Ukraine invasion

Remind me c_v, where are we up to on the list of 'game changers' that's going to turn things around for Zelensky - are we up to 20 yet? It feels like it.
This is yet another nothingburger that'll make no difference to the eventual outcome of the conflict - a complete waste of time and tax payers money. Again.
:(
You should be more concerned that Putler's Russia is about to enter year 3 of a 3 day special operation. Tax payer need not fund this failed invasion. It could be funded from all those frozen Russian assets.
Can you explain why Ukraine should give up? Is it because it makes your life easier?
 
A non-partisan research post - London
----------------------------------------------------
Which NATO countries are spending the 2% 'minimum'... and which nations are relying on US and UK to protect them? Graphic shows how a third of Europe is not 'paying its bills'
  • Back in 2014, NATO members committed to defence spending target of 2% GDP
  • But latest NATO figures show only 11 of 31 members were actually meeting target
 
A non-partisan research post - London
----------------------------------------------------
Which NATO countries are spending the 2% 'minimum'... and which nations are relying on US and UK to protect them? Graphic shows how a third of Europe is not 'paying its bills'
  • Back in 2014, NATO members committed to defence spending target of 2% GDP
  • But latest NATO figures show only 11 of 31 members were actually meeting target
2% will seem like a walk in the park compared to the amount everyone will need to spend when WW3 kicks off.
Europe really ought to know better than to get too comfortable with the peace they have enjoyed over the last 80 yrs.
 
Do they just cancel the arrest warrants for war crimes if the war stops?

I think not.

A non-partisan research post - London
----------------------------------------------------
Short comment - long, long, long conversation. I log some sources here for, primary my own, future reference.

International Criminal Court arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova

The Role of International Tribunals in the
Response to the Invasion of Ukraine

.............. Unlike many other tribunals, the ICC focuses on holding individuals accountable for these
crimes, as opposed to a nation-state. Individuals found guilty of any of these crimes face penalties
including imprisonment, fines, and forfeiture.

The ICC’s jurisdiction generally extends only to those countries that have become parties to the Rome
Statute establishing the ICC. Neither Ukraine nor Russia are parties, and thus, in general, the ICC lacks
jurisdiction over actions within the territories of either country. (Contrast this to cases involving parties to
the Rome Statute, such as the investigation into alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes
committed in Georgia, which became a party in 2003, during the 2008 conflict with Russia.) However, the
ICC may exercise jurisdiction over non-parties for most crimes if the specific requirements of Article
12(3) are met. First, a country must submit a declaration with the Registrar of the ICC accepting the
exercise of the ICC’s jurisdiction “with respect to the crime in question.” Second, the case must be one
that the Prosecutor self-initiated or initiated at the request of a party to the Rome Statute.

In this case, Ukraine filed a declaration in 2014 accepting the ICC’s jurisdiction for the p......

- The US position regarding the ICC -
The International Criminal Court is a Thoroughly Broken and Corrupt Body
 
Last edited:
It does not make a difference .. but a small one: It makes Stoltenberg behaving like an insurance salesman fearing to lose his clients :ROFLMAO:

Do you know ANY member of NATO which was defended in the whole history of this big mouth organization?
I remember only foreign countries invaded by NATO members to "protect" their own interests
  • Russia mocks the West's fury over Trump after he said he'd encourage Putin to attack NATO nations who fail to pay bills:
  • 'Do they seriously think we will bomb defaulters once a quarter?' :giggle:
Mayhaps, this one flew over the cuckoo's nest.
Who's cuckoo's nest ? Now, that's your Grace's part ...
 
Last edited:
You should be more concerned that Putler's Russia is about to enter year 3 of a 3 day special operation. Tax payer need not fund this failed invasion. It could be funded from all those frozen Russian assets.
c_v,
When you say "failed invasion" - I take it this is the new normal where love means hate and peace means war etc.? In other words, the operation is successful and achieving everything the Russians set out to achieve while Ukraine has lost everything. Everyone who looks objectively at what has happened and ignores MSM propaganda knows this is the case. Only the naive and those who choose to be brainwashed by the likes of BoJo still cling to the absurd notion that Ukraine is winning the conflict and will restore its pre-February 2022 borders. That can't possibly happen, it's impossible. Europe is a spent military force - it has no weapons left to give Ukraine and they can't supply anything like enough ammo to keep pace with demand. And Ukrainians don't have any more men of fighting age. Russia, on the other hand, has any amount of weapons, ammo and trained soldiers. Like it or not, those are the cold hard facts of the situation.
Can you explain why Ukraine should give up? Is it because it makes your life easier?
With pleasure. . .
It should give up because it can't win. A snowball in hell has better odds of survival than Ukraine. To continue merely results in more needless loss of life, more needless destruction and more $USD, £GBP and Euros wasted that would be spent on hospitals, schools, mending pot holes - pretty much anything else really.

As for making my life easier, it wouldn't just be my life, but everyone's lives across the board, yours included, but especially Ukrainians lives. For a start, those that are left would get to keep theirs. The only people whose lives might be ever so slightly negatively impacted by a negotiated settlement would be the criminals you've sided with: the morally bankrupt lowlifes who profit from all the death and destruction.

Come the U.S. election in November, I'll be interested to see whether or not you support Trump, given that he is of the view that spending $billions on Ukraine does sweet FA for ordinary Americans, most of whom don't even know where Ukraine is - let alone why they're funding a war there, and has vowed to end the conflict within days of taking office.
Tim.
 
c_v,
When you say "failed invasion" - I take it this is the new normal where love means hate and peace means war etc.? In other words, the operation is successful and achieving everything the Russians set out to achieve while Ukraine has lost everything. Everyone who looks objectively at what has happened and ignores MSM propaganda knows this is the case. Only the naive and those who choose to be brainwashed by the likes of BoJo still cling to the absurd notion that Ukraine is winning the conflict and will restore its pre-February 2022 borders. That can't possibly happen, it's impossible. Europe is a spent military force - it has no weapons left to give Ukraine and they can't supply anything like enough ammo to keep pace with demand. And Ukrainians don't have any more men of fighting age. Russia, on the other hand, has any amount of weapons, ammo and trained soldiers. Like it or not, those are the cold hard facts of the situation.

With pleasure. . .
It should give up because it can't win. A snowball in hell has better odds of survival than Ukraine. To continue merely results in more needless loss of life, more needless destruction and more $USD, £GBP and Euros wasted that would be spent on hospitals, schools, mending pot holes - pretty much anything else really.

As for making my life easier, it wouldn't just be my life, but everyone's lives across the board, yours included, but especially Ukrainians lives. For a start, those that are left would get to keep theirs. The only people whose lives might be ever so slightly negatively impacted by a negotiated settlement would be the criminals you've sided with: the morally bankrupt lowlifes who profit from all the death and destruction.

Come the U.S. election in November, I'll be interested to see whether or not you support Trump, given that he is of the view that spending $billions on Ukraine does sweet FA for ordinary Americans, most of whom don't even know where Ukraine is - let alone why they're funding a war there, and has vowed to end the conflict within days of taking office.
Tim.


Putin's invasion of Ukraine indeed failed to achieve its objective of bringing the entire country under control, as now only parts of it are targeted. Another failure is the aim to prevent NATO from expanding, yet, in reality, Finland and Sweden are joining NATO, marking yet another setback for Putin. The West, being democratic, tends to be slower in organizing military manufacturing, but it is making progress. Dictators may be able to make quick decisions, which is akin to a sprint versus a marathon, and Putin's sprint, much like Hitler's, has failed. History repeats itself, and here we see tangible evidence of Putin's failures. As for Trump, he was the one advocating for NATO members to increase military spending. He may tell the electorate anything to get elected, but his real actions later tell a different story.
 
A non-partisan research post - London
----------------------------------------------------
Media Bias: Subtle (and Not So Subtle) Ways Journalists Slant the News
 
Putin's invasion of Ukraine indeed failed to achieve its objective of bringing the entire country under control, as now only parts of it are targeted. Another failure is the aim to prevent NATO from expanding, yet, in reality, Finland and Sweden are joining NATO, marking yet another setback for Putin. The West, being democratic, tends to be slower in organizing military manufacturing, but it is making progress. Dictators may be able to make quick decisions, which is akin to a sprint versus a marathon, and Putin's sprint, much like Hitler's, has failed. History repeats itself, and here we see tangible evidence of Putin's failures. As for Trump, he was the one advocating for NATO members to increase military spending. He may tell the electorate anything to get elected, but his real actions later tell a different story.
Hi joyny,
You kick off with: "Putin's invasion of Ukraine indeed failed to achieve its objective of bringing the entire country under control, as now only parts of it are targeted". Firstly, what makes you think that Putin's objective was to bring the entire country under control (whatever that means?) and, secondly, even if that was his aim (which is news to me), what makes you think he's failed? After all, the war is ongoing and Russia is clearly winning it.

You're right about NATO expanding by bringing Finland and Sweden on board. However, that would likely have happened anyway in the fullness of time and is not Russia's primary concern. Ukraine joining NATO is what it must prevent at all costs because it represents a clear and obvious existential threat. As Putin said in his interview with Tucker Carlson, it would be an act of gross incompetence for any Russian leader to allow that to happen - or words to that effect.

You also assert that the west is democratic; what makes you think that? Sure, there is a thin veneer of democracy, but nothing more than that. Very little that the government does has been approved by the electorate, and much of what it promised it would do (in its manifesto if re-elected) - it has failed to do. Lamentably so. IMO, our leaders are every bit as tyrannical and despotic as any dictator - certainly Putin. If a poll was conducted that asked the question: 'Between Putin and BoJo - which of the two men do you trust the least and think is most likely to lie to you?' - my money's on BoJo winning that contest hands down!

Lastly, you write: "He [Trump] may tell the electorate anything to get elected, but his real actions later tell a different story." Can you name a politician of any political hue to whom this does not apply?! Also, one must distinguish between politicians who make a decent stab of doing what they say they'll do on the campaign trail prior to being elected and those that make no attempt whatsoever. At least Trump made an effort to do the things he said he would - even if he wasn't always successful.
Tim.
 








 
The exchange below between Elon Musk and Sen. Ron Johnson will make uncomfortable reading for the fantasists on here who refuse to accept the reality of what's happening. They discuss their opposition to escalating the ongoing bloody stalemate in the War in Ukraine. Instead, advocating for peace negotiations to bring an end to the loss of lives and the destruction of Ukraine. Neither man likes Putin, so they're not Putin stooges, supporters, useful idiots or apologists etc, just realists who understand what's going on.

@elonmusk:
"My companies have probably done more to undermine Russia than anyone. Space X has taken away two-thirds of the Russian launch business. Starlink has overwhelmingly helped Ukraine.My concern is exactly what you articulated. If you have an extended war of attrition, every day that goes by, you're losing more Ukrainian people.They aren't even Ukrainian boys anymore because they are running out of boys. And if you are going to spend lives, it must be for a purpose. Not just a mile back and forth. In fact, the lines aren't moving. So, just every day, people die. As you said, there's no way Putin is going to lose. If he backs off, he will be assassinated. And for those who want regime change in Russia, they should think about who is the person that could take out Putin? Is that person likely to be a peacenik? Probably not. They're probably going to be even more hardcore than Putin."

@SenRonJohnson:
"We all have to understand that Vladimir Putin will not lose this war... Losing to Vladimir Putin is existential to Vladimir Putin. Russia has four times the population and a much larger industrial base. Russia can produce 4.5 million artillery shells per year. We're not even up to 1 million per year. The average age of a Ukrainian soldier right now is 43 years old. Some of Zelensky's top aides say that even if the U.S. and its allies deliver all the weapons they have pledged, they don't have the men to use them. If you're worried about the people of Ukraine, you have to understand that probably 100,000 of their soldiers have been killed.The only way this war ends is in a settlement, and every day that the war goes on, more Ukrainians and more Russian conscripts die, more civilians die, and more of Ukraine gets destroyed. Again, sending $60 billion as added fuel to the flames of a bloody stalemate makes no sense. As evil of a war criminal as Putin is, he's not going to lose this war, and our colleagues here just aren't willing to accept that reality. They are living in a fantasy world thinking that Ukraine can win this thing."

 

Biden, Zelensky responsible for deaths in Ukraine — US journalist Hinkle

Military mobilization of 500,000 Ukrainians could cost $34 bln — financial expert



 
A non-partisan research post - London
----------------------------------------------------
Putin calls up his Dad's army: Russia 'will raise age limit of military personnel by 20 YEARS to 70' as leader desperately looks for more troops to fight his war in Ukraine, says UK intelligence
  • The Ministry of Defence says the move by the Kremlin will help Russia 'alleviate' the need for extra mobilisation which has angered some in Russian in the past
  • Ukraine is also trying to pass a bill to lower the minimum age for drafting
 
A non-partisan research post - London
----------------------------------------------------
Putin constructs 20-MILE long 'tsar train' of 2,100 freight cars lined up to create a 'mobile wall' to defend newly gained territory in Ukraine
  • Huge structure stretches all the way from Olenivka to Volnovakha near Donetsk
  • Train could prove a major obstacle for Ukrainian troops trying to counterattack
 
A non-partisan research post - London
----------------------------------------------------
Joe Biden was 'the enabler' for foreign deals with China and others testifies Hunter's ex-business partner Tony Bobulinski: He sold 'his brand' while being 'buffered' by a 'complex scheme' to maintain plausible deniability says key impeachment witness
  • Bobulinski is appearing before impeachment investigators on the Oversight and Judiciary Committees in a deposition that is expected to take up most of the day
  • 'The Biden family business was Joe Biden, period,' DailyMail.com has learned he will say
  • 'It is clear to me that Joe Biden was 'the Brand' being sold by the Biden family,' he says in opening remarks
  • In addition, he will detail how Chinese energy company CEFC 'successfully sought to infiltrate and compromise' the Obama-Biden White House
 

 
A non-partisan research post - London
----------------------------------------------------
Senate passes $95B foreign aid bill 70-29
 
Top