under discussion.Those charts are not a meaningful comparison.
Which is all they were intended to do.
I apologise if you thought I was making a completely different point that I didn't mention in any way.![]()
WTF is a "turbo military operation"? Is he saying the Russian military has been holding back?
Technically, it is a kind of crack in the support. This person is saying Putin isn't doing it right.WTF is a "turbo military operation"? Is he saying the Russian military has been holding back?
I'm not sure what he meant, but this is clearly a guy who knows his stuff. He seems to think that Putin is holding people back from rushing to complete the operation. Putin should consider making him a general and sending him right to the front immediately. The troops there are waiting to be led and will cheer him forward. I suggest putting him in the lead tank at the head of a large column. Ukrainians are waiting to welcome their liberators. Enthusiasm of that magnitude deserves to be rewarded.
Belgorod might be a good staging area for them. They'll be in artillery range soon.WTF is a "turbo military operation"? Is he saying the Russian military has been holding back?
I'm not sure what he meant, but this is clearly a guy who knows his stuff. He seems to think that Putin is holding people back from rushing to complete the operation. Putin should consider making him a general and sending him right to the front immediately. The troops there are waiting to be led and will cheer him forward. I suggest putting him in the lead tank at the head of a large column. Ukrainians are waiting to welcome their liberators. Enthusiasm of that magnitude deserves to be rewarded.
Technically, it is a kind of crack in the support. This person is saying Putin isn't doing it right.WTF is a "turbo military operation"? Is he saying the Russian military has been holding back?
I'm not sure what he meant, but this is clearly a guy who knows his stuff. He seems to think that Putin is holding people back from rushing to complete the operation. Putin should consider making him a general and sending him right to the front immediately. The troops there are waiting to be led and will cheer him forward. I suggest putting him in the lead tank at the head of a large column. Ukrainians are waiting to welcome their liberators. Enthusiasm of that magnitude deserves to be rewarded.
It's amazing how these attitudes only come out when a Demonrat is President. Shut the fuck up and only come back when Trump is re-elected. I'd love to see your stance on foreign policy then.I guess the USA never tires of getting involved in regional conflicts and lobbing gobs of tax payer $ at it. I really don't see what benefit to the US citizen there is in getting involved in yet another foreign adventure. For all intents and purposes the USA has been dragged into another proxy war with Russia in Ukraine similar to Afghanistan and Syria. And weirdly, a lot of people are getting a proper hard on for it.
What, the parts that talked about China, Russia, and Ukraine?The point is that it's telling only part of the story--which you conveniently clipped out of the quote.They show that the US spends shitloads of money on weapons, both before and after the bill under discussion.Those charts are not a meaningful comparison.
Which is all they were intended to do.
I apologise if you thought I was making a completely different point that I didn't mention in any way.![]()
I know. It beggars belief that the USA might spend money on weapons. Whatever next?
I think the idea of mobilization is being floated so that the public will be more accepting of it when it happens.WTF is a "turbo military operation"? Is he saying the Russian military has been holding back?
Does he even have to do that? Why not just compile a list and issue an order?Declaring martial law would also put a plug on the brain drain of young professionals leaving the country.
Obviously martial law would be an overkill to keep IT nerds in the country. And probably too late anyway. But it's a bonus.Does he even have to do that? Why not just compile a list and issue an order?Declaring martial law would also put a plug on the brain drain of young professionals leaving the country.
The Senate had a voice vote on the bill, something that requires unanimity to pass. RP obstructed that procedure with his "no" vote.The top Democrat and Republican in the US Senate joined forces in a rare moment of unity on Thursday in an attempt to pass $40bn in aid for Ukraine, only to be stymied by a single Republican lawmaker: the Kentucky libertarian Rand Paul.
Faced with the prospect of an extended delay for the package that passed the House of Representatives on Tuesday, the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, and his Republican counterpart, Mitch McConnell, sought to move forward on the aid package only to be blocked by Paul, a fiscal hawk who objects to the amount of spending proposed.
The stalemate delayed passage of the measure into next week.
My oath of office is to the U.S. Constitution, not to any foreign nation. Congress is trying yet again to ram through a spending bill – one that I doubt anyone has actually read – and there’s no oversight included into how the money is being spent. All I requested is an amendment to be included in the final bill that allows for the Inspector General to oversee how funds are spent. Anyone who is opposed to this is irresponsible. While I sympathize with the people of Ukraine, and commend their fight against Putin, we cannot continue to spend money we don’t have. Passing this bill brings the total we’ve sent to Ukraine to nearly $54 billion over the course of two months. It’s threatening our own national security, and it’s frankly a slap in the face to millions of taxpayers who are struggling to buy gas, groceries, and find baby formula.
Rumble rumble.Republican Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.) and Dan Crenshaw (Texas) feuded on Twitter on Wednesday over the passage of an Ukrainian aid bill that cost $40 billion.
...
When responding to criticism of his vote in favor of the bill on Twitter, Crenshaw said the bill was a “good idea.”
“Yeah, because investing in the destruction of our adversary’s military, without losing a single American troop, strikes me as a good idea. You should feel the same,” Crenshaw wrote.
Greene chimed in, saying Crenshaw is funding a “proxy war with Russia.”
“So you think we are funding a proxy war with Russia? You speak as if Ukrainian lives should be thrown away, as if they have no value. Just used and thrown away,” Greene wrote. “For your proxy war? How does that help Americans? How does any of this help?”
“Still going after that slot on Russia Today huh?” Crenshaw fired back.
On Sunday, after discussions with members from all 26 of the country’s districts, the Social Democrats will announce their decision, said Kenneth G. Forslund, a member of the party executive and chairman of the Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Relations. The consensus is that the party will reluctantly back joining NATO alongside Finland.
“We and the Finns belong together,” said Carl Bildt, a former prime minister. “If we were outside on our own, we would be a 1960s nostalgia museum.”
Few analysts in either country doubt that the two countries will apply jointly, and that NATO will rapidly accept. Both Washington and London — Washington quietly, London loudly — have provided bilateral security assurances to both countries while their applications are ratified.
After 200 Years of Neutrality, Sweden Weighs Joining NATO - The New York Times
On Sunday, after discussions with members from all 26 of the country’s districts, the Social Democrats will announce their decision, said Kenneth G. Forslund, a member of the party executive and chairman of the Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Relations. The consensus is that the party will reluctantly back joining NATO alongside Finland.
“We and the Finns belong together,” said Carl Bildt, a former prime minister. “If we were outside on our own, we would be a 1960s nostalgia museum.”
Few analysts in either country doubt that the two countries will apply jointly, and that NATO will rapidly accept. Both Washington and London — Washington quietly, London loudly — have provided bilateral security assurances to both countries while their applications are ratified.
Sounds like he needs another visit from his neighbor.But Rand Paul says no; the aid package must be delayed; and NATO and Ukrainian plans must be put on hold. Even if support among Senators is 99-1, Rand Paul — named after his family idol Ayn Rand — says No.
Key Takeaway: Russian President Vladimir Putin likely intends to annex occupied southern and eastern Ukraine directly into the Russian Federation in the coming months. He will likely then state, directly or obliquely, that Russian doctrine permitting the use of nuclear weapons to defend Russian territory applies to those newly annexed territories. Such actions would threaten Ukraine and its partners with nuclear attack if Ukrainian counteroffensives to liberate Russian-occupied territory continue. Putin may believe that the threat or use of nuclear weapons would restore Russian deterrence after his disastrous invasion shattered Russia's conventional deterrent capabilities.
Putin’s timeline for annexation is likely contingent on the extent to which he understands the degraded state of the Russian military in Ukraine. The Russian military has not yet achieved Putin’s stated territorial objectives of securing all of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts and is unlikely to do so. If Putin understands his military weakness, he will likely rush annexation and introduce the nuclear deterrent quickly in an attempt to retain control of the Ukrainian territory that Russia currently occupies. If Putin believes that Russian forces are capable of additional advances, he will likely delay the annexation in hopes of covering more territory with it. In that case, his poor leadership and Ukrainian counteroffensives could drive the Russian military toward a state of collapse. Putin could also attempt to maintain Russian attacks while mobilizing additional forces. He might delay announcing annexation for far longer in this case, waiting until reinforcements could arrive to gain more territory to annex.
Ukraine and its Western partners likely have a narrow window of opportunity to support a Ukrainian counteroffensive into occupied Ukrainian territory before the Kremlin annexes that territory. Ukraine and the West must also develop a coherent plan for responding to any annexation and to the threat of nuclear attack that might follow it. The political and ethical consequences of a longstanding Russian occupation of southeastern Ukraine would be devastating to the long-term viability of the Ukrainian state. Vital Ukrainian and Western national interests require urgent Western support for an immediate Ukrainian counteroffensive.
Or it's simply political, they feel the need to be "for" peace but know Ukraine isn't going to accept a cease-fire while winning.Both US defense department and German chancellor Scholz have contacted Russia and are asking for a ceasefire.
I wonder, is that what Ukraine wants also? Because a ceasefire essentially solidifies the border of currently occupied territory. Either Ukraine has realized it's peaked and can't do any better, which would be a good place to start negotiations, or US and Germany have lost faith and and are acting on their own.
Under current climate I'd say that backing Ukraine by calling for withdrawal of Russian troops rather than a ceasefire would be politically more popular.Or it's simply political, they feel the need to be "for" peace but know Ukraine isn't going to accept a cease-fire while winning.Both US defense department and German chancellor Scholz have contacted Russia and are asking for a ceasefire.
I wonder, is that what Ukraine wants also? Because a ceasefire essentially solidifies the border of currently occupied territory. Either Ukraine has realized it's peaked and can't do any better, which would be a good place to start negotiations, or US and Germany have lost faith and and are acting on their own.
With success like that and like just north of Kharkiv, Ukraine is not likely to agree to a ceasefire.More than 70 tanks and armoured fighting vehicles were estimated to have been destroyed and possibly 1,000 soldiers killed in a single set of strikes by Ukrainian forces.
In what has been described as some of the heaviest fighting of the war, artillery bombardments and air strikes devastated the battalion as it used a pontoon bridge to try to cross the Siverskyi Donets River on Sunday.
Russian battalion wiped out trying to cross river of death | News | The Times - Thursday May 12 2022, 2.45pm BST, The Times
With success like that and like just north of Kharkiv, Ukraine is not likely to agree to a ceasefire.More than 70 tanks and armoured fighting vehicles were estimated to have been destroyed and possibly 1,000 soldiers killed in a single set of strikes by Ukrainian forces.
In what has been described as some of the heaviest fighting of the war, artillery bombardments and air strikes devastated the battalion as it used a pontoon bridge to try to cross the Siverskyi Donets River on Sunday.
On Sunday, after discussions with members from all 26 of the country’s districts, the Social Democrats will announce their decision, said Kenneth G. Forslund, a member of the party executive and chairman of the Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Relations. The consensus is that the party will reluctantly back joining NATO alongside Finland.
“We and the Finns belong together,” said Carl Bildt, a former prime minister. “If we were outside on our own, we would be a 1960s nostalgia museum.”
Few analysts in either country doubt that the two countries will apply jointly, and that NATO will rapidly accept. Both Washington and London — Washington quietly, London loudly — have provided bilateral security assurances to both countries while their applications are ratified.
Turkey's leader opposes letting Finland, Sweden join NATO | AP NewsWhat they're saying: "We are following the developments regarding Sweden and Finland, but we are not of a favorable opinion," Erdoğan told reporters in Istanbul, according to AP.
- Erdoğan said Turkey would not repeat the same "mistake" it made by allowing Greece to rejoin NATO's military wing in 1980, arguing that Athens has used the alliance against Turkey in the two countries' maritime dispute.
- "Furthermore, Scandinavian countries are guesthouses for terrorist organizations," Erdoğan said, according to Reuters. "They are even members of the parliament in some countries. It is not possible for us to be in favor."
Erdogan says Turkey not supportive of Finland, Sweden joining NATO | ReutersThe Turkish leader explained his opposition by citing Sweden and other Scandinavian countries’ alleged support for Kurdish militants and others whom Turkey considers to be terrorists.
He said he also did not want to repeat Turkey’s past “mistake” from when it agreed to readmit Greece into NATO’s military wing in 1980. He claimed the action had allowed Greece “to take an attitude against Turkey” with NATO’s backing.
It sometimes makes me sick to my stomach to watch soldiers being killed on the battlefield via the drone videos. And this attack was quite striking. However, the Russians are in a country that did not welcome them. They are stealing land, blowing up buildings and hospitals, killing people, killing civilians, shooting them in the back of the head while being bound, and stealing everything that they can get their hands on. Sadly, this war isn't going to end until the invaders are pushed out.Russian battalion wiped out trying to cross river of death | News | The Times - Thursday May 12 2022, 2.45pm BST, The Times
With success like that and like just north of Kharkiv, Ukraine is not likely to agree to a ceasefire.More than 70 tanks and armoured fighting vehicles were estimated to have been destroyed and possibly 1,000 soldiers killed in a single set of strikes by Ukrainian forces.
In what has been described as some of the heaviest fighting of the war, artillery bombardments and air strikes devastated the battalion as it used a pontoon bridge to try to cross the Siverskyi Donets River on Sunday.
In this case, the attacks were repelled. But Russia kept trying, I think three times if not more, to cross that river and establish a bridge head on the other side.It sometimes makes me sick to my stomach to watch soldiers being killed on the battlefield via the drone videos. And this attack was quite striking. However, the Russians are in a country that did not welcome them. They are stealing land, blowing up buildings and hospitals, killing people, killing civilians, shooting them in the back of the head while being bound, and stealing everything that they can get their hands on. Sadly, this war isn't going to end until the invaders are pushed out.Russian battalion wiped out trying to cross river of death | News | The Times - Thursday May 12 2022, 2.45pm BST, The Times
With success like that and like just north of Kharkiv, Ukraine is not likely to agree to a ceasefire.More than 70 tanks and armoured fighting vehicles were estimated to have been destroyed and possibly 1,000 soldiers killed in a single set of strikes by Ukrainian forces.
In what has been described as some of the heaviest fighting of the war, artillery bombardments and air strikes devastated the battalion as it used a pontoon bridge to try to cross the Siverskyi Donets River on Sunday.
You are a little more pessimistic than me my friend. The Ukrainians had primarily defensive weapons. They had to wait until the Russians were within their range, then they launched, and then ran away. Very effective against an ineffective uninspired army lead by imbeciles. However, Russians are finally getting smarter and are lagging back, relying on their long range artillery which are very effective long range. Ukrainians didn't have long range weapons (drones, and most battlefield missiles are not long range.) But the west has been sending in long range artillery to the front lines in the south. The US made Howitzers are going to start chewing up the Russian artillery. Once that's more balanced, their motivated troops will counter attack more effectively. Ironically, Ukraine has more in reserves (civilians training to join the fight) and more arms entering the country. The Ukrainians are motivated, backs to the wall, with nothing to lose. Could be my imagination, but it seems to me that Russia is starting to crack up. There are cracks showing. China is tiring of the war. It's starting to tilt towards Ukraine. Let's see...In this case, the attacks were repelled. But Russia kept trying, I think three times if not more, to cross that river and establish a bridge head on the other side.It sometimes makes me sick to my stomach to watch soldiers being killed on the battlefield via the drone videos. And this attack was quite striking. However, the Russians are in a country that did not welcome them. They are stealing land, blowing up buildings and hospitals, killing people, killing civilians, shooting them in the back of the head while being bound, and stealing everything that they can get their hands on. Sadly, this war isn't going to end until the invaders are pushed out.Russian battalion wiped out trying to cross river of death | News | The Times - Thursday May 12 2022, 2.45pm BST, The Times
With success like that and like just north of Kharkiv, Ukraine is not likely to agree to a ceasefire.More than 70 tanks and armoured fighting vehicles were estimated to have been destroyed and possibly 1,000 soldiers killed in a single set of strikes by Ukrainian forces.
In what has been described as some of the heaviest fighting of the war, artillery bombardments and air strikes devastated the battalion as it used a pontoon bridge to try to cross the Siverskyi Donets River on Sunday.
Until Ukraine has capability to launch their own offensives (which may take months), it has to succeed to defeat the attackers every time, Russia only has to succeed once. And while this was going on, Russia took Popasna and maybe another village North of it, and is moving artillery in range to reach Zaporizhzhia. It's not going well.
I think this will end with either Russia annexing large swaths of Ukraine, or a nuclear exchange.