Topic: Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress] - page 16. (Read 79973 times)

The thing about black noise is that it continues where a nuke stops.

An exploding nuke is a simply a big vibration. Within it there may be reverberations (echos). But it is all vibration just like black noise. The difference with black noise is that it is continuous, and of a lower force than a nuke. It is the continuation that makes it so dangerous.

There might be patents for black noise, but nobody has figured out how to make a continuous blast on a big scale. Tesla invented this long ago with his earthquake machine. But making it practical in the whole Earth - or in a section of the Earth like a city - is difficult.

If Tesla had it, all the major scientific communities of the world have it, including Russia.

It appears the world will once again will split, the US on one side, the UK at the other extrem, and London the new Moscow.
The first few already fleed the US heading for UK, how many will follow in the new year?

Politics is like sheep herting; you chase em left or right, whatever is needed at a time.



Intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and nukes are hopelessly outdated; you will not win a war with it. To flatten more than a town or country:
https://youtu.be/DEYoqjznemU

Are you trying to tell me that they were voting at Dnipro when Putin dropped that multiple warhead ICBM-like missile there?

Zelensky, like Ukraine, is essentially gone. Chop the head off the snake, but the body still wiggles for a while. Nothing left for Zelensky to fight with.

BREAKING: Sources Tell Infowars Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Peace Talks Nearing Major Ceasefire Breakthrough, Alex Jones Warns Globalists May Stage False Flag To Derail Peace - https://www.infowars.com/posts/breaking-sources-tell-infowars-trumps-mar-a-lago-peace-talks-nearing-major-ceasefire-breakthrough-alex-jones-warns-globalists-may-stage-false-flag-to-derail-peace

There is no real debate here, anyone understand perfectly well that it would be very easy for Ruzzia to send drones and missiles to polling centres in an election day and there is no way to guarantee the safety of the voters. Ruzzia has held "elections", but the "elections" do not mean anything and do not have any guarantee of equanimity... it is a farce and everyone knows it is a farce.

if you want to get rid of Zelensky, think twice, you may get Zaluzhny. Do not take for granted Ruzzia can install a puppet.

Now, if you want elections hope for peace.

https://x.com/grimeskywalkers/status/1858349285831585795

Russia had elections during the war, and my info sources [paxmao + Ukraine media] assure me that Russia was getting severely punished the whole time.  They are losing 10 soldiers for ever one which Ukraine loses.  For the last several years, in fact, they have been out of weapons and fighting with shovels.  The are even so low on food that they are eating dogs which have been eating the corpses of their fallen comrades.  Must be rough for them!  But somehow they manage to vote?  Go figure.

My country, the U.S., is very peaceful and has never been in a war so we don't know if war would stop our elections or not.

We had elections in Croatia during war

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Croatian_parliamentary_election

On the other hand, with the war going on, it would be difficult for the CIA to influence elections and keep Zelensky in there. So, let's put elections on hold.

Well, that could be anyone, paid by anyone, doing whatever... The fact is that Ukraine elections have been made impossible due to war. Ukrainian constitution does clearly state that being a war is a situation in which elections are not an option.

But let's not play naive here Branko, it is impossible to call elections with the Kremlin waiting for the occasion to disrupt and manipulate - which is the only reason you are asking for them.

BTW, give them elections:

https://en.tavria.tv/news/society/ukrainian-football-fans-put-up-a-flag-with-the-inscription-give-us-elections/

Right! And to top it off, Russia could have armed it with nukes, and set it down in the United Kingdom. Think of that. No Britain, Ireland, or Scotland left.



EDIT: at least we wouldn't have to put up with paxmao in the forum any longer.

You don't see difference between something with range of 400km and something else that has range of 3000km and also has multiple warheads?

And so what? It's nothing new, Kinzhal that they're using often or Zircon missiles also have similar range and also can carry a nuclear warhead.

It would be strange if they wouldn't want peace as soon as possible. It's already 1002nd day of war, people are tired, they want to return to normal life. But when it comes territorial concessions, it's not that 52% people would agree with it. It's only 52% from people who answered that they want peace as soon as possible. Without doing maths, I guess it's about 25% from all respondents. So, you can't say that majority of Ukrainians want.
You talk that West and Ukraine continue to escalate war, but offcourse that you will ignore fact that Russia is escalating war by including another country into war - iI'm talking about North Korea.

Ukraine did not launch those missiles because they do not have the ability to do so.  They also don't have the ability to guide them to a target.  These missiles were launched and guided to their targets within Russia by NATO (and more specifically by the American and British elements of NATO...Germany wisely refused, and as far as I can tell, the French found an excuse to bail as well.)  One can hardly think of a more clear act of war _by_ NATO _against_ Russian.

The Russians made it clear that from their standpoint such an activity, if it were to occur, would be considered a NATO attack and all NATO member states are culpable and subject to actions which will reduce the threat to Russia going forward.  Absolutely reasonable and certainly the way any country would view such a thing.

I think it was very humane of Putin to test their new weapon a) on Ukraine, b) with a heads-up, and c) using inert warheads.  This was a pleasant surprise to me, and I doubt it will go this way the next time around.

Maybe it is becoming more clear to more people why people like me have been screaming from the rooftops that NATO is chock full of deranged psychopaths and is a huge menace to every human on earth.  It's an obsolete cold war relic which should have been dissolved several decades ago.

Russia just showed the world that they are capable of taking the whole UK out. Ukraine better respond with peaceful intentions, or Russia might just do that - take out the UK. After all, it was US and UK missiles that Ukraine launched into Russia.

I think Russians will respond to their response
But circle will continue until Russians respond to UK, not Ukraine

I think Ukraine needs to respond to this Russian missile.

Apparently a relatively common Rubezh, mid-range and not terribly new.

To be honest, ICBMs do reach more than hypersonic speeds, match 24 and the like, but what would make the hypersonic a clearly unstoppable system is the ability to manoeuvre at such speed and evade interception systems. Whatever Ruzzia claims about their technical capabilities has to be interpreted under Tsun-Tzu's advice:


There are some news on regards to the Ukrainian strike pointing to the North Korean commanders being in the bunker attacked with the Stormshadow.

Putin's new "Oreshnik" turned out to be a fake, new fairy tales for Russians.

He may, as far as I know he does not have an International Court of Justice order that would prevent him from going to any of these countries.

Ruzzia will never release real losses.

I think that if Ukrainians want to negotiate a peace, it should be negotiated, but that is not what you are saying I am afraid. You have a long history in this thread and every time you speak of peace and negotiation you are meaning surrender and when you say concessions you mean... surrender. It is basically the only thing you have been promoting until now.

I have not seen any poll saying that Ukraine should cease to exist and become Ruzzia's garden (thanks Branko for the name) and "territorial concessions" may simply be recognising that, as of today, it is not possible to recover Crimea. So back to 2014 illegal borders and bye.

So the problem is not negotiating, which has to eventually happen, the question is what is going to be negotiated. For example, you ask Ruzzians they tell you they want to negotiate by not giving anything. I wonder if some Ukrainians think that they should negotiate under those same terms.

Now, the time for negotiation will be after Trump starts governing (or doing Trump's version of governing). He said he would finish the war and I would like to see what is the magic plan. Do not take for granted it will be pleasant for Putin and do not take for granted there will not be an armed and protected country called Ukraine after whatever "negotiation".



Again, you may want to ask the people who are experts on the topic, rather than an AI known to hallucinate.


https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/arms-control-and-proliferation-profile-united-kingdom#:~:text=The%20United%20Kingdom%20does%20not%20poss


Again, you are looking into the wrong sources. Everybody knows there were two Trident tests failed - it is the thing about public TV just as...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/russian-icbm-test-launch-failed/


Again, keep displaying numbers... it is irrelvant. Either you risk it or not, either you think article 5 does not trigger or it does, either you think the US will not honour the part of their nuclear policy that clearly includes "... their allies" or not....

If somehow you are trying to scare the West into inaction, that ship has sailed and sunk.