Topic: Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress] - page 77. (Read 73557 times)

Ukraine is spending all that help wisely:

https://newsyou.info/en/2024/02/prodazhi-elitnix-avto-v-ukra%D1%97ni-byut-rekordi

  BA... you kill me 

And on topic now, another A-50 seems to have been shot down. This is a very expensive toy that should usually be either better protected or not used where is at risk. It seems that a nation without a Navy and with a tiny air force has managed to win the battle at sea and seems like it is going to win the air war. Anything that is not shelling seems beyond any of the capabilities of the Ruzzians.

Do you even think you are saying something important? Of course, all your rants - even those with a little truth in them - are fun for you, right? So, they ARE important to you, right? Almost everybody who contributes comments to the forum is having fun doing so, right? Or they wouldn't be here, right? And they aren't here, right? People enjoy your comments, one way or another.

All the lies of the US and Nato.


How Realistic Is Putin?

---

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2024/02/29/how-realistic-is-putin/
On February 27 I was interviewed by Finian Cunningham about this risk.  If the interview is posted online, I will link to it hopefully before it is taken down by the narrative controllers.

There is no doubt that I have been proven correct that the provocations, accepted by the Kremlin with only words in opposition, have increased in severity over the past two years.

First the West would send to the Ukrainians helmets and sleeping bags.  Then small arms ammunition. Then artillery.  Tanks were mentioned, but Washington and NATO said, "never tanks." Then tanks were sent. Then, after first being denied, drones and intermediate-range missiles. Then targeting information. Then mercenaries.  Then after being denied, now long-range missiles and US F-16s capable of penetrating deep into Russia herself far from the battlefront are under consideration.  And now the latest, the French President's proposal to send NATO troops.  "We will never send troops," declares NATO's Stoltenberg. But all the denials previously were breached and meant nothing.
...

---

You do amazingly well at being able to use a keyboard without electrocuting yourself, given you intellectual level.

Your link is pure propaganda, there are little facts, all bias and I am not going to bother to listen more that 2 minutes of that short of crap. Bottom-line, all countries conduct operations abroad, Ruzzia is well known to manipulate elections abroad, kill people abroad, spread disinformation (Please, preeettty please, ask me to provide proof). That is not war (although arguably killing in foreign soil is an act of war) , war is marching your troops into a recognised estate to take over its territory.

I'd rather say that they don't like to be neglected. If you run a tank for 12 hours straight in difficult conditions without cleaning the air filter, you're neglecting it.

These tanks aren't made to be operated for so long, but rather mission-wise. It's range is up to 300km, so that's just a few hours of runtime without refueling. When you refuel, it's normal for the crew to do basic maintenance, clean visors and other equipment, clean or replace the filters. It barely takes 30 min, but some soldiers are given equipment they don't know and ride it until it dies.

Also, isn't this a machine made for desert warfare?
Still much better than Russian cans that grill the crew when they get hit.

You do amazingly well with English, considering it isn't your first language. But then, a lot of people know two or more languages. But perhaps you should re-study English a little, so you can see what is said in the video... and a lot of other places for that matter.

The thing is that at this point only works with those who make a conscious effort to believe the figures. In any war they tend to be inflated from both sides, however with the current OSINT available there are a few sites that have reasonably credible figures that at least can indicate the direction of travel.

I think that Macron wanted everyone to understand that the possibility actually exists. That a NATO member may perfectly well send either soldiers or other support personnel to Ukraine. It is just about opening the debate of what does EU want to do in the near and long future. The US as ally seems to be failing the moment a bunch of retards get hooked on Trumpamine and since that possibility exists, the common defence strategy may have to be fully revamped.




Seriously, facts?? In the first two minute this dude has already classed two newspapers as "part of the regime", then mentions an article that does not say what he says it says and goes to a tweet by a nobody repeating Kremlin propaganda.

do I really need to listen to ultra-biased shit when there is a clear fact that you are trying to ignore? Putin sent his troops and captured Crimea. This was a recognised part of a recognised country. That is the start of a war.

Whatever the CIA did or did not is no different to whatever the Ruzzian "inteligence" services tried and failed to do.

You guys speaking about facts in laughable (dumBAss).


[moderator's note: multiple posts have been merged]

That's not propaganda. They simply destroyed a bunch of them several times.

This is how propaganda works:
https://twitter.com/Xenta777/status/1761724381867257984
As of February 24, 2022: Ukraine had 250 airplanes and helicopters

By February 24, 2024: 839 airplanes and helicopters had been destroyed

About Macron words, I was surprised to hear it from him, you would expect to hear it from maybe Poland, Czechia or Baltics, but not from him. And seems that these ideas didn't got much support.
And I'm getting more and more sceptical about words of politicians about this war. C'mon, they failed to supply promised 1 million 155 mm shells and now they're talking about sending troops from NATO countries.

He is propaganda bot, he's not interested in your videos...or any facts

Thanks, again for proving that you don't have a clue about what is going on. If you had watched the video in my post, you would have seen the proof - not just talk - that it was the US using Ukraine that started the war years before Putin decided to do something about it in 2022. However, I like the idea that you can dream. People should be able to dream. But try looking at reality some time.

Here's the video, again... just to make it easier for you to find - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRqP4XLhqak.

Of course, I am sure you are going to get 10 "kills" a week minimum now until you reach twice the number of Abrams actually sent   Nothing new, bonus in the Ruzzian army are common place and one of the main reasons why kills are miscounted by design.

Anyway, it seems that Macron has spoken out the idea of an increased European involvement with Ukraine. US may retreat, EU does not have that luxury. I guess Macron can speak out loud because France does have a nuclear deterrent.


Is there any country in which CIA is not active? Vanuatu maybe? The war started when Ruzzian troops violated the legitimate borders of a internationally recognised state.

BTW BA, how is that Ruzzian citizenship application going? Go an enjoy freedom.

Edited to add: dumBAss.

More proof that Ukraine (really the CIA) started the war long before Russia invaded.


The CIA's Secret Ten Year War On Russia...From Within Ukraine!

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRqP4XLhqak
The New York Times came out with a bombshell article on Sunday detailing the past ten years of CIA active warfare from within Ukraine against Russia. From building 12 CIA bases within the country, to instructing on sabotage inside Russia to providing targeting intelligence BEFORE the 2022 Russian military operation in Ukraine. And...much of the operation was kept secret from then-President Trump!
...

---

Abrams don't like mud

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/11/30/the-biggest-problem-with-ukraines-m-1-tanks-they-dont-like-staying-dirty/?sh=533f484251f6

You are kind of cluless about ERA? There is no high-tec to it, and the Ruzzians & Co probably had examples from it since the Gulf War. Yes Abrams is a tank and gets killed when hit sufficiently. did anyone expect anything else? What I get from this news is that US did effectively deliver the tanks to the frontlines, they have enough fuel to use them and trained crews.

I wonder how much a Ukrainian could get from the Russians for a sample of the ERA which the Americans wisely removed before sending the tanks to corruption-central?  I'd bet it would be well over $100k unless the Russians have enough samples already which is more than possible.  IIRC it was a matter of weeks before the Russians received a mint HIMARS, with a full load of rockets to boot.  All wrapped nicely in a bow.  That should have been worth at least one villa in Monaco.

Earlier, Russian actor Ivan Okhlobystin announced an additional bonus of 10 million rubles for each damaged Abrams tank. This is a rather large amount (about $110,000), so it would be better for the 30 Abrams remaining in Ukraine not to appear near the line of combat contact in the future - they are a priority target for FPV drone operators.

Looks like one of the M1A1 Abrams made the mistake of getting a little to close to actual combat 'aaaand it's gone!'  Why waste a Lancet when a simple FPV drone will do the job?

I'll make a prediction that the same fate awaits the next in a long string of decades old Voonder Veepons to be sent to Ukraine which will probably be the F-16.

I'll also posit that the Russians breath a sigh of relief when they hear that the Azov zionazis are to be playing opfor since they are developing a pretty strong reputation for running away like little bitches at the first smell of powder.  Back to their natural duty as rear echelon 'barrier troops'.

You are starting to like when I call you dumBAss, that is the only explanation to this shitpost. Anyone who criticises Putin does not "get into trouble", they take a final flight, like Prigozin, are imprisoned and tortured to death like Navalny or get an option of "Krenlim tea or window". Free speech is not "part of any nation", it is a right that needs to be protected - (you still have not read your own country's constitution have you?)

People all over and throughout Russia say all kinds of things to each other, freely. Free speech is part of Russia just as it is part of every nation, and just as people can get themselves into trouble by what they say... in any nation.