Topic: Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress] - page 222. (Read 77449 times)

Are you trying to argue that freedom to protest in the US and Russia are the same?

Its not a problem to find a video, thousands of it actually...i just put pic instead because
forum cant properly embed video (for people lazy to click). Here you go

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zf5vpzMIgyU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qp2b9Qo88UI

A vast majority copes with Putin the best they can. Those who cannot longer cope and have good skills leave the country.

The supporters of Putin are those who benefit from the regime the most: Military in the high ranks that benefit from taking their cuts (a reason why most of the claims about size and performance of their army are wrong) and some of the secret services, which take their cuts from informants and live a good life.

All other citizens mean nothing.

---

Curious you could not find a better pic. What I see there is one protester being arrested while 50 people in the background film it.

An seriously speaking, protesting in most developed countries is widely admitted - not if it carries violence. We have all seen people arrested in the Red Square for holding a white sheet of paper.

Thank God, similar policemen in the West give protesters donuts and coffee, and spread love and peace
among protesters




So they applied "Shock and awe"? And whose invention was that?

^^^ Russia is not in the habit of pointing fingers at terrorist states... at least not as much as the US is. But if they were, they would simply point at the US as a terrorist state. If you listen to the lulling messages coming in over the US media, and stop there without thinking and looking at ALL history, you will never recognize that all the large nations are terrorist states, especially the US.

Russia is terrorist state and now Putin aren't even trying to hide it. He admited that today Russia attacked energy and communication infrastructure in most of cities of Ukraine which left people without electricity and water:
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-moscow-will-respond-forcefully-ukrainian-attacks-2022-10-10/
And like usual, these ''high precision'' missiles hit apartment buildings, pedestrian bridge, parks, children playgrounds and street:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-63199721 Military objects they say.

Most of them are happy about what's happening, in their opinion Putin is doing right thing. They are fighting against nazis, NATO, gays and all other imaginary enemies. To get image about their opinion, it's enough to open some Russian telegram channels and see how russians react to news about killed Ukrainian civilians. Everything is fine for them, as long as they can comment about it on internet or watch propaganda on TV. But now when there is risk to get mobilized, love to mother Russia is gone and now many is running away from Russia to save their asses.

False, a response to a nuclear attack does not necessarily have to be nuclear, that has been stated over an over. It has been described as "devastating" but most likely conventional. The ICBMs are not the only nuclear option and the nuclear response is not only not the only option, it is not even the best to achieve a deterrent for tactical nukes from Russia. Do you know that the tactical nuke arsenal in US is barely 200 units, like 10 times less than RF's?

At the risk of repeating myself, I am going to quote my post. Notice that it is PREVIOUS to the Kerch bridge being destroyed.


I am sure you can add 1+1

Russian conservatism ends where US tyranny begins... Ukraine.

Smart and brave, if such a definition can be applied to the people of so-called russia, who fled the country in 2014.
Those who are trying to flee now aren't brave and smart. These are those who aren't against invasions of other countries, colonial and genocidal wars. They support all that but prefer not to have it all done with their own hands. In this case, it doesn't matter at all whether they support Putin or not, because as we know "russian liberal ends where Ukraine begins”.

The number of people detained in Russia for protesting against the country's partial military mobilization has risen to nearly 2,500 people across the country, as prominent pro-Kremlin voices have begun questioning the way the draft is being conducted.
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-protests-mobilization-ukraine-war/32052011.html


They are protesting but in Russia they have special police trained to fight protesters and these guys are brutal. They don't care if you're a woman or a child, everybody gets hit with batons and sprayed with tear gas the same way and then they drag you to a prison transport and you don't get a phone call to family like in the US, or a hot meal. More likely they'll make you take your clothes off and leave you naked for the night or come back in a few hours to beat you. You don't get to experience this in "normal" countries. You need big balls to be an anti government protester in Russia or Belarus.

From all what is happening in Russia, what are the citizens saying about the current happenings Why cant they put down Mr X and all this will be history, because millions of people have been displaced, thousands injured and hundeds killed, all this all because of selfish desires by a few individuals. The world is bigger than one man or should i say a few individuals! Peace and Love must win this fight.

According to Russian logic if you keep wounded soldiers in a hospital it becomes a military object. This means that if people see a wounded soldier they should ignore him and let him die instead of taking him to a nearby hospital. A hospital where there's 100 civilians and 20 wounded soldiers is going to be targeted because Russians will say it's a military target.
I say bomb the Kremlin because there's a number of military personnel present there at all times, therefore it's a military target.

Thank goodness that somebody finally released these people from US slavery.

It is said that Stalin might have killed as many as 60 million people in Soviet Union lands. This has been the focus of the media as the US goes to other nations around the world and kills people there... way more than Stalin could have ever thought of doing. Russia changed with the fall of the USSR, realizing that force doesn't get things done like Stalin was trying to do.

In the Ukraine, Russia has released the people of about 20% of Ukraine from the US-style of killing. But the rest of the Ukraine is still under murderous US control. And Zelensky is proving it by using his people for human shields, and often by directly bombing and harming people in his attempt to oust Russia so that his US bosses are happy.

Pretty much spot on. He takes Crimea, then Easter Ukraine and the Fakepublics of the Dombas, then a corridor to the Fakepublic of Transnistria, they liberating the oppressed Russian living un Hungary, then a corridor to Konigsberg, ... From the European perspective, this has to end here and now. From the Ukrainian perspective, they do not want to be drafted as slaves, not having to survive the next Holodomor nor be the buffer for Putin's aggressions. And believe that some of the fighters in Ukraine speak well of the Commies, so Adolf Putin must have gotten something really wrong here.

Regarding soviet equipment, some people say that it is running thin, my personal take is that there is still a lot of rusty old iron. It is not fit for a modern war, but it kills when used and they do have a shitload of it. The issue is if in modern RF there is still space for a forceful recruiting of an army of slaves - Adolf Putin may have gotten that wrong too.

It's the same old Soviet junk that Russia is planning to win the war with, or better. I still don't know why you're so obsessed with tanks - or only specific brands of tanks - as if that constitutes a worse threat to Russia than e.g. HIMARS, but Russia already lost a shitload of tanks (being captured or destroyed by Ukraine) and can't make anymore, so it doesn't really take a math genius to see where the balance shifting.


I think you've missed the point. There is no "good" outcome. Let's say Putin takes Ukraine. Then he wants Poland. The whole thing starts over, just much worse.


Not the best of your straw people. I'm talking about the Russian forces.

The 200k invasion army was supposedly better trained and better equipped and had other advantages like robust air support and still functioning supply lines. What happened to those soldiers? No one cares, let's throw another 300k into it, just with less of everything, and see how that works out. Maybe shift some generals around, yeah, that'll do it.

It would be ideal to be able to hit a bridge, which is (in this case) critical war infrastructure, minus anyone travelling on it. Quite different from hitting a school or a shopping mall IMO. Not to mention killing the Skripals in a foreign country not at war, in case people are forgetting.

This links with the expelling of the "legal" spies (diplomatic status) and an intensified pressure on the rest of the networks - this is putting pressure on intelligence. It also speaks of how Adolf Putin's regime of cleptocracy fails to provide patriotic incentives to the spies even at a commanding level, which means that they are much more into getting a bigger car and a larger dacha than in defending the country. Cooking the intelligence, faking reports and getting info publicly available in internet is everyday, as well as taking cuts from informants payments.

On another matter, from an Ukrainian soldier in training: "The assault tactics of the Russians are well known: they place the newly recruited and unexperienced cannon fodder at the front, hoping to keep us busy killing them while trying to flank or surprise". DO NOT DIE FOR PUTIN. DO NOT LET YOURSELF BE DRAFTED.



You are no longer even trying to makes sense, are you? You have to quit it or start taking it, which ever of the two you are not doing.

Right now you're pretending that NATO has only sent old Soviet era junk to Ukraine.

It seems like risk of escalation is not a major factor in why NATO has yet to send any modern tanks.  It is *a* factor, as it would be an escalation, but not as big of a factor as long range missiles for example. Tank supplies are more limited compared to other weapons, they require more training and maintenance, and the US is concerned about transfer of technical knowledge of their Abrhams to Russia. 

Also, Russia has been giving Ukraine more tanks than they know what to do with.

Glad we agree that RU nuclear strike on UA doesn't mean there will be a nuclear response or a war between NATO and RU. No you missed my point, NATO doesn't want Armageddon (in fact this is exactly the reason why they're refusing to send modern tanks to UA).

---

Right now we're pretending to not know the difference between old Soviet junk and modern tanks? But please entertain us with your version of why NATO is not sending modern tanks to UA? Perhaps they're too busy playing Dota? Or requests just keep getting lost? Or they can send millions of 155mm shells but logistics to send tanks are just too hard? Or they're secret RU Orcs too?


Agreed. So RU options are either take a chance to hold on to their resources and deliveries to EU or a guaranteed dissolution. Doesn't take a genius to figure out why they're doing what they're doing
Sure let's extend all this effort for a high probability of a worse outcome? Worked so great in Afghanistan and Libya right?

I suggest you check new commitments and deliveries to UA after RU declared partial mobilization

Right how mobilized Russians with previous combat experience could possibly compare with super mega ultra warrior conscripts of Ukraine and super sober uber special forces of the 8th? mobilization wave of Ukraine?    


hope you're right and we won't see more IEDs blowing up in Russia

Retaliating for what? Ukraine has been getting tanks, AFV/IFV, artillery, SAM and other missiles, and a bunch of other stuff from NATO countries for many months now. But sending some additional tanks now would justify a nuclear response? Rhetorical question BTW. It wouldn't. Trying to spin into "Ukrainians fault for getting nuked" is still as absurd as it always was.


All other things being equal, losing the war would result in the same or worse outcome, except after more months or years of costly war.


Oh no, the horror, the dictator could be replaced, possibly with another dictator. How will we ever get over this.


Lend-lease just barely started. That's about as big of a commitment as it gets.


That's quite pathetic, pretty much copypasta from Kremlins excuse list. After months of losing military equipment and personnel, Russia can't plug these holes with untrained cannon fodder. Mobilized drunks can't fly airplanes and can't make airplanes. The best they can do is get a rusty Kalash and shoot it the general direction of the enemy.


Nuclear fantasies aside (again), Ukrainians have been bombing the shit out of Russian supply routes and depots etc for months now, while Russian response has fizzled. There is a reason they're using Iranian mopeds and had to modify C300 for surface-to-surface use and keep blatantly targeting high-density residential buildings. Let's see if you can figure that reason out before January.

Are you pretending that other people are pretending that?  It doesn't even make sense.  Why would someone pretend that countries want a nuclear Armageddon, and if that's what NATO wanted, why wouldn't it of already happened?