Ukraine has begun to reinforce its troops along the front lines of its counteroffensive with new, fresh fighters.

[Mavideol]

could this be one of the reasons Russians fled to Thailand  555

 

White House Confirms Russian Military ‘Actively Executing’ Disobedient Soldiers

https://au.yahoo.com/news/white-house-confirms-russian-military-233616735.html

 

[RayC]

20 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If I were to address that it would be off topic, whataboutism and would just get deleted, so I won't.

And perhaps also because it is a bit close to the truth?

[RayC]

20 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Because you are trying to make me a Russian supporter, when I am not. I am trying to counter the propaganda with a recognition that Russia can not be defeated as it has the ultimate deterrent, and fighting them only results in death and destruction.

When faced with ultimate defeat is it better to die fighting an unwinnable war or give up some territory.

 

The Thai kings that gave up land to France and Britain to avoid invasion certainly thought so.

 

 

 

In amongst the reportage in the Western Press, there is, of course, propaganda but so what? It doesn't alter the underlying fact that Russia used the Euromaiden protests as an excuse to invade Crimea and a process of 'de-nazification' to invade the rest of Ukraine last year. Do you think either justification holds water? I don't.

 

I don't know why you think Russia cannot be defeated? Because of its' nuclear arsenal? If so, the same argument could be used for the US and the other nuclear powers. Mutually assured destruction, etc.

 

Interesting that you consider the comparison between Ukraine in 2023 and the UK in 1940 off-topic, but introduce European colonialism in Siam into the conversation. Imo Chulalongkorn played a bad hand very well. Unfortunately, a more recent example of ceding land in Europe i.e. the Sudetenland didn't have such a happy ending.

[RayC]

21 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Well, it's progress if you accept it's going to be a long war if the US and EU keep pouring the weapons in.

I seem to remember some posters claiming the valiant Ukrainians would soon be at the gates of Moscow, a couple of years ago.

Their much vaunted offensive, with those invincible Leopard tanks that were supposed to have routed the Russians doesn't seem to have achieved much, and winter is here.

 

And you wonder why you get labelled as a Russian supporter?

[RayC]

21 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Even the US congress can't magic up enough bombs, shells and missiles to support 2 wars involving such weapons in large numbers, while keeping enough to attack Iran if they get involved. That is why they have sent 2 carrier groups to the area, isn't it?

 

Maybe not but NATO still has a bigger conventional arsenal than Russia.

[Tug]

9 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

Maybe not but NATO still has a bigger conventional arsenal than Russia.

It’s not a problem for the USA to support both countries the problem is the Republican congress running scared of trump and his acolytes in congress as far as our pal thaibeachlover he certainly seems to absolutely hate the USA and seems to support anything anti democratic.then he gets bent when he’s called on it lol 😆 

[Bkk Brian]

On 10/27/2023 at 6:35 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

Well, it's progress if you accept it's going to be a long war if the US and EU keep pouring the weapons in.

I seem to remember some posters claiming the valiant Ukrainians would soon be at the gates of Moscow, a couple of years ago.

Their much vaunted offensive, with those invincible Leopard tanks that were supposed to have routed the Russians doesn't seem to have achieved much, and winter is here.

I seem to remember some posters claiming the valiant Ukrainians would soon be at the gates of Moscow, a couple of years ago.

 

Link?

[thaibeachlovers]

double post

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, RayC said:

nteresting that you consider the comparison between Ukraine in 2023 and the UK in 1940 off-topic, but introduce European colonialism in Siam into the conversation.

I already said that I considered the question to be baiting. I wasn't asking a question about my example of giving up land in exchange for non invasion.

 

Next.

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, RayC said:

 

Maybe not but NATO still has a bigger conventional arsenal than Russia.

Which is why nuclear weapons will likely be used in a conflict between Russia and NATO.

[Wobblybob]

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Which is why nuclear weapons will likely be used in a conflict between Russia and NATO.

So the answer is to give in to terrorism, appeasing terrorists never ends well they always want more and it is a shame you are unable to figure these things out for yourself, it is not that difficult. 🥴

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, RayC said:

 

And you wonder why you get labelled as a Russian supporter?

I see nothing in that quote to say I'm a Russian supporter.

Anyway, you are under the mistaken assumption that we have to support either Russia or Ukraine, but I support neither. Ukraine is nothing to do with me, and I am commenting on the waste of western money being spent on an IMO hopeless cause, and a proxy war that only results in lots of dead and Ukrainian destruction.

Western countries should be spending taxpayer money on the taxpayers, not making American arms manufacturers rich on the corpses of people that didn't have to die.

 

Next.

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, RayC said:

And perhaps also because it is a bit close to the truth?

I really have no interest in responding to baiting.

 

Next.

[RayC]

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I already said that I considered the question to be baiting. I wasn't asking a question about my example of giving up land in exchange for non invasion.

 

Next.

 

Ok, here's the 'Next'.

 

I explained why the comparison was valid and not baiting.

 

Your inability to explain the obvious contradiction in your position says it all.

[RayC]

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Which is why nuclear weapons will likely be used in a conflict between Russia and NATO.

 

So the 'undefeatable' Russia maintains its' record by ensuring the end of life on Earth? Great!

[RayC]

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I see nothing in that quote to say I'm a Russian supporter.

Anyway, you are under the mistaken assumption that we have to support either Russia or Ukraine, but I support neither. Ukraine is nothing to do with me, and I am commenting on the waste of western money being spent on an IMO hopeless cause, and a proxy war that only results in lots of dead and Ukrainian destruction.

Western countries should be spending taxpayer money on the taxpayers, not making American arms manufacturers rich on the corpses of people that didn't have to die.

 

Next.

 

But there is plenty in your posts as a collective to support the view that you are an apologist for Russia's actions in Ukraine.

 

By your rationale, the governance of Ukraine has nothing to do with anyone apart from the Ukrainians. Fine. If only Putin would agree with your view.

 

Much as it irks you to acknowledge the parallels with '30s Europe, they exist: The dangers of the liberal democracies of Europe (and the US) passively accepting aggressive land-grabs by totalitarian states such as Putin's Russia are clearly obvious.

 

Why anyone would seek to defend such aggressors is beyond me and you have been completely unable to offer any justification.

 

Next.

[RayC]

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I really have no interest in responding to baiting.

 

Next.

 

Methinks you doth protest too much.

[thaibeachlovers]

12 hours ago, RayC said:

 

But there is plenty in your posts as a collective to support the view that you are an apologist for Russia's actions in Ukraine.

 

By your rationale, the governance of Ukraine has nothing to do with anyone apart from the Ukrainians. Fine. If only Putin would agree with your view.

 

Much as it irks you to acknowledge the parallels with '30s Europe, they exist: The dangers of the liberal democracies of Europe (and the US) passively accepting aggressive land-grabs by totalitarian states such as Putin's Russia are clearly obvious.

 

Why anyone would seek to defend such aggressors is beyond me and you have been completely unable to offer any justification.

 

Next.

You should stop beating a dead horse. The topic isn't me, so perhaps you could confine your post content to the OP, instead of trying to bait me into something I didn't intend to say.

 

In future I will not respond to any personal attack by you, though as you have some valid comments when you discuss the topic I shall respond to them, rather than just putting you on ignore.

[thaibeachlovers]

12 hours ago, RayC said:

 

So the 'undefeatable' Russia maintains its' record by ensuring the end of life on Earth? Great!

That's how it works now. Don't like it, become a politician and change it.

[Mavideol]

good news keep coming as more Orcs are getting killed......Putin friend should be banned from EU funds that would shut his Russia propaganda

 

Russian soldier says 8 Ukrainian fighters fended off hundreds of enemy troops from their fortified position, per leaked audio

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russian-soldier-says-8-ukrainian-085119346.html

Russia suffers 'significant losses', Orban says Ukraine 'can't win', Belarus calls for peace talks

https://au.yahoo.com/news/war-ukraine-russia-suffering-significant-082057410.html

 

[stevenl]

I find that Belarus peace talks request a significant development.

[RayC]

13 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You should stop beating a dead horse. The topic isn't me, so perhaps you could confine your post content to the OP, instead of trying to bait me into something I didn't intend to say.

 

In future I will not respond to any personal attack by you, though as you have some valid comments when you discuss the topic I shall respond to them, rather than just putting you on ignore.

 

So long as you post comments which I disagree with l will post what I consider to be valid responses: As others have said, it's a public forum so you should expect to be challenged about your posts 

 

I am not trying to bait you into saying something unintentional, I am pointing out what I consider to be flaws in your rationale. You clearly do not wish to address my challenges to your argument directly which is obviously your choice.

[RayC]

13 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

That's how it works now. Don't like it, become a politician and change it.

 

Perhaps you should act your own advice in that case.

[thaibeachlovers]

11 hours ago, RayC said:

 

So long as you post comments which I disagree with l will post what I consider to be valid responses: As others have said, it's a public forum so you should expect to be challenged about your posts 

 

I am not trying to bait you into saying something unintentional, I am pointing out what I consider to be flaws in your rationale. You clearly do not wish to address my challenges to your argument directly which is obviously your choice.

You are welcome to dispute anything I say on here but making it personal is not appropriate on a public forum. No one else has any interest in that, and I find it boring. Attacking me personally isn't going to change my mind.

eg

On 10/28/2023 at 8:47 PM, RayC said:

Methinks you doth protest too much.

So, by all means disagree with what I said without making it personal, but continued personal comments will only result in one more addition to my ignore list, and in your case I am reluctant to do so, as you actually have some interesting things to say.

[thaibeachlovers]

11 hours ago, RayC said:

 

Perhaps you should act your own advice in that case.

I am somewhat passed the age at which that would be possible.

 

[RayC]

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You are welcome to dispute anything I say on here but making it personal is not appropriate on a public forum. No one else has any interest in that, and I find it boring. Attacking me personally isn't going to change my mind.

eg

So, by all means disagree with what I said without making it personal, but continued personal comments will only result in one more addition to my ignore list, and in your case I am reluctant to do so, as you actually have some interesting things to say.

 

My replies to you are, by definition, personal. 

 

I do not intend to offend you but, on the 'Ukraine issue', I disagree with your comments vehemently. I have been direct in stating my disagreement but I do not believe that I have been offensive towards you personally.

[RayC]

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I am somewhat passed the age at which that would be possible.

 

 

Well, at least we are similar in that regard

[Mavideol]

and the Monday updated good news  555

 

Major Russian losses in recent offensive around Avdiivka likely to be among the worst of 2023, UK intel says

https://www.yahoo.com/news/major-russian-losses-recent-offensive-164706554.html

 

Russia's heavy losses of at least 109 armored vehicles in a recent battle will hurt future offensives: ISW

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russias-heavy-losses-least-109-202913760.html

 

[Seppius]

We don't know for sure if Putin is dead, has he been seen recently?

[thaibeachlovers]

Not looking good for Ukraine. As I have been saying for a while.

 

https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-aid-congress-money-russia-e8cf1bf75fc67a6126aee8b15b0a16d4

The lack of progress by Ukraine to push Russian forces back has created an opening for some members in Congress to question why the U.S. should keep sending money. A hard-right flank of Republicans, led by former President Donald Trump, the Republican front-runner in the 2024 race for the White House, is increasingly opposed to sending more money overseas. That faction was pivotal in getting Ukraine funding stripped from the last-minute 45-day funding bill that prevented a shutdown.

 

 

https://time.com/6319238/government-funding-bill-ukraine-aid-dropped/

Voting in the House this past week pointed to the potential trouble ahead. Nearly half of House Republicans voted to strip $300 million from a defense spending bill to train Ukrainian soldiers and purchase weapons. The money later was approved separately, but opponents of Ukraine support celebrated their growing numbers.