Topic: Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress] - page 344. (Read 73524 times)

And not only against Ukraine. The list of unfriendly countries is being actively supplemented by Poland and the Baltic States. As you may know, Poland is now most active in helping Ukrainians, both defenders and refugees and civilians. Polish civilians are really concerned over russia's threats. For example, a russian missile recently crashed in Ukraine 20 km from the border with Poland, ie NATO.

https://www.politico.eu/article/western-europe-listen-to-the-baltic-countries-that-know-russia-best-ukraine-poland/

https://cepa.org/the-baltics-should-be-worried/

https://www.ft.com/content/38b1906f-4302-4a09-b304-dc2ecf5dc771

No, there is. At the moment, this is not one organization, but several at once: the prosecutor's office, the Prosecutor General's Office, Roskomnadzor and other "power" structures. Even if we talk about the survey that many people refer to here... they asked the question "do you support a special military operation?". Even a complete idiot should realize that this is a technique for manipulating thinking and the results would be completely different if the question sounded like "do you support the war Russia with Ukraine?".
All censorship and silencing of information is the work of the Ministry of Truth. A huge part of the russian population is not even aware of the fact that Russian soldiers staged there and how big is corruption in Russia.

Some reference links:
‘Don’t call it a war’ – propaganda filters the truth about Ukraine on Russian media
Ecли вepить гocyдapcтвeнным coцoпpocaм, бoльшинcтвo poccиян пoддepживaют вoйнy в Укpaинe. Ho мoжнo ли им вepить? Boт пять гpaфикoв, кoтopыe пoмoгaют oтвeтить нa этoт вoпpoc
Пpaвдa ли, чтo влacти пpoвoдят coцoпpocы c пoмoщью cпeцcлyжб? Учeный Гpигopий Юдин oтвeчaeт нa caмыe пoпyляpныe вoпpocы o poccийcкoй coциoлoгии

Wagner Group
Cyд в Mocквe пpизнaл плaкaт «Фaшизм нe пpoйдeт» диcкpeдитaциeй Boopyжeнныx cил PФ
Poccия: кceнoфoбия, pacизм, a тeпepь и пpoявлeния нaцизмa
Heoнaцизм в Poccии
Boйнa вышлa из пoдвopoтeн
Aнтифaшиcты в Poccии
Умep Maкcим Tecaк Mapцинкeвич. Кaк oн cтaл глaвным нeoнaциcтoм Poccии и мoг ли пoкoнчить c coбoй?
Myжcкoe гocyдapcтвo
Copaтники Bлaдиcлaвa Пoзднякoвa тpaвят вдoвy тeмнoкoжeгo cтyдeнтa, кoтopый yтoнyл, cпacaя дeвyшкy
Дёмyшкин, Дмитpий Hикoлaeвич

Yes, now skinheads no longer walk the streets and do not kill migrants, but this has turned into some part of the national idea: for many years, through federal channels, Russians have been inspired by how flawed Americans and Europeans are. For example, offensive statements like "pindos", "geyropa" are very common in modern Russia. After the seizure of Crimea, strong anti-Ukrainian propaganda began.

The quibbling of what is "defensive" aside, that's not what I said. I said the expansion since 1990s was clearly defensive, i.e. new countries were joining because they didn't want the repeat of pre/post WW2 annexations and puppetry from Russia. You know, the exact thing that's happening right now with Ukraine. None of these countries had reasons to start a war with Russia, nor would they have been able to drag NATO into starting a war with Russia.

Apparently, Moscow took very seriously the speech of President Vladimir Zelensky who said at the Munich Conference on February 19, 2022 that Ukraine is ready to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (the "Budapest Memorandum"). Zelensky also asked to announce the time frames for Ukraine's entry into NATO.

The purpose of creating NATO at the initial stage was to contain Soviet control in Europe, but even after the collapse of the USSR, the alliance still continued to move east. In 1999, NATO organized the bombing of Yugoslavia in violation of the UN Charter, so it is wrong to claim that this block pursues "clearly defensive" goals.

However UK opposes now to early peace talks between Ukraine and Russia.

It is obvious that no one wanted to mess with Russia because of its nuclear weapons, which left in this country after the collapse of the USSR.

The U.S and Russia think alike somehow, they both can just invade any country they want and they both play their "national security" card to justify the invasion, luckily Russia isn't capable (yet) of invading countries on the other side of the planet, also luckily things did not end up well for the last a few U.S invasions, hopefully, this war ends soon and teaches both of these countries (and all the other countries with a history of invasion) to mind their own freaking business.

Why do you think information from Russian defence ministry is reliable and they're not spreading fakes? Blindly believing in information given by one side is living in alternative reality.

I love when people start whataboutism and brings USA card. How it justifies war in Ukraine? And you really compare number of victims in war which lasted few years and war in Ukraine which started month ago. I'm not going to justify what US did in Iraq, but it's not a reason not to react in things which happening in Ukraine now.
And I don't see how Ukraine actions provocted Putin to attack them. Yes, they wanted to join NATO, but they wouldn't be accepted because of ongoing conflict in Donbass. So, there was no real threat for Russia. And can you answer me, does Ukraine need to be in NATO or NATO need to have Ukraine? I think all things show that NATO don't really want to have cUkraine in their alliance.

He's defending Russia and blaming Ukraine and US.

What you are doing is saying that Ukraine acted "as if" they wanted to be invaded, I do understand the statement and the wording, but it can be easily interpreted as a covered attempt of justification for the aggression so. My question, that you just do not answer, remains: Do you think they wanted to be invaded?

A few more questions, just so you have the chance to be clear on your points.

 Do you justify Putin on the grounds of Ukraine not accepting to do his will?
 Do you justify Putin's aggression on the grounds of "since the world is not perfect, Ukraine cannot make its own choices?" Before answering (or more likely, not answering which seems your style) consider that by using that argument nearly anything is justified (e.g. "since the world is not perfect", we can admit modern slavery in Saudi Arabia, children's prostitution in south east Asia, women's systematic assassinations and rapes in Ciudad Juarez, racial profiling,...)

As us American use to say "Might is right"

A good example of:



Can't say if you're trolling for fun or for profit.
Russian data reliable? I haven't seen so many lies being told in 1 month ever. Even North Korea and China aren't bullshitting as much as Russia is.
Just this one event when Ukraine was posting Russian losses and Russia wasn't posting anything or claiming there are no losses should make you think. About 2 weeks ago Russian news agency gave an estimate of Russian losses and it was taken down within hours, but not before people made pictures, so it's all to be found in the Internet.

Just some of the Russian lies summed up for you. I don't expect to change your mind about "reliable Russian data" but I'll at least try to expose how wrong you are.


We are not going to attack Ukraine.
We are conducting military drills and will leave the border when they're finished.
We are not attacking Ukraine but moving in to protect our people in newly formed republics.
We are not attacking civilian targets.
We are not attacking Ukraine, only nazis.
All attacks are made by precision weapons aimed at military targets.
There are no losses on our side, all claims from the Ukrainian side are false.
There are some wounded on our side, but nothing serious and all Ukrainian claims are false. We will not give any numbers.
We were shooting at the nuclear power plant because we wanted to secure it so that Ukrainians could not do a provocation by blowing it up.
We destroyed a maternity hospital because Nazis were hiding there.
We are not using conscripts, all soldiers fighting in Ukraine are contract military.
We are not going to force people into service and will only send trained soldiers into Ukraine.


Before the war
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-02-17/russia-tells-u-s-no-ukraine-invasion-planned-tass-says
The Kremlin has repeatedly denied it intends to invade Ukraine, though Russian President Vladimir Putin has demanded concessions from NATO while building up forces around the country, including tanks, artillery and other equipment.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60407010
Moscow says it is moving troops away from the Ukrainian border after the completion of military exercises.

Beginning of the war
Russia’s defence ministry said on Thursday that its air attacks on Ukraine were not targeting cities and posed no threat to civilians, the RIA news agency reported.
Ukraine said earlier that at least eight people had been killed and nine were wounded by Russian shelling.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/24/russia-says-not-targeting-ukraine-cities-kyiv-claims-8-killed

MOSCOW, February 24. /TASS/. The statements by Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Valery Zaluzhny about Russia’s losses of aircraft and armored vehicles are false, the Russian Defense Ministry said on Thursday.
"The statement by the Ukrainian Army’s commander-in-chief Zaluzhny about the alleged losses of Russian aircraft and armored vehicles is an absolute lie," the statement said.
https://tass.com/politics/1409663


The Russian army on Sunday admitted that there were "killed and injured" soldiers among its troops in Ukraine on the fourth day of its invasion of the country, without specifying how many Russians had died there.
https://www.firstpost.com/world/ukraine-russia-war-news-live-updates-will-be-catastrophe-for-world-if-russia-uses-nukes-on-ukraine-says-foreign-minister-10411881.html

Enemy losses as of Feb 27 have amounted to nearly 4,300 &over 200 taken as prisoners of war; Russia denies. Ukraine had opened a hotline for relatives of Russian soldiers who can't be contacted; over 100 calls from Russian mothers were received during the 1st hr: Ukraine at UNSC
Ukrainian Ambassador to UN, Sergiy Kyslytsya, at UNSC meeting on Ukraine, says, "line & dedicated website have been shut down (by Russia).
https://mobile.twitter.com/ANI/status/1498067960296271874

The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation denied the information about the participation of conscript soldiers in a special operation on the territory of Ukraine. This was stated by the official representative of the department Igor Konashenkov
https://hindustannewshub.com/russia-ukraine-news/russian-defense-ministry-denies-participation-of-conscript-soldiers-in-special-operation-against-ukraine-the-moscow-times/


Thousands of Russians are trying to dodge conscription into their army by fleeing to the US via Mexico to claim asylum, immigration lawyers have claimed.
Many are afraid Russia's invasion of Ukraine will leave Putin wanting more people to join up to bolster his troops.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10556775/Conscription-fears-grip-Russia-thousands-try-claim-political-asylum-US.html

Not sure why you're bringing this up. I'm not a fan of US "peace and democracy" exports if that's your angle. That doesn't mean that small or large Eastern European countries - or any countries - should be just given to Putin.

So once again, why USA invaded Grenada and Panama? They don't even share border, and
are pretty miniscule compared to, lets say, Ukraine

NATO nukes haven't moved closer to Russia in the last 30 years and there were no plans to do so. NATO expansion was quite clearly defensive and it would have remained so even if Ukraine joined NATO. Despite Putin's delusions, the West wants a stable prosperous Russia to trade with, not a shithole to fight with. If they wanted to attack it they'd have done it in mid-1990s.

Putin was upset about NATO missile defense systems in Poland et al - do you realize how insane that is? "Don't you dare to defend against us should we decide to liberate you at some point".


It doesn't look like Ukrainians want to be "friendly" (aka Belarus) with Russia so yeah let's bomb them to rubble.

I'm not saying that we're living in a perfect world...but seeing USA/NATO track record since WW2, can you blame Russians?
Looking at Napoleon, Hitler, Genghis Khan and numerous other invasions, can you blame Russians?

I suggest you look for and watch Oliver Stone (lenghty) interview with Putin on Youtube

hell, USA was afraid of small Grenada and attacked state of 100 thousands people with almost no military

Two French Intelligence operatives died in helicopter crash
https://halturnerradioshow.com/index.php/en/news-page/world/american-and-uk-military-advisors-plus-france-intel-operatives-holed-up-with-azov-nazis-in-mariupol-now-trapped-by-russian-forces

So, in your view, Ukraine cannot decide what to do because else Putin would not feel "secure" despite having a nuclear arsenal? Just think of it in in the opposite way: "Russian should demilitarise so that Ukraine feels secure". You see how absurd that is?

I compared current situation with Cuba crisis, BUT Ukraine in NATO would put Russia in jeopardy against conventional attack too.
Unlike conventional attack from Estonia/Latvia/Lithuania, conventional attack from Ukraine would put Russia in situation where only defense
would be use of nukes

In case of neutral or friendly Ukraine, for conventional war vs NATO  Russia only has to close Suwalki gap
Its 100km vs 2300km border to defend

Nothing that Ukraine did or didn't do had any effect on the situation (unless of course they simply gave up and joined Putin's empire voluntarily).

Putin lied to the Russian people and created the obviously false narrative that Ukraine ("nazis") and/or NATO were going to attack Russia so he had to strike first. NATO has been on Russia's borders for decades. The new members joined NATO to defend against this exact shit that's going on now in Ukraine and it was a damn good decision that saved Estonia/Latvia/Lithuania - surely Putin would have gone there first and not to Ukraine if he could.

In your view, is the fact that Cuba, in the 60s, could not install nuclear missiles on its soil the true justification for this war?

Do you think Ukraine would be admitted in the OTAN and, if so, it would have nuclear missiles installed in its soil? Before you answer that question, please notice that Lithuania is a NATO member and the distance from Moscow is less than 500 miles, that there are nuclear submarines that can be positioned in the artic or any other point in the coastal areas of Russia and that there are several other options for a first strike capability.

Do you think that now that Finland is requesting to join the NATO Putin is justified to attack Finland? Should NATO position troops in Finland now?

The fact is that if you want to invade a country, you can always find a whatabbout to justify.

Same reason as why Cuba was not allowed to put nukes on its soil?
Why you call 1960's "middle ages"?

Also, you should make distinction between "because" and "as if"