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

[jvs]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If he was bigger and stronger than me and was going to destroy me- yes I would

That is very honest of you,thanks.

Luckily the people in the Ukraine would rather die then give up their land.

They would never understand your statement and frame of mind,i can not either.

That is why NATO is important,together countries can make a fist against

people like Putin.

In you case the neighborhood bully would not stop at taking a small part

of your garden,he would demand more until someone would stop him.

He would also try and take other gardens close to him but a strong united

neighborhood unity would stop him .

[LosLobo]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

History, especially that of Barbarossa, tells us that Russia will win, short of a new leader ( Gorbachev ended the Afghanistan war- they didn't actually lose IMO )

 

As far as escalation goes, IMO no sane person wants to escalate a war with a nuclear armed state.

History tells us that Hitler's Barbarossa is more liken to Putin's Special Operation where Russia failed to take Ukraine, in particular Kyiv.

 

This was due to same weather, logistical conditions, resolve of the defenders and arms support from the US, that occurred in Hitler's planned attempt of genocide and ethic cleansing in Russia.

Yet, with escalation of war, Putin et al are doing exactly that with the nuclear armed West.

 

Gorbachev didn't actually win the Afghanistan war either.

Have ever considered directing some of your narrative against the perpetrators of this crime against humanity?

 

Edited January 19, 2023 by LosLobo

[Bkk Brian]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I think you are wrong about this,giving in to Putin would have only made

him stronger in his believe Russia is invincible and it would even encourage him more to try to "reestablish the old USSR" like he said he wanted to do.

I've seen that often, but no one actually knows, do they?

Anyway, he wouldn't invade a NATO country and why would most of us care about some country in Eastern Europe if not in NATO?

 

I strongly believe that now he realizes he has made a very big mistake but being the man he is he will never admit that because it will show weakness and that in itself would be very dangerous to him.

IMO it's gone too far to back down now, and if he did it's over for him, literally.

 

You think support to the Ukraine will dwindle,i think it will not.

I disagree. IMO it's already dwindling in the US as their problems mount. Wait to see if the GOP is prepared to spend the money on missiles instead of on Americans. Don't forget the US debt problem

 

The USA is getting rid of an age old enemy for a relatively cheap price,there is a lot more to that but that is for another discussion.

LOL. Russia isn't going away, whatever happens in Ukraine

 

You are saying it is not your war,it is a war against pure evil and the Ukraine is fighting for all the right reasons.

All war is evil, but humans still do it, and probably always will.

 

Honest question,if you had a neighbor who wanted a piece of your garden for whatever made up reason,would you give it to him to keep the peace?

If he was bigger and stronger than me and was going to destroy me- yes I would

 

 

From someone a little higher up than us in an official capacity. Words which should be in every ones thoughts for the sake of Ukrainians and their beloved country. If there is any room for human rights in your soul then support for Ukraine is the only solution.

 

Just released:

 

"President of the European Council Charles Michel: Ukrainians are fighting for their land, for the future of their children. But they are also fighting for our common European values of peace and prosperity. They need and deserve our support."

 

https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1616216559466291201

 

[steven100]

Now this is more like it   !!     NATO & the west need to remove Putin and his two mouthpieces ... Medov & foreign affairs guy.

 

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/german-company-ready-ukraine-more-153000437.html

 

Edited January 20, 2023 by steven100

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

if you don’t have a realistic idea of how to end this war in another way, that doesn’t do much good, does it? 
So what would be your solution to end this war, without giving in to Russia? Honest question. 

 

Honest answer:-

Going back to before the invasion, negotiations with some loss of land to Russia might have saved all this death and destruction. That was my solution, but I have none to solve this situation. IMO this war will end when foreign countries end the arms supplies that keeps it going, and IMO that will happen this year as inflation and other economic hardship turns populations against spending billions to support Ukraine.

History, especially that of Barbarossa, tells us that Russia will win, short of a new leader ( Gorbachev ended the Afghanistan war- they didn't actually lose IMO )

 

As far as escalation goes, IMO no sane person wants to escalate a war with a nuclear armed state.

"Going back to before the invasion, negotiations with some loss of land to Russia might have saved all this death and destruction."

 

It's more likely it would have lead to a more aggressive Russia and more land grabs.  It was insufficient push-back after Russia grabbed parts of Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine that led Putin to believe he could keep slicing off pieces of neighboring countries with little consequence.

 

"Gorbachev ended the Afghanistan war- they didn't actually lose IMO"

 

And in the opinion of many making the cost of the war in Ukraine unacceptable to the people of Russia will lead to Russia's leader, maybe Putin's replacement, ending the war.

[LosLobo]

41 minutes ago, heybruce said:

"Going back to before the invasion, negotiations with some loss of land to Russia might have saved all this death and destruction."

 

It's more likely it would have lead to a more aggressive Russia and more land grabs.  It was insufficient push-back after Russia grabbed parts of Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine that led Putin to believe he could keep slicing off pieces of neighboring countries with little consequence.

 

"Gorbachev ended the Afghanistan war- they didn't actually lose IMO"

 

And in the opinion of many making the cost of the war in Ukraine unacceptable to the people of Russia will lead to Russia's leader, maybe Putin's replacement, ending the war.

Gorbachev made this particularly poignant statement when Russia withdrew from Afghanistan in 1988.

 

"The question of the withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan was a reflection of our current political thinking, of our new, modern view of the world. We wanted thereby to reaffirm our commitment to the traditions of good-neighbourliness, good will and mutual respect". 

 

"Any armed conflict, including an internal one, can poison the atmosphere in an entire region and create a situation of anxiety and alarm for a country’s neighbours, to say nothing of the suffering and losses among its own people. That is why we are against any armed conflicts. We know that the Afghan leadership, too, takes the same attitude".

 

Gorbachev Statement on Afghanistan – Seventeen Moments in Soviet History (msu.edu)

 

I cannot see Putin doing this with Ukraine.

 

We can only hope a future Russian President will one day continue with Gorbachev's visionary changes to Russia's history of war and territorial land grabs.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, kwonitoy said:

Donbas was also illegibly occupied, so that's some loss of Ukraine land and that didn't appease the invaders

Wasn't Ukraine attacking Donbas before the invasion? That's hardly accepting the situation, and wasn't it separatists ( ie not "occupiers" ) and not Russian military in there?

 

I don't believe the Russians invaded to take over Donbas, otherwise they could have just invaded that area and not the rest.

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, jvs said:

That is very honest of you,thanks.

Luckily the people in the Ukraine would rather die then give up their land.

They would never understand your statement and frame of mind,i can not either.

That is why NATO is important,together countries can make a fist against

people like Putin.

In you case the neighborhood bully would not stop at taking a small part

of your garden,he would demand more until someone would stop him.

He would also try and take other gardens close to him but a strong united

neighborhood unity would stop him .

Sadly, the people of Ukraine are dying, and will continue to do so till a negotiated end is arranged.

[NextG]

2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Wasn't Ukraine attacking Donbas before the invasion? That's hardly accepting the situation, and wasn't it separatists ( ie not "occupiers" ) and not Russian military in there?

 

I don't believe the Russians invaded to take over Donbas, otherwise they could have just invaded that area and not the rest.

I think you know there were Russians under contract fighting there since 2014, just as in the ‘special military operation’. Of course they just denied their presence there. ‘Separatists’ is just a catch all phrase. 

[jvs]

11 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Wasn't Ukraine attacking Donbas before the invasion? That's hardly accepting the situation, and wasn't it separatists ( ie not "occupiers" ) and not Russian military in there?

 

I don't believe the Russians invaded to take over Donbas, otherwise they could have just invaded that area and not the rest.

Why do you think the Russians invaded the Ukraine?

The Ukraine was not attacking Donbas,it was part of the Ukraine.

Maybe you should do some reading and not just accept the Russian propaganda.

There are always two sides to a story and then there is what really happened.

[Rimmer]

Off topic post trying to hijack the topic about what happened in 2014 has been removed

 

Topic title is:

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

 

 

 

[LosLobo]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Wasn't Ukraine attacking Donbas before the invasion? That's hardly accepting the situation, and wasn't it separatists ( ie not "occupiers" ) and not Russian military in there?

 

I don't believe the Russians invaded to take over Donbas, otherwise they could have just invaded that area and not the rest.

No! Russians dressed as "little green men" invaded the Donbas in 2014!

 

"Little green men" were masked soldiers of the Russian Federation in unmarked green army uniforms and carrying modern Russian military weapons and equipment, who appeared during the Russo-Ukrainian War in 2014".

 

 No! "The Kremlin denied their official involvement or presence of their troops in the region, and they wore unmarked uniforms or disguised themselves as pro-Russian separatists".

 

Little green men (Russo-Ukrainian War) - Wikipedia

 

I agree with @jvs!

 

You do should do some reading and not just accept the Russian propaganda!

Edited January 20, 2023 by LosLobo

[bannork]

We don't need no Russian gas.

We don't need no Russian oil 

All in all, Putin, bang your head against the wall.

 

[Bkk Brian]

9 minutes ago, bannork said:

We don't need no Russian gas.

We don't need no Russian oil 

All in all, Putin, bang your head against the wall.

 

Putin: You have to pay for gas in Rubles. Europe...........naaaa no more blood money for you 

[jvs]

6 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Putin: You have to pay for gas in Rubles. Europe...........naaaa no more blood money for you 

And even worse for Putin,they have to burn the gas now because it is a by product of producing oil and they have no way to store it.

Actually a terrible waste but so be it.

So he is burning money in able to make money,i am sure his soldiers would like some gas in the trenches so they can warm them selves.

Well,let them feel a different kind of heat i say.

[steven100]

I'm not sure why the US or EU don't take Putin and his puppets out...

very strange  ?

do they just want to prolonge death and misery because that's exactly what they are allowing.

 

Please explain there thinking ...

[Tug]

9 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sadly, the people of Ukraine are dying, and will continue to do so till a negotiated end is arranged.

Putin used the same excuse that hitler used to protect the German speaking people insert (Russian speaking people) Europe and the world aren’t going to make the same mistake that chamberlain made (the infamous clip of him waving the paper and saying peace in our time) they called Putin immediately on his game imo the correct thing to do russia needs to be defeated humiliated and Putin disposed perhaps with luck he can pay a visit to that special room in the Lubyanka prison basement we democracy’s must continue to support Ukraine in her just and heroic fight for freedom and the right to exist slava Ukraine!!!

[jvs]

9 minutes ago, steven100 said:

I'm not sure why the US or EU don't take Putin and his puppets out...

very strange  ?

do they just want to prolonge death and misery because that's exactly what they are allowing.

 

Please explain there thinking ...

Thinking about this for awhile also and i have come up with an answer.

If ,just if,say the CIA had a way to kill Putin then Putin could be made into

a marter and that way there would be room for an even more evil person to stand up and call for revenge.

Propaganda would do the rest and the war would go on with maybe many russians calling it justified.

On the other hand,if the economy keeps going down an internal uprising in Russia could totally change politics over there.

It is always better if the changes comes from within i think.

Many younger Russians are against this war but so far too afraid to do much about it.

Younger people are saying protests do not work over there because they

will get beat down.

I hope the time will come that that pot boils over.

When that happens it will be the end of russia as we know it.

This is just me  thinking and i could be wrong.

[jvs]

Let's hope operation Ramstein comes up with some solid

results.

More and more countries want to send heavy tanks,they are needed!

Don't try to tell me it costs too much,all the weapon factories will be

doing over time in order to keep up what is being used.

In the end it will be very good for economies,also for the USA.

[steven100]

9 hours ago, jvs said:

Let's hope operation Ramstein comes up with some solid

results.

More and more countries want to send heavy tanks,they are needed!

Don't try to tell me it costs too much,all the weapon factories will be

doing over time in order to keep up what is being used.

In the end it will be very good for economies,also for the USA.

exactly,   the military aid packages can continue into 100's of billions of dollars because what you said is absolutely correct,  it will create thousands upon thousands of jobs right down the chain world wide for the next 20 yrs or whatever with supplies of every discription.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 20, 2023 by steven100

[tgw]

10 hours ago, jvs said:

Let's hope operation Ramstein comes up with some solid

results.

More and more countries want to send heavy tanks,they are needed!

Don't try to tell me it costs too much,all the weapon factories will be

doing over time in order to keep up what is being used.

In the end it will be very good for economies,also for the USA.

you are very correct and I do hope that the economic restructuring doesn't stop there.

our side has to ensure intra-bloc autonomy for a number of things, such as critical industries and technologies, energy, food production, etc.

security, immigration, counter-terrorism, counter-intelligence and intelligence services also need to be beefed up massively, especially with the perspective of a showdown with China.

production capacities for tanks, armored vehicles and especially ammunition are too weak.

 

in 1995, the USA had only approx. 400.000 155mm shells in storage (which is ridiculously low) against a requirement of 800.000, which is also quite low.

to put things in perspective, if the US were involved in a full scale war, they would probably fire between 50.000 and 100.000 shells per day, and I think we should have more in reserve than we need for 3 months of conflict AND have a good plan of how production can be rapidly ramped up, including securing the necessary strategic resources and extraction capacities to make the shells.

this problem is present in all branches of military.

 

a number of weapon use doctrines need also to be re-thought, so that our side are able to mobilize enough conventional forces against adversaries using large scale conventional forces and troop mass effects.

 

cheap weapons are needed, so the 4-million a piece patriot missiles don't get used on 25.000 USD Iranian drones.

 

cheap, very highly effective weapons are needed.

 

and, maybe, alliances such as NATO should be able to overrule the export restrictions of one of its members.

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, tgw said:

you are very correct and I do hope that the economic restructuring doesn't stop there.

our side has to ensure intra-bloc autonomy for a number of things, such as critical industries and technologies, energy, food production, etc.

security, immigration, counter-terrorism, counter-intelligence and intelligence services also need to be beefed up massively, especially with the perspective of a showdown with China.

production capacities for tanks, armored vehicles and especially ammunition are too weak.

 

in 1995, the USA had only approx. 400.000 155mm shells in storage (which is ridiculously low) against a requirement of 800.000, which is also quite low.

to put things in perspective, if the US were involved in a full scale war, they would probably fire between 50.000 and 100.000 shells per day, and I think we should have more in reserve than we need for 3 months of conflict AND have a good plan of how production can be rapidly ramped up, including securing the necessary strategic resources and extraction capacities to make the shells.

this problem is present in all branches of military.

 

a number of weapon use doctrines need also to be re-thought, so that our side are able to mobilize enough conventional forces against adversaries using large scale conventional forces and troop mass effects.

 

cheap weapons are needed, so the 4-million a piece patriot missiles don't get used on 25.000 USD Iranian drones.

 

cheap, very highly effective weapons are needed.

 

and, maybe, alliances such as NATO should be able to overrule the export restrictions of one of its members.

Elected officials like to tell voters how they controlled spending while buying exciting big-ticket items like aircraft carriers, new generations of aircraft, etc.  The easiest way to do that is to cut the budget for the boring essentials; munitions, maintenance, training, etc.  Unfortunately I don't see that changing until voters get smarter.

[GroveHillWanderer]

On 1/20/2023 at 4:01 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

Honest answer:-

Going back to before the invasion, negotiations with some loss of land to Russia might have saved all this death and destruction.

Ever heard the phrase, "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it"?

 

Because what you're suggesting is exactly what Neville Chamberlain thought when he negotiated the settlement that ceded the Sudetenland to Germany in 1938.

 

Remind us again - how did that work out for him?

[bannork]

[rudi49jr]

On 1/19/2023 at 10:01 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

if you don’t have a realistic idea of how to end this war in another way, that doesn’t do much good, does it? 
So what would be your solution to end this war, without giving in to Russia? Honest question. 

 

Honest answer:-

Going back to before the invasion, negotiations with some loss of land to Russia might have saved all this death and destruction. That was my solution, but I have none to solve this situation. IMO this war will end when foreign countries end the arms supplies that keeps it going, and IMO that will happen this year as inflation and other economic hardship turns populations against spending billions to support Ukraine.

History, especially that of Barbarossa, tells us that Russia will win, short of a new leader ( Gorbachev ended the Afghanistan war- they didn't actually lose IMO )

 

As far as escalation goes, IMO no sane person wants to escalate a war with a nuclear armed state.

 

 

 

I guess we’re going to have to agree to disagree. History has shown over and over again that negotiating with or giving in to bullies is not a good idea and usually leads to (much) more bloodshed. Even more so because Putin and his clique have been very outspoken about their eventual goal: to restore Russia to what it was in the days of the USSR. So giving them a part of Ukraine would have only reinforced them in their belief that they were on the right track to achieve that goal. The only way to stop Russia is to defeat them. 

[Rimmer]

Unattributed off topic post and a reply harping back to 2014 removed

 

 

 

 

 

[balo]

In Norway we have Leopard II tanks ready to send to Ukraine, but believe it or not, we are not allowed by Germany.   Our government can't react until Germany says yes.  

[Hummin]

1 minute ago, balo said:

In Norway we have Leopard II tanks ready to send to Ukraine, but believe it or not, we are not allowed by Germany.   Our government can't react until Germany says yes.  

I have not seen it as an option yet? 

 

If Germany says no, It is understandable from one point of view, if the russians get their hands on one and investigate the technology, but Im sure they already got the blueprints anyway, so ? What is the hatch? Do not want to provoke Putin more than necessary?

[balo]

4 minutes ago, Hummin said:

I have not seen it as an option yet? 

 

If Germany says no, It is understandable from one point of view, if the russians get their hands on one and investigate the technology, but Im sure they already got the blueprints anyway, so ? What is the hatch? Do not want to provoke Putin more than necessary?

This article could explain it 

 

"The re-export of Leopards requires German government approval, so other countries with such tanks could not send them to Ukraine without it."

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/west-mulls-sending-german-leopard-2-tanks-ukraine-2023-01-13/

Edited January 21, 2023 by balo

[bannork]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/putins-henchmen-threaten-tens-of-thousands-of-dead-us-troops?ref=scroll