Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

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

 

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
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
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
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
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
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. 

Posted
19 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. 

It must be to do with how many civilians are still left in area's.

  • Confused 2
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
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.

Posted

Not on the website yet but on TV, BBC is reporting that Russia has cut electricity to the Chernobyl Power plant according to Ukraine Energy Minister, a very dangerous situation currently 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
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?

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
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
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.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...