Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

Wonder if the Ukrainians can try bombing the Russian territory? I guess their resources are better used defending their own land but a direct threat to Russian population might be an interesting hypothetical scenario. Might it slow down the war and get Putin kicked out or maybe escalate it to a level of no coming back.
I can’t see a way that bombing Russian territory, and therefore possibly Russian civilians, would in any way help the Ukrainian cause. Their best plan is to strictly target the Russian military.
 
Wonder if the Ukrainians can try bombing the Russian territory? I guess their resources are better used defending their own land but a direct threat to Russian population might be an interesting hypothetical scenario. Might it slow down the war and get Putin kicked out or maybe escalate it to a level of no coming back.

A Dolittle Raid?
 
Wonder if the Ukrainians can try bombing the Russian territory? I guess their resources are better used defending their own land but a direct threat to Russian population might be an interesting hypothetical scenario. Might it slow down the war and get Putin kicked out or maybe escalate it to a level of no coming back.
I think they hit one airport with Tochka
 
I obviously don't know if this is true or not, but ...

 
Wonder if the Ukrainians can try bombing the Russian territory? I guess their resources are better used defending their own land but a direct threat to Russian population might be an interesting hypothetical scenario. Might it slow down the war and get Putin kicked out or maybe escalate it to a level of no coming back.

Considering that this war began with territory annexed by Russia back in 2014 and considering that Ukrainian air options remain limited (they have no long-range bombers), one big juicy target to strike would be Sevastopol. I think it would be far more sensical for the Ukrainians to identify military targets there, to hit them, and thus cripple the most immediate threat to Ukraine than going for a one-way ticket to hell of a raid upon Moscow. And besides, striking Sevastopol would be a huge psychological blow to the pro-Moscow people over there since they have not been under any threat since being annexed 2014.
 
Considering that this war began with territory annexed by Russia back in 2014 and considering that Ukrainian air options remain limited (they have no long-range bombers), one big juicy target to strike would be Sevastopol. I think it would be far more sensical for the Ukrainians to identify military targets there, to hit them, and thus cripple the most immediate threat to Ukraine than going for a one-way ticket to hell of a raid upon Moscow. And besides, striking Sevastopol would be a huge psychological blow to the pro-Moscow people over there since they have not been under any threat since being annexed 2014.

No it wouldn't, quite the opposite. Much like the Russians striking Ukraine has galvanised the Ukrainians and strengthened their national identity, similarly Ukraine striking at Crimea would simply prove to the people there that Ukraine is indeed an enemy and a threat, like the Kremlin propaganda said all along. It will galvanise them and they will never willingly return to Ukrainian sovereignty afterwards. The surest way for Ukraine to forever lose Crimea, is to treat it like an enemy.
 
Total Bullshit. The leadership vacuum occurred under Trump, who not only wouldn't have helped Ukraine in the slightest, he also would have blamed them and praised Putin.

The US and allies have placed massive sanctions on Russia and are supplying Ukraine with money, weapons, intelligence and humanitarian assistance - and lots of all these. Short of engaging in direct combat with Russian military, and thereby risking a nuclear WWIII, there's not much more they can do.
...ah, you bring up the previous guy straight away then reference WWIII, the classic default. You'll be worrying about creating 'offramps' for the fascist invaders next. Take a look around, lots of Ukrainian voices and others bemoaning US timorousness. What's being done now -assisting the victims to 'fight clean" within parameters designed not to upset the the enemy- is clearly not enough.
 
They're gonna let Russia destroy Ukraine and most of the Eastern Bloc so that Russia can take its place as ruler of slave labour, as the Europeans made India and Africa, and China are struggling to maintain right now.

Wrong thread? Geopolitics and Whataboutism?
 
...ah, you bring up the previous guy straight away then reference WWIII, the classic default. You'll be worrying about creating 'offramps' for the fascist invaders next. Take a look around, lots of Ukrainian voices and others bemoaning US timorousness. What's being done now -assisting the victims to 'fight clean" within parameters designed not to upset the the enemy- is clearly not enough.

I mention Trump because that's where the real leadership vacuum lay - or do you deny it?

If there's no off-ramp created for Putin, then the alternative is a war lasting months, leading into years. What's your alternative to creating an off-ramp - a fight to the death until the entire Russian invading force is killed?

As for your bullshit about the enemy not being upset: at least 30,000 of the invading troops are now out of action, in another 3 weeks it'll be 60,000 and their invasion will be close to collapse. Moreover, Russian citizens are fighting inside shops for dwindling supplies of some basic food-stuffs, their stock exchange is more or less permanently shut, inflation will sky-rocket, as will unemployment, China has refused to supply weapons to Putin ... the list goes on.

I'd imagine that Putin and his cronies are plenty upset: invasion stalling, losses mounting, unrest rising inside Russia.

You may blithely dismiss concerns about an escalation to a nuclear WWIII, but NATO has a clear red-line and it doesn't involve sending troops/aircraft into non-NATO countries to directly engage in combat with Russians.
 
As for your bullshit about
Grow up.
The broader parameters have been set by the US/NATO not to step onto Ukrainian soil at any point/supply it with aircraft/set no fly zones etc, thus giving the rare advantage to the enemy (Putin) of knowing that we will remain inactive regardless of whatever depredation he visits upon the population. We should -minimum, and for example- have at least warned him through private channels that if he uses chemical or biological weapons, we will respond militarily. Now, whether you fear that might lead to WWIII or not is irrelevant. In the face of a brutal bully, a stand must be taken, action threatened and followed through with.
Biden's permissive pre-war comments about the comparative acceptability of a 'minor incursion' helped set a confused and unresponsive tone for the invasion and if America is not going to take the boldest possible steps to assist the Ukrainian people, at least Biden could step up the public rhetoric in defense of the values the Ukrainians are fighting for in this conflict, which go beyond their country's sovereignty.
 
They're gonna let Russia destroy Ukraine and most of the Eastern Bloc so that Russia can take its place as ruler of slave labour, as the Europeans made India and Africa, and China are struggling to maintain right now.

Wrong thread? Geopolitics and Whataboutism?
These are definitely words arranged in an order with punctuation.
 
So... the Moscow Stock Market will open on Monday? Are you guys ready to buy cheap?
 
Grow up.
The broader parameters have been set by the US/NATO not to step onto Ukrainian soil at any point/supply it with aircraft/set no fly zones etc, thus giving the rare advantage to the enemy (Putin) of knowing that we will remain inactive regardless of whatever depredation he visits upon the population. We should -minimum, and for example- have at least warned him through private channels that if he uses chemical or biological weapons, we will respond militarily. Now, whether you fear that might lead to WWIII or not is irrelevant. In the face of a brutal bully, a stand must be taken, action threatened and followed through with.
Biden's permissive pre-war comments about the comparative acceptability of a 'minor incursion' helped set a confused and unresponsive tone for the invasion and if America is not going to take the boldest possible steps to assist the Ukrainian people, at least Biden could step up the public rhetoric in defense of the values the Ukrainians are fighting for in this conflict, which go beyond their country's sovereignty.

So, according to you the fear of a nuclear WWIII is irrelevant. And you're telling me to grow up? It sounds to me like you're lost in machismo posturing.

And you want America to take "the boldest possible steps to assist the Ukrainian people". Well, bombing every Russian convoy in Ukraine to hell would be pretty bold - but it seems that you imagine Putin would just fold at that point and do nothing in response. I suggest you re-think that fond imagining, and instead imagine Russian missile strikes on the airbases from which those bombers took off from. And then what?

You also say that Biden should "have at least warned him through private channels that if he uses chemical or biological weapons, we will respond militarily". Well, if it's a private warning, how do you know that he hasn't already done that? The answer is you don't.
 
So... the Moscow Stock Market will open on Monday? Are you guys ready to buy cheap?

It's not really opening - because only Federal Loan Bonds will be open for trading, not stocks and shares.
 
We should -minimum, and for example- have at least warned him through private channels that if he uses chemical or biological weapons, we will respond militarily. Now, whether you fear that might lead to WWIII or not is irrelevant. In the face of a brutal bully, a stand must be taken, action threatened and followed through with.

Irrelevant? Are you serious?
 
So, according to you the fear of a nuclear WWIII is irrelevant. And you're telling me to grow up? It sounds to me like you're lost in machismo posturing.
And you want America to take "the boldest possible steps to assist the Ukrainian people". Well, bombing every Russian convoy in Ukraine to hell would be pretty bold - but it seems that you imagine Putin would just fold at that point and do nothing in response. I suggest you re-think that fond imagining, and instead imagine Russian missile strikes on the airbases from which those bombers took off from. And then what?
You also say that Biden should "have at least warned him through private channels that if he uses chemical or biological weapons, we will respond militarily". Well, if it's a private warning, how do you know that he hasn't already done that? The answer is you don't.
No machismo posturing. Graphic here has it about right.
https://fight4ukraine.org/
 
VDV is essentially an evil looking riot police, that is their purpose. They are not trained for military battles and combat. They were used because Russia did not expect having to fight a real war, so it is quite logically that VDV suffered heavy losses.
I think you are mixing up the VDV with Rosgvardiya here.
The VDV is the Russian airborne forces and one of the Russian armys spearhead forces. They where at least before this conflict seen as one of the elite forces of the Russian army.
The Rosgvardiya or the national guard of Russia is on the other hand an internal force reporting directly to Putin and separeted from the army. They are basically a more heavy equipped police force.
 
Mean him personally or any other internet random freaking out at Putin's bluff. All he has to do is say the word 'nuclear' and we stand by and watch the rape.

You do realise he has over 6000 nuclear warheads and you want to go all Rambo to see if he will or won't let the missiles fly? Ludicrously big gamble with the costs of failure potentially then end of civilisation as we know it.
 
Last edited:
You do realise he has over 6000 nuclear warheads and you want to go all Rambo to see if he will or won't let the missiles fly? Ludicrously big gamble with the costs of failure potentially then end of civilisation as we know it.
No one mentioned going Rambo, that's just your daft reactionary characterisation. Look again at that graphic, and see what Ukrainians and other voices are suggesting could be done to pressure Putin more.

You think the western world is working at the very limits of what's advisably possible as a response, that there's no more it could do without Putin incinerating the globe? It's a fallacious point of view forever defended with that "Do you want WWIII??" used if you suggest we could be doing more...
 
No one mentioned going Rambo, that's just your daft reactionary characterisation. Look again at that graphic, and see what Ukrainians and other voices are suggesting could be done to pressure Putin more.

I'm all for helping Ukraine but direct NATA military intervention in Ukraine is well and truly going Rambo and could well push Putin to use nukes especially as we would presumably wipe the floor with them quite quickly. No matter what how can Russia having nukes be irrelevant?
 
US/NATO needs to Bomb Kremlin soon!

And Tony Kevin and others that support Putin in this should be shipped to Ukraine or put in prison as soon as possible.
 
Last edited:
so has the stock market opened yet?

No. Government bond trading only from 10am London time. They've started a closed pre auction and the price has dropped 10% in that.

I haven't seen any news on when the actual stock market will reopen.
 
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has banned eleven opposition parties, while also planning to unify all media under 1 channel.

Sounds like a dictator