Devastation in Sumy: Dozens Killed as Russian Missiles Strike City Center

[NativeBob]

40 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

all the 'enemies of the west' attack civilians, hospitals, churches, schools

didn't you forget another horrible act of <whatever they called it> supplying ED-stimulants to RU soldiers by their superiors for the purpose of mass rapes? Women, young children and elders regardless of gender? Even that fat woman from UN made such a bald statement about those crimes (somebody told her she forgot who and where).

[frank83628]

2 hours ago, bannork said:

Yet his popularity keeps increasing in Ukraine.

Who, zelensky ? Haha, yeah right, of course it does

 

[Digitalbanana]

14 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

Who, zelensky ? Haha, yeah right, of course it does

 

Based on what? Your own biased viewpoint? 

As of April 14, 2025, Volodymyr Zelenskyy remains relatively popular in Ukraine, with recent polls indicating a trust or approval rating around 57% to 67%, depending on the survey and the time frame. Several reputable polls, such as those from the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) and Ipsos, show that his support has stabilized or even slightly increased in early 2025, particularly after international challenges like his meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump. For example, a KIIS poll in March 2025 reported 67% trust, up from 57% in February, while an Ipsos poll for The Economist in March found over 70% approval. However, his popularity has declined from the peak of around 90% during the early stages of the Russia-Ukraine war in 2022, due to war fatigue, corruption concerns, and other challenges.

These polls suggest Zelenskyy is still the most popular politician in Ukraine, though he faces potential competition from figures like Valerii Zaluzhnyi, the former military chief, who polls show could be a strong contender if elections were held. Elections are currently prohibited under martial law, which has been extended until at least May 9, 2025, so no official voting has taken place since 2019. The data comes from credible Ukrainian and international polling organizations, though some skepticism exists about poll accuracy due to the ongoing war and displacement of voters. Posts on X show mixed opinions, with some claiming lower support, but these are not backed by verifiable data and often reflect bias rather than fact.

[NoDisplayName]

8 hours ago, frank83628 said:

Western propaganda at its finest...  i wonder when Putin will gas hisbown people

 

Well, he did blow up Nordstream, so there's that.

[bannork]

In an interview with CBS News,  Zelensky urged Trump to visit Ukraine to witness the devastation first hand caused by the Russian invasion. The President of Ukraine stressed the importance of taking a firm stance against Russian aggression.

 Zelensky expressed gratitude for the American financial aid, which totalled $175 (£133) billion, with most of it allocated for arms production.

In a Russian missile attack on Sumy, 34 people were killed, including two children. Over 117 people were injured, among them 15 children. 

Zelensky invites Trump to war-torn Ukraine for firsthand view

 

[frank83628]

3 hours ago, Digitalbanana said:

Based on what? Your own biased viewpoint? 

As of April 14, 2025, Volodymyr Zelenskyy remains relatively popular in Ukraine, with recent polls indicating a trust or approval rating around 57% to 67%, depending on the survey and the time frame. Several reputable polls, such as those from the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) and Ipsos, show that his support has stabilized or even slightly increased in early 2025, particularly after international challenges like his meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump. For example, a KIIS poll in March 2025 reported 67% trust, up from 57% in February, while an Ipsos poll for The Economist in March found over 70% approval. However, his popularity has declined from the peak of around 90% during the early stages of the Russia-Ukraine war in 2022, due to war fatigue, corruption concerns, and other challenges.

These polls suggest Zelenskyy is still the most popular politician in Ukraine, though he faces potential competition from figures like Valerii Zaluzhnyi, the former military chief, who polls show could be a strong contender if elections were held. Elections are currently prohibited under martial law, which has been extended until at least May 9, 2025, so no official voting has taken place since 2019. The data comes from credible Ukrainian and international polling organizations, though some skepticism exists about poll accuracy due to the ongoing war and displacement of voters. Posts on X show mixed opinions, with some claiming lower support, but these are not backed by verifiable data and often reflect bias rather than fact.

He has banned whatbis claimed as 'pro russian' parties, bit like France and Romania banning the opposition.... but democracy!!

 

[Digitalbanana]

13 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

He has banned whatbis claimed as 'pro russian' parties, bit like France and Romania banning the opposition.... but democracy!!

One would need to be a bit dim not to notice the country is under martial law since Russia invaded it in Feb-2022. Therefore political parties esp pro Russian will be taking a back seat for the foreseeable until Russia stops the illegal aggression and exits.

[beautifulthailand99]

5 hours ago, steven100 said:

it's such a shame Ukraine got rid of their nuclear weapons when promised security guarantees by the US and Russia which were a complete lie. 

 

They could have flattened Moscow completely by now had they kept them.  

Are you mad or do you genuinely beleive that ? The world and their dog would come down on Ukarine like a ton of bricks in that scenario if they ever had that ability. The whole point of both sides having nuclear weapons is you get to nuclear stalemate so neither side will use them. That and the huge costs of developing and maintaining them which would have diverted resources from more conventional arnaments.

[rice555]

8 hours ago, steven100 said:

it's such a shame Ukraine got rid of their nuclear weapons when promised security guarantees by the US and Russia which were a complete lie. 

 

They could have flattened Moscow completely by now had they kept them.  

Ukraine never had any, Russia had them in Ukraine.

Just like the US has nukes Turkey, Turkey has no nukes.

[gargamon]

18 minutes ago, rice555 said:

Ukraine never had any, Russia had them in Ukraine.

Just like the US has nukes Turkey, Turkey has no nukes.

Wrong. When the USSR collapsed the nukes remained in the countries they were in.

 

Three decades ago, the newly independent country of Ukraine was briefly the third-largest nuclear power in the world.

Thousands of nuclear arms had been left on Ukrainian soil by Moscow after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. But in the years that followed, Ukraine made the decision to completely denuclearize.

In exchange, the U.S., the U.K. and Russia would guarantee Ukraine's security in a 1994 agreement known as the Budapest Memorandum.

 

https://www.npr.org/2022/02/21/1082124528/ukraine-russia-putin-invasion

[bokningar]

Russian trolls seams to have taken over here.

Very sad.

[rice555]

Willy OAM u-tube for 4 14 25 went over the attack, and if I understood

him correctly, there's standing orders from Kiev  that WERE in place that

there were NOT to be any large military gatherings anywhere!

It was real smart to have an event in a civilian populated area that close

to the front.

[rice555]

12 minutes ago, gargamon said:

Wrong. When the USSR collapsed the nukes remained in the countries they were in.

 

Three decades ago, the newly independent country of Ukraine was briefly the third-largest nuclear power in the world.

Thousands of nuclear arms had been left on Ukrainian soil by Moscow after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. But in the years that followed, Ukraine made the decision to completely denuclearize.

In exchange, the U.S., the U.K. and Russia would guarantee Ukraine's security in a 1994 agreement known as the Budapest Memorandum.

 

https://www.npr.org/2022/02/21/1082124528/ukraine-russia-putin-invasion

Does it also say that Ukraine had the launch codes?

[beautifulthailand99]

12 minutes ago, rice555 said:

Willy OAM u-tube for 4 14 25 went over the attack, and if I understood

him correctly, there's standing orders from Kiev  that WERE in place that

there were NOT to be any large military gatherings anywhere!

It was real smart to have an event in a civilian populated area that close

to the front.

I totally trust WillyOAM on his takes. Will go and have a look now. All attacks on civilian places are horrific wherever they happen in the world. No ifs no buts. We are entering an age of barbarism where the international rules based order no longer holds. The ICC for all intents and purposes is dead.

[beautifulthailand99]

50 minutes ago, rice555 said:

Ukraine never had any, Russia had them in Ukraine.

Just like the US has nukes Turkey, Turkey has no nukes.

Actually the USSR. The west was desperate to de nuclearise where they could because of the threats of nuclear material getting into the hands of terrorists , and rightly so.

[beautifulthailand99]

 

[steven100]

9 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Are you mad or do you genuinely beleive that ? The world and their dog would come down on Ukarine like a ton of bricks in that scenario if they ever had that ability. The whole point of both sides having nuclear weapons is you get to nuclear stalemate so neither side will use them. That and the huge costs of developing and maintaining them which would have diverted resources from more conventional arnaments.

Well, while you may be partly correct ....   may I remind you with these harrowing pics of death & destruction by Russian missiles on ordinary civilians. 

 

I doubt he world would comedown on Ukraine like a ton of bricks as you assume, as they would know why Zelensky would nuke Moscow after what it has and is suffering from Russia's illegal invasion. 

 

Why wouldn't one nuke Moscow,  Ukraine has nothing to lose ....it's being destroyed, and thousands upon thousands murdered.  Ukraine didn't start a war with Russia ....   RUSSIA INVADED ANOTHER COUNTRY.   If I was in Zelensky's position,  one wouldn't hesitate to wipe Moscow off the face of the earth.    imo

[frank83628]

6 hours ago, gargamon said:

Wrong. When the USSR collapsed the nukes remained in the countries they were in.

 

Three decades ago, the newly independent country of Ukraine was briefly the third-largest nuclear power in the world.

Thousands of nuclear arms had been left on Ukrainian soil by Moscow after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. But in the years that followed, Ukraine made the decision to completely denuclearize.

In exchange, the U.S., the U.K. and Russia would guarantee Ukraine's security in a 1994 agreement known as the Budapest Memorandum.

 

https://www.npr.org/2022/02/21/1082124528/ukraine-russia-putin-invasion

They had security from Russia, but the US started meddling in domestic affairs.

[frank83628]

25 minutes ago, steven100 said:

Well, while you may be partly correct ....   may I remind you with these harrowing pics of death & destruction by Russian missiles on ordinary civilians. 

 

I doubt he world would comedown on Ukraine like a ton of bricks as you assume, as they would know why Zelensky would nuke Moscow after what it has and is suffering from Russia's illegal invasion. 

 

Why wouldn't one nuke Moscow,  Ukraine has nothing to lose ....it's being destroyed, and thousands upon thousands murdered.  Ukraine didn't start a war with Russia ....   RUSSIA INVADED ANOTHER COUNTRY.   If I was in Zelensky's position,  one wouldn't hesitate to wipe Moscow off the face of the earth.    imo

'harrowing pics of death & destruction' totally used as propaganda.  bad Russia, good israel

From what I'm reading the attack was pre planned and they could have evacuated everyone. 

[frank83628]

6 hours ago, gargamon said:

Wrong. When the USSR collapsed the nukes remained in the countries they were in.

 

Three decades ago, the newly independent country of Ukraine was briefly the third-largest nuclear power in the world.

Thousands of nuclear arms had been left on Ukrainian soil by Moscow after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. But in the years that followed, Ukraine made the decision to completely denuclearize.

In exchange, the U.S., the U.K. and Russia would guarantee Ukraine's security in a 1994 agreement known as the Budapest Memorandum.

 

https://www.npr.org/2022/02/21/1082124528/ukraine-russia-putin-invasion

So, as he said, they were Russian nukes, not Ukraines.

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, WorriedNoodle said:

I'd be shocked anyone could be so unhinged as to think this is Zelenskyy's fault. You really must be trapped in some bizarre locked echo chamber of misinformation or Putin has something on you.

Sure sure, Ukraine is going to win, for sure, just needs the Euros to keep spending lots more money to send the Ukrainians more bombs and bullets.

 

How many more Ukrainians need to die so Zelensky can pretend to be a great leader? Despicable.

[thaibeachlovers]

6 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

The ICC for all intents and purposes is dead.

It always was just for naughty people from countries the US didn't like. When it started muttering about people the US support it was doomed.

 

IMO.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

7 hours ago, bokningar said:

Russian trolls seams to have taken over here.

Very sad.

Perhaps the Ukrainian trolls had had it to themselves too long.

[thaibeachlovers]

16 hours ago, steven100 said:

it's such a shame Ukraine got rid of their nuclear weapons when promised security guarantees by the US and Russia which were a complete lie. 

 

They could have flattened Moscow completely by now had they kept them.  

A/ go look at a map of Russia.

 

B/ did you notice it is quite large, and there are not enough nukes on the planet to destroy it all?

 

C/ do you think that Russia keeps all it's nukes in Moscow?

 

If Ukraine nuked Moscow Ukraine would have all it's cities destroyed shortly thereafter.

 

Carry on living in your bubble though. It must be nice in there.

[VBer]

Quote

We’ve lost 13,000 civilians, and as many as 100,000 of our soldiers.

Civilian deaths are 10 times smaller than militant deaths. This clearly shows that the primary target of the Russian army is the Ukrainian army, not civilians, keeping in mind that army personnel are usually more protected and better prepared.

[beautifulthailand99]

5 hours ago, steven100 said:

Well, while you may be partly correct ....   may I remind you with these harrowing pics of death & destruction by Russian missiles on ordinary civilians. 

 

I doubt he world would comedown on Ukraine like a ton of bricks as you assume, as they would know why Zelensky would nuke Moscow after what it has and is suffering from Russia's illegal invasion. 

 

Why wouldn't one nuke Moscow,  Ukraine has nothing to lose ....it's being destroyed, and thousands upon thousands murdered.  Ukraine didn't start a war with Russia ....   RUSSIA INVADED ANOTHER COUNTRY.   If I was in Zelensky's position,  one wouldn't hesitate to wipe Moscow off the face of the earth.    imo

Thanks for answering my question !

[dinsdale]

What this article fails to mention is that the Ukrainian Army was holding a military parade at the time in a civilian populated area. Under the terms of war this was a legitimate military target. I know that this is harsh and dozens were killed but why the hell would you have a military parade through a civilian area in times of war. 

[beautifulthailand99]

President Donald Trump’s special envoy described his talks with Russian leader Vladimir Putin last week as “compelling,” saying they discussed steps that could end the war in Ukraine and perhaps lead to business opportunities.
At the end of a nearly five-hour meeting, the envoy, Steve Witkoff, told Fox News in an interview on Monday, Putin made his request to secure “a permanent peace,” a development Witkoff said “took a while for us to get to.”

 

https://archive.is/78Avr#selection-1497.0-1501.222

[johng]

37 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

but why the hell would you have a military parade through a civilian area in times of war. 

It was in lieu of an election ?

[Flyguy330]

I'm sort of a fan of George Galloway. I've admired his oratory ever since he took on and defeated the US Senate in a hearing on their own territory. His famous 'Two cheeks of the same ar5se' quote was delivered there.

George has a YouTube channel called MOATS (Mother Of All Talkshows) where he gives a daily monologue, and invites various talking heads on to discuss current affairs. He strenuously supports the Palestinian people, and criticizes and condemns Israel for its murderous campaign against them, especially the indiscriminate bombing of women and children and aid workers. I totally agree with him.

 

However, George is also a BIG supporter of Putin and Russia. He constantly claims that the Russian invasion was asked for and brought on by

NATO encroachment and US dirty tricks, and is therefore justified. Including the indiscriminate bombing of women and children and aid workers. This I find hypocritical and intolerable.

 

In his latest video on his MOATS channel he mentions this attack on Sumy, in a very cursory manner, and makes a slanted reference about a 'Ukrainian military parade' in the town that day. This is meant to justify the attack while he swiftly moves on to other issues.

 

I found that video of the actual attack on another website. What I can see is a city street with just a few pedestrians, then the explosions begin. There is no sign or evidence of any military parade at that area. Another poster here gave a link referencing some kind of military ceremony, no video evidence or location shown. Does this justify lobbing guided missiles onto a civilian street?

 

The video goes on to show the aftermath of the attack. There are plenty more videos on the web showing gruesome images of small children who were blown apart by the explosions. George just passed over this, made no reference at all to it.

 

This to me exposes George as a terrible hypocrite. I can't stand hypocrisy.

I can hear George saying 'This was all the result of Ukraines own behaviour', the same excuse we hear the Zionists use to justify their obliteration of Gaza. But George seems blind to the parallels in these two conflicts, and he hypocritically talks up one aggressors logic, while dismissing the same logic from the other. It's sickening and bare faced hypocrisy.

 

There is no justification for raining missiles on children, whether they be Palestinian or Ukrainian, and George Galloway should be ashamed of himself.