Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

[TMDaines]

Apparently this kid is saying he’s Ukrainian and has seemingly been forced to fight for the Russians. feck’s sake

Spoiler: Barely visible presumably dead bodies

It is widely understood that Ukrainians still living in the DNR and LNR are forcibly conscripted into fighting for the Russian forces and against Ukraine.

It is mental that people think there is any way that Ukraine could recognise these “states”. They are merely fiefdoms of Russian militias and would continue to be exactly the cancerous growth Russia has always intended them to be as long as they exist.

 

[TMDaines]

 

[spiriticon]

I don't understand why NATO can't deploy their best air defences to protect Lviv. It's literally a stone's throw away from the Polish border and it's most definitely a key resupply hub for the Ukrainians.

 

[Dans]

Russia is going to lose its mind over this, but they previously claimed that Biden stole the election so they really don't have any room to get mad.

That being said, it doesn't really help things.

He's 78, he's got nothing to lose (albeit we might), but at least he's calling it as it is. I for one respect him for that.

 

[GlastonSpur]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...right-to-use-nuclear-weapons-in-ukraine-putin

"An adviser to Ukraine’s defence ministry, Markian Lubkivskyi, claimed on Saturday that Russia would soon lose control of the southern city of Kherson, the first major centre to fall to the Kremlin since the war began on 24 February.

He said: “I believe that today the city will be fully under the control of Ukrainian armed forces. We have finished in the last two days the operation in the Kyiv region so other armed forces are now focused on the southern part trying to get free Kherson and some other Ukrainian cities.”

 

[Oly Francis]

I don't understand why NATO can't deploy their best air defences to protect Lviv. It's literally a stone's throw away from the Polish border and it's most definitely a key resupply hub for the Ukrainians.

That would mean direct NATO involvement in the Ukrainian airspace, it's not hard to understand.

 

[spiriticon]

That would mean direct NATO involvement in the Ukrainian airspace, it's not hard to understand.

Eh, we certainly can give the equipment to the Ukrainians at the border for them to set it up in Lviv itself.

Though if we're too scared to even set up air defences on the Polish side of the border, I'm starting to wonder just how far we'll let this fear of Putin cripple us.

 

[nimic]

This man is a fraud.

 

[Oly Francis]

Eh, we certainly can give the equipment to the Ukrainians at the border for them to set it up in Lviv itself.

Though if we're too scared to even set up air defences on the Polish side of the border, I'm starting to wonder just how far we'll let this fear of Putin cripple us.

Anti missile equipments are ultra high tech, it's not something you can just give with a manual. They have anti aircraft weapons already but it's pretty much useless against long range missiles. There's not a whole lot that can be done i'm afraid.

 

[spiriticon]

Anti missile equipments are ultra high tech, it's not something you can just give with a manual. They have anti aircraft weapons already but it's pretty much useless against long range missiles. There's not a whole lot that can be done i'm afraid.

Luckily, cruise missiles cost a lot so I don't see Russia firing them willy-nilly all over the West of Ukraine. But it's still a bit of a worry that we won't even defend against missiles, not even shooting any planes, just missiles in the West of the country when the capability is clearly there.

 

[stevoc]

I don't understand why NATO can't deploy their best air defences to protect Lviv. It's literally a stone's throw away from the Polish border and it's most definitely a key resupply hub for the Ukrainians.

So would you like to see NATO getting involved and taking direct military action against Russia in Ukraine?

 

[RedDevilQuebecois]

It is widely understood that Ukrainians still living in the DNR and LNR are forcibly conscripted into fighting for the Russian forces and against Ukraine.

It is mental that people think there is any way that Ukraine could recognise these “states”. They are merely fiefdoms of Russian militias and would continue to be exactly the cancerous growth Russia has always intended them to be as long as they exist.

Which brings the question as to what should happen to those annexed territories down the road and considering that a vast majority of civilians have been either forcefully evacuated or even forced into this mess. Puppet governments in both DNR and LNR will have to be brought down anyhow before Ukraine can formally regain control over those areas (I think it's far more complicated with Crimea though).

And I thought that child soldiers being forced to fight was only a thing in underdevelopped countries. Fecking animals.

 

[spiriticon]

So would you like to see NATO getting involved and taking direct military action against Russia in Ukraine?

I would for missiles targeted at Lviv. If the precision guidance on those missiles has a malfunction, then the refugees and NATO soldiers at the Polish border are going to have a very bad day.

If it's a Kinzhal then fair enough, nothing you can do about that.

 

[Carolina Red]

I would for missiles targeted at Lviv. If the precision guidance on those missiles has a malfunction, then the refugees and NATO soldiers at the Polish border are going to have a very bad day.

If it's a Kinzhal then fair enough, nothing you can do about that.

It’s over 40 miles from Lviv to the Polish border.

 

[spiriticon]

It’s over 40 miles from Lviv to the Polish border.

And those 40 miles should be covered by proper anti-missile defences stationed on the Polish side of the border.

I can see why we don't want to shoot planes down, but not even wanting to defend against missiles? Ugh.

I guess if accidents happen we can always move our defences a few more miles back and wag our finger ferociously at the Russians.

 

[Mciahel Goodman]

This man is a fraud.

Yeah, he is an absolute fraud.

 

[Oly Francis]

And those 40 miles should be covered by proper anti-missile defences stationed on the Polish side of the border.

I can see why we don't want to shoot planes down, but not even wanting to defend against missiles? Ugh.

I guess if accidents happen we can always move our defences a few more miles back and wag our finger ferociously at the Russians.

NATO anti missile systems will kick in should a missile enter polish airspace. 40 miles into another country isn't your airspace, it's that simple

 

[stevoc]

I would for missiles targeted at Lviv. If the precision guidance on those missiles has a malfunction, then the refugees and NATO soldiers at the Polish border are going to have a very bad day.

If it's a Kinzhal then fair enough, nothing you can do about that.

Yeah but whether it's western Ukraine, Eastern Ukraine or anywhere in Ukraine. It's still Ukraine and NATO can't intervene directly as Ukraine sadly isn't a member of NATO.

Don't worry Russia won't be firing any missiles that veer into NATO territory. They might be a bit incompetent but they're not stupid, an incident like that would give NATO justification to intervene in this conflict and Russia certainly don't want that as they seem to be having enough problems just fighting the Ukrainians.

 

[LDUred]

Suppose, just suppose, that this was all really just about liberating the Donbass area of Ukraine, as ridiculous as that sounds in light of all the entire world has witnessed.

Why not go through the proper channels for that? Why not petition the UN for a free and fair referendum for independence? Make a show of doing it the right way; show that you genuinely care about the people who live there, regardless of their sympathies to Kyev or Moscow.

That might actually have worked. People could have had legitimate sympathy for Russia if they had even disingenuously gone down the proper channels to engineer a peaceful secession.

Instead, they have gone in all guns blazing and literally flattened entire cities; not only that, they have seemingly committed the most egregious war crimes along the way. Any credibility that they could have laid claim to before has been tossed to the four winds.

Russia's reputation as a nation is in tatters literally for generations and one idiotic fool of a man has put paid to it.

 

[spiriticon]

Yeah but whether it's western Ukraine, Eastern Ukraine or anywhere in Ukraine. It's still Ukraine and NATO can't intervene directly as Ukraine sadly isn't a member of NATO.

Don't worry Russia won't be firing any missiles that veer into NATO territory. They might be a bit incompetent but they're not stupid, an incident like that would give NATO justification to intervene in this conflict and Russia certainly don't want that as they seem to be having enough problems just fighting the Ukrainians.

I don't think they will intentionally fire anything across the border. Well they might I don't know. But I'm more concerned about the unintentional accidents happening,

I'm surprised we are not even willing to defend one city and the main road to Poland, which is probably chock full of refugees, from stray missiles. But hey, what's another couple of hundred deaths when we've already watched thousands die.

I do hope our soldiers have fire extinguishers at the ready, just in case any poor sod manages to crawl over that borderline while on fire.

 

[Raoul]

Yeah, he is an absolute fraud.

As a Greek I am telling you that this guy is a complete moron. Zero substance. He only wants to grab attention to himself. He almost single-handedly destroyed the Greek economy in 2015, we were very lucky that the head of his party threw him out!

I'm beginning to see what Frostbite is talking about in the above statement.

 

[Carolina Red]

And those 40 miles should be covered by proper anti-missile defences stationed on the Polish side of the border.

I can see why we don't want to shoot planes down, but not even wanting to defend against missiles? Ugh.

I guess if accidents happen we can always move our defences a few more miles back and wag our finger ferociously at the Russians.

Bud 40 miles is a long damn way for a missile to miss by.

 

[Mciahel Goodman]

I'm beginning to see what Frostbite is talking about in the above statement.

I think he's right (not Frostbite). Biden's statement was ill advised. How does it help anyone (Ukrainian, American, European)? The goal for the Americans has been regime change, if possible, from the off. But why say that? Isn't that part of Putin's justification of this whole thing both internally and externally as an existential threat? Senior neoconservatives have been criticising the statement and the administration more or less retracted it, so not a controversial opinion really.



The above basically.

 

[Raoul]

I think he's right (not Frostbite). Biden's statement was ill advised. How does it help anyone (Ukrainian, American, European)? The goal for the Americans has been regime change, if possible, from the off. But why say that? Isn't that part of Putin's justification of this whole thing both internally and externally as an existential threat? Senior neoconservatives have been criticising the statement and the administration more or less retracted it, so not a controversial opinion really.



The above basically.

He's not really saying anything other than saying he doesn't understand Biden's policy, while at the same time not advocating any solutions himself.

 

[spiriticon]

Bud 40 miles is a long damn way for a missile to miss by.

A malfunction is a malfunction. These Kalibr missiles have a range of 1500 miles?

40 miles overshoot is nothing.

But as I said above. I'd argue that we should defend the 40 miles from Lviv to Poland from any missile.

 

[Mciahel Goodman]

He's not really saying anything other than saying he doesn't understand Biden's policy, while at the same time not advocating any solutions himself.

I think he'd argue in favour of a negotiated peace-deal with the US making actual efforts on that front which they haven't as of yet. Might be viewed as naive, but it's a valid position for anyone who just wants an end to the conflict. The Putin regime change comment was just bad politics, even from the most cynical perspective which views the US as wanting this to endure as long as possible. It doesn't make good sense in any frame, except that it might have sounded or felt good.

 

[GlastonSpur]

Suppose, just suppose, that this was all really just about liberating the Donbass area of Ukraine, as ridiculous as that sounds in light of all the entire world has witnessed.

Why not go through the proper channels for that? Why not petition the UN for a free and fair referendum for independence? Make a show of doing it the right way; show that you genuinely care about the people who live there, regardless of their sympathies to Kyev or Moscow.

That might actually have worked. People could have had legitimate sympathy for Russia if they had even disingenuously gone down the proper channels to engineer a peaceful secession.

Instead, they have gone in all guns blazing and literally flattened entire cities; not only that, they have seemingly committed the most egregious war crimes along the way. Any credibility that they could have laid claim to before has been tossed to the four winds.

Russia's reputation as a nation is in tatters literally for generations and one idiotic fool of a man has put paid to it.

It wouldn't have worked because Putin knows full well that in a free and fair election the vote would have gone against him big time. The Ukrainians in the non-Russian- occupied Donbass know from friends and relatives in the "liberated" eastern areas how those areas are now ruled by Russian gangsters, with kidnap for ransom, murder, torture, rape, and widespread robbery having destroyed all semblance of the life enjoyed before the Russians got involved..

 

[Carolina Red]

A malfunction is a malfunction. These Kalibr missiles have a range of 1500 miles?

40 miles overshoot is nothing.

But as I said above. I'd argue that we should defend the 40 miles from Lviv to Poland from any missile.

Right. I’m sorry, but that’s nonsense. It’s a satnav guided cruise missile.

 

[Raoul]

I think he'd argue in favour of a negotiated peace-deal with the US making actual efforts on that front which they haven't as of yet. Might be viewed as naive, but it's a valid position for anyone who just wants an end to the conflict.

Not very likely given that neither side are remotely interested in the conditions the others are offering. The US policy should be to remove Putin from power so we don't go through this every few years. Thus the sanctions should remain in place to penalize Putin for this and slowly squeeze the life out of his brutal regime.

 

[spiriticon]

Right. I’m sorry, but that’s nonsense. It’s a satnav guided cruise missile.

I don't think you're getting the point of the word 'malfunction'. Satnav no work.

 

[frostbite]

Biden, by saying 'Putin cannot remain in power' was talking to the people *around* Putin:

"Guys, one way or another, Vlad is going down. Do you really want to go down with him?"

 

[Carolina Red]

I don't think you're getting the point of the word 'malfunction'. Satnav no work.

Whatever you say bud. I don’t think you’re getting the point that if a Russian Kalibr hits Poland, it isn’t a malfunction. Cruise missiles have backup navigation systems specifically in case of gps jamming.

 

[GlastonSpur]

I think he's right (not Frostbite). Biden's statement was ill advised. How does it help anyone (Ukrainian, American, European)? The goal for the Americans has been regime change, if possible, from the off. But why say that? Isn't that part of Putin's justification of this whole thing both internally and externally as an existential threat? Senior neoconservatives have been criticising the statement and the administration more or less retracted it, so not a controversial opinion really.



The above basically.

I don't agree. First of all, Biden's comments weren't some off-the-cuff remarks. They were aimed at those people in Russia - outside of Putin's hardcore cronies - who still have some power and influence He's telling them that there is no way back from Russia's rapid decline short of them finding a way to remove Putin.

Secondly, we actually are now in an existential struggle, world-wide, between the democracy and freedom (not the fake "freedom" proclaimed by Trumpian neo-fascists) versus the forces of dictatorship and oppression (principally Russia and China, but not just them).

We need to face this square on: ultimately it is about regime change in Russia, however long it takes, because there will never be peace as long as Putin remains.

 

[spiriticon]

Whatever you say bud. I don’t think you’re getting the point that if a Russian Kalibr hits Poland, it isn’t a malfunction.

With the state of the Russian equipment, I don't rule anything out.

But regardless, I feel we should defend the skies around Lviv from missiles only because we have the capability, we don't technically have to put a single boot on the warground and the area is fully populated with refugees.

No Russian soldiers are killed or wounded with us targeting missiles.

 

[Raoul]

I don't agree. First of all, Biden's comments weren't some off-the-cuff remarks. They were aimed at those people in Russia - outside of Putin's hardcore cronies - who still have some power and influence He's telling them that there is no way back from Russia's rapid decline short of them finding a way to remove Putin.

Secondly, we actually are now in an existential struggle, world-wide, between the democracy and freedom (not the fake "freedom" proclaimed by Trumpian neo-fascists) versus the forces of dictatorship and oppression (principally Russia and China, but not just them).

We need to face this square on: ultimately it is about regime change in Russia, however long it takes, because there will never be peace as long as Putin remains.

Spot on. Biden knew exactly what he was doing.

 

[Raoul]

Hans Zimmer interupts his own show in London to show the kid in Lviv playing the Inception theme - ignoring air raid sirens blarring in the background, then plays it himself LIVE after.

 

[GlastonSpur]

This YouTube channel is worth watching re. the unfolding military situation in Ukraine. The guy clearly puts in some effort to keep abreast of things as best as any outsider can, with updated maps and news.

His latest is that that Russians NW of Kyiv - a very sizeable force - may well be in big trouble.

 

[Mciahel Goodman]

I don't agree. First of all, Biden's comments weren't some off-the-cuff remarks. They were aimed at those people in Russia - outside of Putin's hardcore cronies - who still have some power and influence He's telling them that there is no way back from Russia's rapid decline short of them finding a way to remove Putin.

Secondly, we actually are now in an existential struggle, world-wide, between the democracy and freedom (not the fake "freedom" proclaimed by Trumpian neo-fascists) versus the forces of dictatorship and oppression (principally Russia and China, but not just them).

We need to face this square on: ultimately it is about regime change in Russia, however long it takes, because there will never be peace as long as Putin remains.

I respect your point of view but I'm not part of any "we" that wants to use Ukraine so the US can fight a war of regime change and risk nuclear annihilation. He's 69 years of age, he has about five years left before he's removed by some internal mechanism anyway.

Not very likely given that neither side are remotely interested in the conditions the others are offering. The US policy should be to remove Putin from power so we don't go through this every few years. Thus the sanctions should remain in place to penalize Putin for this and slowly squeeze the life out of his brutal regime.

That is (and has been) their policy. I don't agree with it as a matter of diplomatic resolution. A geriatric Putin who shuffles off the stage by internal demand is preferable to this Putin being forced into a nuclear corner by US escalation. The point he makes is also true, the US has a terrible track record of regime change. Not in the moral sense, but in the sense of it actually going to plan. Look at Maduro whom the US have now had to recognise. If I thought this would without fail end in a flawless removal of Putin from office, I wouldn't have a problem with it. My problem is that I'm fairly certain it will not work and will prolong the war plus risk serious escalation from which there will be no return.

This has obviously been very serious from the beginning, but someone said there was a 0.01% chance of nuclear usage. That figure should be steadily revised upward after today.

 

[Dante]

Suppose, just suppose, that this was all really just about liberating the Donbass area of Ukraine, as ridiculous as that sounds in light of all the entire world has witnessed.

Why not go through the proper channels for that? Why not petition the UN for a free and fair referendum for independence? Make a show of doing it the right way; show that you genuinely care about the people who live there, regardless of their sympathies to Kyev or Moscow.

That might actually have worked. People could have had legitimate sympathy for Russia if they had even disingenuously gone down the proper channels to engineer a peaceful secession.

Instead, they have gone in all guns blazing and literally flattened entire cities; not only that, they have seemingly committed the most egregious war crimes along the way. Any credibility that they could have laid claim to before has been tossed to the four winds.

Russia's reputation as a nation is in tatters literally for generations and one idiotic fool of a man has put paid to it.

It won't be. Russia also needs to secure water access for Crimea as a major priority.

The Ukrainians have been blocking the flow of the canal (red line) and thereby limiting access to the only fresh water supply for the peninsula since 2014. At the very least, Putin will want to seize that route so he can ensure the viability of Russian Crimea.

 

[Raoul]

I respect your point of view but I'm not part of any "we" that wants to use Ukraine so the US can fight a war of regime change and risk nuclear annihilation. He's 69 years of age, he has about five years left before he's removed by some internal mechanism anyway.


That is (and has been) their policy. I don't agree with it as a matter of diplomatic resolution. A geriatric Putin who shuffles off the stage by internal demand is preferable to this Putin being forced into a nuclear corner by US escalation. The point he makes is also true, the US has a terrible track record of regime change. Not in the moral sense, but in the sense of it actually going to plan. Look at Maduro whom the US have now had to recognise. If I thought this would without fail end in a flawless removal of Putin from office, I wouldn't have a problem with it. My problem is that I'm fairly certain it will not work and will prolong the war plus risk serious escalation from which there will be no return.

This has obviously been very serious from the beginning, but someone said there was a 0.01% chance of nuclear usage. That figure should be steadily revised upward after today.

You don't know whether he is already prepared to use nukes now, so there's no value in pretending to create a fake agreement that neither side are prepared to abide by. Second, there was nothing in Biden's statement that would incentivize Putin to use nukes, unless he was already prepared to do so before.