Jump to content
Login with your Gmail HERE and start posting in seconds! ×

Assault on Kiev: Russian helicopters swoop above Ukraine's capital

Chris.B

By Chris.B
in The War in Ukraine

 Share

Recommended Posts

ozimoron Star Member

ozimoron

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, tgw said:

wrong:

1- the USA operates more than 1200 F-16 and Poland is okay with used equipment.

2- the Polish MiGs have been upgraded

The MiG-29s also are inferior to more sophisticated Russian aircraft and could be easy prey for Russian pilots and Russian missiles.

 

https://www.arabnews.com/node/2038906/world

 

Some of the new, sensitive technologies installed on the MiGs would likely have to be pulled out before transferring to the Ukrainians.

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/08/poland-transfers-mig-fighters-to-the-us-as-ukraine-asks-for-help-00015259

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 11.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

tgw
tgw

the main story is Russia has been meddling in Ukraine for decades. Ukraine has been the recipient of billions of Euros as investment, loans, development aid and whatnot and is/was evolving into a

tgw
tgw

long story short, less than 2% of voters support the far-right in Ukraine. in all countries there are always a small group of extremists. Ukraine doesn't have a far-right problem. But i

Posted Images

  • Popular Post
tgw Platinum Member

tgw

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
6 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

The MiG-29s also are inferior to more sophisticated Russian aircraft and could be easy prey for Russian pilots and Russian missiles.

 

https://www.arabnews.com/node/2038906/world

 

Some of the new, sensitive technologies installed on the MiGs would likely have to be pulled out before transferring to the Ukrainians.

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/08/poland-transfers-mig-fighters-to-the-us-as-ukraine-asks-for-help-00015259

 

I think the most important argument against the deal is this:

Quote

“the prospect of fighter jets … departing from a U.S./NATO base in Germany to fly into airspace that is contested with Russia over Ukraine raises serious concerns for the entire NATO alliance,” he said.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolcarer Gold Member

coolcarer

Posted
Posted
56 minutes ago, Kwasaki said:

That's the problem here it was not one sided it was stated history of event the likes of the truth.

Do me a favor, that’s a classic Russian apologist post. There’s so many holes that it fail to address, the other factors involved along with speculative bias assumptions that have no basis with reality. It got the response it deserved. I suggest you read it again and if you can’t see that then you have the same problem.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolcarer Gold Member

coolcarer

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, tgw said:

I think the most important argument against the deal is this:

 

Yes, Putin would see it as NATO getting directly involved and that is the only excuse he is waiting for to expand this war into something far worse. I fail to see why Poland cannot just do it from their territory unless they also are pushing NATO to get involved and this is a public way to do it?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
lexor Apprentice Member

lexor

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

If the powers to be wanted UA to get military aircraft they would have them by now. The west is not concerned for UA and probably never will be. Zellenskyy should see the writing on the wall and stop now or many more civilians will die. NATO is doing what they do best, NOTHING. All concerned parties have no desire to admit UA into NATO except UA. It's all talk and bluster from the US about these obstacles to supply military hardware, they are not interested. Heck, two countries (RSA/UAE) refused to take calls from Biden yesterday, probably to beg for oil from them. US has made a mess of Afghanistan and this is beginning to look no different. Their credibility and respect is in the toilet now. Time for UA to cut their loses, get back to the table and try to salvage what remains.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tgw Platinum Member

tgw

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

Yes, Putin would see it as NATO getting directly involved and that is the only excuse he is waiting for to expand this war into something far worse. I fail to see why Poland cannot just do it from their territory unless they also are pushing NATO to get involved and this is a public way to do it?

I think what's needed now is a non-Nato country to participate in the deal to receive Poland's jets and then deliver them to Ukraine.

 

Preferably a country that doesn't feel threatened by Russia or doesn't give a toss.

Malta?

Ireland?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
tgw Platinum Member

tgw

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
6 minutes ago, lexor said:

If the powers to be wanted UA to get military aircraft they would have them by now. The west is not concerned for UA and probably never will be. Zellenskyy should see the writing on the wall and stop now or many more civilians will die. NATO is doing what they do best, NOTHING. All concerned parties have no desire to admit UA into NATO except UA. It's all talk and bluster from the US about these obstacles to supply military hardware, they are not interested. Heck, two countries (RSA/UAE) refused to take calls from Biden yesterday, probably to beg for oil from them. US has made a mess of Afghanistan and this is beginning to look no different. Their credibility and respect is in the toilet now. Time for UA to cut their loses, get back to the table and try to salvage what remains.

and as always in such a case, my sincerest greetings to Olgino !

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Lacessit Star Member

Lacessit

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
2 hours ago, Mr Derek said:

Who has vilified Russia? The west.

Who has threatened Russia? the existence of NATO which should have been disbanded decades ago.

Russian majority in Donbass marginal? If you believe in democracy, any majority is good enough.

Thousands have died in Donbass due to Russia? No. They have died because Ukraine is clinging on unreasonably to these territories. Give them up and the entire problem is solved. Why won't they give them up? I've answered before: mere pride. In the circumstances that is crass and indefensible.

Information about Donbass not being suppressed in the west? Try to find any BBC or Guardian article on the topic in recent years. It is suppressed because it doesn't fit in with their anti-Russian 'create an enemy' agenda.

How can anyone doubt that Russia has been terrorized by western passive aggression, by the expansion of NATO in recent years, by the constant vilification in the media etc for so long?  It would be no wonder if they have been driven deranged.

 

I think that adequately addresses all your points. Let me know if you have anything else.

 

Someone else said that the Russian invasion was evil because it hurts the good, peaceable Ukraininans. That's no argument. It's like saying we could not bomb Germany in WWII because it would hurt the good Germans. Besides, Ukrainians are not angels. I have not heard of any of them demonstrating on the streets against the treatment of the Donbass Russians. Most likely they universally agree with the campaign to neutralise them or rid themselves of them, which, while not actual genocide, is effectively a genocide-wish. Their Nazi Azov Regiment has been actively trying to do neutralise them, but you won't hear about that in the western media.

 

Finally, for someone who accused me of Russian propaganda, I have no connection culturally or geographically with Russia. I am Anglo-Saxon, protestant, and from Yorkshire - the latter means I don't swallow propaganda bs of any kind. Just trying to appeal to the facts here and debunk the near-insanity of the west's position.

 

 

Allow me to do some debunking of my own, and introduce some facts from history.

The Donbas and Luhansk areas of Ukraine were created by the Holodomor of 1932-1933, a man-made famine orchestrated by Stalin, which killed millions of Ukrainians. Those areas were then occupied by Russians who were transferred into the region. The fact Russians have been there for about 90 years does not make their presence any more legitimate in the eyes of Ukrainians.

 

When the Germans invaded the Ukraine in World War II, they were greeted as liberators. Not surprising, given the horrors Stalin had inflicted on them. It then became a convenient propaganda tool to call Ukrainians Nazis, when in fact they very quickly learned the Germans were no better than the Russians. Tell me how it is possible for a so-called Nazi government to be headed by Zelensky, who  is Jewish. Tell me how a country which speaks a different language, and has a different alphabet, can be regarded as Russian.

 

Another fact from history. Putin signed the Budapest agreement in 1994 respecting the sovereignty of Ukraine. The Ukraine agreed to destroy all nuclear weapons on its territory.

Despite the annexation of the Crimea in 2014, Ukraine has stuck to its commitment of non-proliferation.

 

I agree possibly the best outcome would be to allow the Donbas and Luhansk areas to secede. They certainly would not flourish under Putin's aegis, the man is a thief and murderer. However, that would have to be contingent on Russia getting the hell out, and not coming back.

 

Why do you think Poland, Hungary and the Baltic states joined NATO? I'd suggest if Yorkshire had 46 years of Russian dominance and Communist central planning, that county would be falling over itself to get signed up too. Perhaps you do not realize Russia's paranoia about NATO is a self-inflicted wound. NATO would not have expanded so far without the impetus of Russian belligerence.

 

If you want to talk about near-insanity, it is Putin's quite clearly expressed wish to restore the USSR to pre-1991.

 

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lacessit Star Member

Lacessit

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

I'm wondering if those bandying around the "nukes" word would consider it fair and proportional. Maybe Orlando and Houston for St.Petersburg and Moscow? Limited tactical nuking. It might finally bring people to the table. Maybe they accept their black is not 100% black. Their white is not 100% white. Or is the position so absolutely entrenched that they should just empty out the missile silos at once?

 

Of course, it would be in the world's interest if westerners could turn off the tv and think for themselves for 5 minutes. Did Putin just wake up one morning and say "think i'll invade the Ukraine - it'll be fun" because I can assure you this is not how it happened. Complicated history, repeated provocation, incompetent and insincere negotiation, years long hate campaign blaming Putin for a certain pant-suited lady not achieving her divine rights, plus an epic demonstration of military cowardice and stupidity a few months back led by someone the word "feeble" doesn't do justice too. Lots of ingredients. Can they bake something edible?

AFAIK the insincere negotiation was when Putin guaranteed the sovereignty of Ukraine in 1994, then put more nukes into the region after annexing Crimea in 2014.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Walker88 Platinum Member

Walker88

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
7 hours ago, Mr Derek said:

 

No. russia has been supplying arms to ethnic russian in those 2 provinces, and these 'separatists' (aka putin lackeys) have been killing those who don't want to become part of muthaf###### russia.

 

Get your talking points from the Internet Research Agency (GRU)?

 

So by your (ill)logic, it's okay to bomb schools and hospitals, devastate cities, indiscriminately kill civilians, and drive 2 million Ukrainians out of the country?

 

The only good russian invader is a DEAD invader.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
nauseus Diamond Member

nauseus

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

The US is not in a position to replace the MIGs to Poland with F16s because the pilots will need extensive training and the aircraft are not available anyway as the next shipments are going to Taiwan. There is also a fear that Russian aircraft will overwhelm the old MIGs due to being much superior and AA being very effective. So, long story short, this isn't a political issue even tough you'd like to make it one.

Not the issues. The US could easily source the F16s to replace only 23 Polish Migs - the Poles already have F16s. The issue is US concern and worry about more Russian reaction if it is seen that the US is effectively sending the Ukraine more fighters. This might have been done a lot more quietly but far too late now. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kwasaki Star Member

Kwasaki

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, nauseus said:

Not the issues. The US could easily source the F16s to replace only 23 Polish Migs - the Poles already have F16s. The issue is US concern and worry about more Russian reaction if it is seen that the US is effectively sending the Ukraine more fighters. This might have been done a lot more quietly but far too late now. 

So jet fighters arn't consider as arms which they are already supplying Ukraine with, I just don't get it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
nauseus Diamond Member

nauseus

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
9 minutes ago, Kwasaki said:

So jet fighters arn't consider as arms which they are already supplying Ukraine with, I just don't get it. 

Why not read my post again? But slowly this time.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hummin Diamond Member

Hummin

Posted
Posted (edited)

Swedens prime minister says

 

"Towards Andersson's NATO statement: - A serious misjudgment

Sweden's Prime Minister believes NATO membership will destabilize Europe. The opposition believes the statement is "very unfortunate" in the current situation"

 

Not really surprised by this fallback, and a bit disappointed! 

 

 

Norwegian news

https://www.vg.no/nyheter/utenriks/i/wOLag5/ut-mot-anderssons-nato-uttalelse-en-alvorlig-feilvurdering

Edited by Hummin
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kwasaki Star Member

Kwasaki

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Why not read my post again? But slowly this time.

Why what's the difference of NATO sending arms over the border and Ukrainian pilots flying jets over the border. 

Or what wrong with sticking the planes on trucks and delivering them with the trucks that are taking arms over the border.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jvs Ruby Member

jvs

Posted
Posted

I just wonder how the EU is going to handle 20 to 30 million refugees?

They will all want to go the Western Europe and most countries are already full

of refugees.

Where can they go?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jingthing Legendary Member

Jingthing

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, jvs said:

I just wonder how the EU is going to handle 20 to 30 million refugees?

They will all want to go the Western Europe and most countries are already full

of refugees.

Where can they go?

I recently saw a worst case scenario of ten million refugees and one million dead, but still of course very, very bad.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lacessit Star Member

Lacessit

Posted
Posted
Just now, jvs said:

I just wonder how the EU is going to handle 20 to 30 million refugees?

They will all want to go the Western Europe and most countries are already full

of refugees.

Where can they go?

IMO it won't come to that, all the men and women of fighting age will be focused on killing as many Russians as they can. Putin's butcher's bill is already above 10,000 Russian soldiers dead, according to some reports. And with the logistic failures, there are probably even more injured Russians not getting medical aid.

It's wishful thinking, but a single bullet in the back of the head could end all this carnage.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jvs Ruby Member

jvs

Posted
Posted
Just now, Jingthing said:

I recently saw a worst case scenario of ten million refugees and one million dead, but still of course very, very bad.

What you saw is not the worst scenario at all,i believe you are just talking about

the refugees from Ukraine.

No more wheat sales to Africa will have big consequences for the people there also,the stream

of hungry people will all be going to Europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.









×
×
  • Create New...