Ukraine invasion

CavaliereVerde said:
The situation is so bad for Ukraine that every 2 months there is a big defeat for Russians.
Let's wait for the next retreat.
I prefer facts over conspiracies, and the fact is Kherson back to Ukraine.
From "wishful thinking" to reality in a cuople of months.
Click to expand...
CV,
Yes, Kherson is back under Ukrainian control. For now. The questions you're conveniently ignoring are at what cost to Ukraine and what have they gained?

Allow me to help you with the answers. Ukraine now has a city that the Russians can attack at will with almost zero risk to themselves. They have a city which they have to defend, holding Ukrainian armed forces in position who can't now be deployed elsewhere. Moreover, they have a city from which they can't advance because they can't cross the Dnipro River, so they've no chance of cutting off the land bridge to Crimea. Meanwhile, the Russians withdrew at their leisure (NB: they weren't forced to retreat in battle), have suffered minimal losses to personnel and kit, both of which can now be deployed elsewhere. It's called a Pyrrhic victory: winning the battle (even though there wasn't much of one in this case, lol!) - and losing the war. You're looking at the reclaimed territory and being duped into believing the utter BS that Ukraine can just keep going. They absolutely can't: it's the end of the road for them. Even U.S. army General Mark Milley acknowledges this:
Full Ukrainian victory over Russia unlikely, warns top US general
"Army General Mark Milley, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said it is unlikely that Kyiv can militarily force Russia out of all of the territory it occupies, in a Pentagon press conference."

Negotiation is the only available route left to Ukraine to avoid more death and destruction and losing more territory. It's that simple.
Tim.
 
Yes claer, you think it i s a Pyrric victory and you have a couple of generals that think Ukraine is losing.
I have another couple of generals that think the opposite.
You were saying that controlled land matters so let's stick to that and to facts.
 
CavaliereVerde said:
Yes claer, you think it i s a Pyrric victory and you have a couple of generals that think Ukraine is losing.
I have another couple of generals that think the opposite.
You were saying that controlled land matters so let's stick to that and to facts.
Click to expand...
You're taking the pi$$, CV!
'Your' generals are mostly Ukrainian playing a political game, appeasing their western paymasters and telling the western MSM - i.e. you - what they/you want to hear. They know full well they're in quagmires of brown sticky stuff but they can't admit it because, if they did, it would be game over. They have no choice but to be extremely economical with the truth - if not tell outright lies. 'My' general is the most senior officer in the U.S. army. If he's saying what he's saying publicly - as reported by The Telegraph - just imagine what he's saying privately to Biden and Blinken behind closed doors? 'This is a total disaster - pull out now' would be my guess. Or, perhaps you think Milley is a Putin apologist and sympathiser and that Biden's handlers will ignore him and replace him? Yeah, right!
:ROFLMAO:

The thing that I find especially odd about your - and c_v's position - is that in your shoes I'd be urging Zelensky to call a ceasefire and negotiate. Why? Because, as things stand, you won't lose our bet. Just! However, the longer this goes on and the worse the situation becomes for Ukraine - and it will, no ifs or buts about it - the more likely it is that you'll lose our wager.
Tim.
 
counter_violent said:
The more interesting question is .........why is everyone else in denial ?
Click to expand...
Because they dont' want to escalate and involve NATO.
They want Ukraine to win without a conflict between NATO and Russia.
So the more convenient version for everyone is that it was an Ukranian missile catching Russian missiles.


Here we have another analysis by Ryan.

We don't know if the fallen missile was Russian or Ukranian but it was not intentional.
 
southfront.org

Associated Press Issues Correction To Its Fake Report Which Could Have Kicked Off WW3

Originally published by ZeroHedge Update(1605ET): The Associated Press has issued an official correction for its not-so-inconsequential bit of reporting Tuesday that could have...
southfront.org southfront.org

edit:
tass.com

Serbia buying gas from Russia at lowest price in Europe — head of Srbijagas

Earlier, Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic said that the coming winter in Europe would be "cold" and the next one will be "polar"
tass.com tass.com
 
Last edited:
Another person who has his feet firmly on the ground and his finger on the pulse is Scott Ritter. As a former soldier and U.N. weapons inspector, he provides a comprehensive and thoroughly convincing explanation as to how and why Ukrainian missiles landed in Poland, killing two people. He then goes on to detail the kind of negotiations that Ukraine can expect to have with Russia if the conflict is allowed to continue much longer. Spoiler alert: they're very much of the kind that goes: 'sign this or die'!

 
Even if Tim and his "charlatan experts" don't get it, at least Poland understands.

Unless Russia is stopped in Ukraine, then every bordering country is at risk from Russian aggression.

National Security and Defense Council Secretary Oleksiy Danilov said Ukraine is "ready to hand over evidence of the Russian trace" in the accident.

kyivindependent.com

Polish PM: If we do not support Ukraine, war will come to us.

"We still don't know 100 percent of the exact circumstances and reasons for the Przewodow incident, but we definitely know the root cause — the main reason — and that is the Russian aggression against Ukraine," Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said.
kyivindependent.com kyivindependent.com
 
Last edited:
www.newsweek.com

Leaked FSB letters reveal civil war among Putin's allies

"The Service (FSB) is not ready for internal terror, and Prigozhin and Kadyrov think that their time has come," an FSB agent wrote in an email shared with Newsweek.
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com
1668830309084.png
 
counter_violent said:
Even if Tim and his "charlatan experts" don't get it, at least Poland understands.
Click to expand...
Oh dear, oh dear oh dear c_v!
'Charlatan experts' - you're havin' a laugh. Col. Doug Macgregor and Scott Ritter ooze credibility from their core and the fact that you don't pick up on a single point (of the numerous points they each make in the videos I posted) tells us that you haven't a leg to stand on. Yet again, you're forced to resort to trying to discredit the messenger because you know their message is 100% on the money. Pathetic.
counter_violent said:
Unless Russia is stopped in Ukraine, then every bordering country is at risk from Russian aggression.
Click to expand...
Not this nonsense again. You say this on the one hand while, on the other hand, you'll have us all believe that the Russian armed forces are in complete disarray, they're running out of weapons and ammo, personnel are dropping like flies or deserting and Russian high command couldn't organise a pi$$ up in a Stoli factory. Self evidently, one of these narratives is totally, completely and utterly wrong. The question is: which one is it? (Spoiler alert: they're both total BS.)
counter_violent said:
National Security and Defense Council Secretary Oleksiy Danilov said Ukraine is "ready to hand over evidence of the Russian trace" in the accident.
Click to expand...
The missiles were S300s which Russia doesn't have and Ukraine does. Hello, wayey, wakey!!! If you want to waste our time with this ridiculous narrative - then you need to do two things:
1. Explain how Russia benefits from escalating the conflict and dragging NATO into it and how it's to Ukraine's detriment? You'll need to provide concrete evidence of the latter that shows beyond any doubt that Ukraine would suffer (not benefit) if NATO became involved.
2. Provide a counter argument to Scott Ritter's comments in the vid' I posted that shows beyond any doubt that the missiles were fired by Ukrainian armed forces. The only real question is whether or not Zelensky was informed about it beforehand and sanctioned it, or was the decision taken 'on the hoof' by rogue (Azov?) soldiers on the ground? If the former, this then proves that Zelensky is lying to his U.S. and EU backers. If it's the latter, then it proves he's not in full control and can't be relied upon and trusted. Which, of course, he can't.

I very much doubt you'll do either and the reasons why are obvious: this was a botched false flag operation by Ukraine with the clear objective of getting NATO directly involved. Why? Because that's their only way out of the massive hole they've dug for themselves. Other than giving in to all of Russia's demands, that is quite literally their ONLY hope of salvaging anything from this conflict.
Tim.
 
Last edited:
timsk said:
Col. Doug Macgregor and Scott Ritter ooze credibility from their core
Click to expand...
Your "experts" are not exactly unbiased or accurate.

WATCH: Fox reporter scolds Douglas Macgregor for sounding like a 'Putin apologist'​

www.washingtonexaminer.com

WATCH: Fox reporter scolds Douglas Macgregor for sounding like a 'Putin apologist'

A Fox News reporter chastised retired Army Col. Douglas Macgregor on-air after he claimed Ukraine is about to be defeated by invading Russian forces and needs to negotiate.
www.washingtonexaminer.com www.washingtonexaminer.com

Douglas Macgregor: American Colonel's WRONG predictions about the War in Ukraine​

​

I already commented on Scott Ritter's credibility here and here, but I admit he seems good at shooting something else.:)
1668870430611.png


timsk said:
The missiles were S300s which Russia doesn't have and Ukraine does. Hello, wayey, wakey!!!
Click to expand...
Russia still has S-300 missiles.

1668870519819.png


timsk said:
1. Explain how Russia benefits from escalating the conflict and dragging NATO into it and how it's to Ukraine's detriment?
Click to expand...
Explain how Ukraine benefits by shooting a missile at an ally. I don't want to insult you by saying you are slow at this†, but the answer is Ukraine does not benefit because of the risk of losing NATO support and/or being invaded by NATO for attacking a NATO member. Russia doesn't benefit either, so the obvious answer is it was a mistake that would never had happened if Russia wasn't firing missiles at Ukraine. Alternatively, it wouldn't have happened if Western leaders had followed the Rufus Leakey Peace Plan.:D


† Sorry, I couldn't resist.;)
 
Rufus_Leakey said:
† Sorry, I couldn't resist.;)
Click to expand...
R_L,
Is there anyone on your side of the argument - that is to say the wrong side - who's capable of addressing the points made as opposed to just attacking the messenger? Posting a video of a reporter attacking Col. Doug Macgregor when we don't even get to hear what he (Macgregor) said and he's not able to respond to her criticisms of him is really taking the pi$$.

Regarding the missiles, everyone accepts that they were S300s fired by Ukraine. That's no longer a matter of debate. That Russia made the missiles yonks ago is not relevant to today. Again, we know Russia didn't fire them - so there's no point trying to suggest otherwise.

". . .Explain how Ukraine benefits by shooting a missile at an ally. . ."
I already have, very clearly and succinctly. You appear to be slow at grasping the basics R_L. Touche! I don't know how better to express such a simple point, so I'll repeat myself. This was a botched false flag operation by Ukraine with the clear objective of getting NATO directly involved. Why? Because that's their only way out of the massive hole they've dug for themselves. Other than giving in to all of Russia's demands, that is quite literally their ONLY hope of salvaging anything from this conflict. What do you not understand about that?

You're right about Ukraine alienating NATO and the west - that's the net consequence of their actions. That's the one positive to come out of this incident. Going forward, I expect the sycophants who idolise Zelensky will be much more circumspect and questioning about him in the future. And so they should be, he's a corrupt liar and psychopath who's quite happy to see this conflict escalate into world war 3. As for Ukraine being at risk of attack by NATO for firing missiles into Poland - I won't bother to comment save to say I'll end in the same vein as I started: your taking the pi$$!
Tim.
 
Last edited:
Rufus_Leakey said:
Explain how Ukraine benefits by shooting a missile at an ally.
Click to expand...
very easy: just look what Zelensky tried to make out of it. But the lie couldn't work.

tass.com

Kiev military admits that Ukrainian missile fragments probably fell in Poland

Anything could be the result of this air defense battle, Ukraine’s air force spokesman Yuriy Ignat said
tass.com tass.com

counter_violent said:
National Security and Defense Council Secretary Oleksiy Danilov said Ukraine is "ready to hand over evidence of the Russian trace" in the accident.
Click to expand...
bla bla .. why was the hand over never done?
If there were ANY posibble evidence everybody would know.
 
IlIlIlIlI said:
Obviously you want your taxes - if you pay any - used in this way.
And paying high energy prices.

I'm sure the majority of people in GB do not share your opinion.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately Histo', most of the U.K. population haven't joined up the dots and don't realise that they're the ones footing the bill for this obscene and pointless war - so your comment will come as a surprise to most of them. Gradually, they will wake up - just as they are doing with the injustices of the pandemic. That said, the enormity of the task can not be overestimated, because even those who understand perfectly well what's going on - i.e. everyone on this thread - refuse to accept it. It's like a child who discovers Peter Pan is a girl or that Father Christmas isn't real and desperately wants to cling to the fantasy rather than accept reality, along with the tough life lesson that the people they love and respect most - mum 'n dad - have been telling them porkies all along. Substitute Father Christmas with the 'Zelensky & Ukraine good - Putin & Russia bad' narrative and the parents with western governments, the EU and NATO, and you have a near perfect analogy that goes right to the heart of the problem. The only incy wincy little difference being of course that no lives are ruined and no one dies when the little boy or girl discovers Santa isn't real.
Tim.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

trendie
nasty invasive CMC advert
Replies
11
Views
3K
shadowninja
shadowninja
N Rothschild
Ukraine flu
Replies
0
Views
1K
N Rothschild
N Rothschild
M
Austria - Ukraine
Replies
0
Views
2K
markvighan
M
J
Ukraine plays?
Replies
8
Views
2K
PieterSteidelmayer
P
Y
Investing in Ukraine !
Replies
0
Views
2K
Yuriy
Y
Top