This is the "democracy" that NATzO is backing.
Russian special military operation in Ukraine #50
kvs- Posts : 15927
Points : 16062
Join date : 2014-09-11
Location : Turdope's Kanada
This is the "democracy" that NATzO is backing.
GarryB, GunshipDemocracy, Hole, Broski and ucmvulcan like this post
Arrow- Posts : 3590
Points : 3580
Join date : 2012-02-12
dino00 and Hole like this post
lancelot- Posts : 3190
Points : 3186
Join date : 2020-10-18
They might just do like the Soviets did in the Korean War. Make sure their NATO F-16 pilots stay on their side of the Dnieper so they cannot be captured.Rodion_Romanovic wrote:Of course that should be an act of war from NATO countries, but they could "solve" it by having f16 pilots and technicians from NATO countries being discharged from their respective country armed forces (after being promised a considerable amount of money) and then being given Ukrainian nationality by zelenski and then being commissioned/ enlisted into the Ukrainian air force.
Actual Ukrainian pilots and "volunteers" would fly closer to the front.
franco- Posts : 7074
Points : 7100
Join date : 2010-08-18
Over the past 24 hours, Russian air defense systems have shot down two MiG-29 aircraft, a Su-24 bomber, and a Mi-8 helicopter of the Ukrainian Air Force (UAF). The Russian Ministry of Defense reported this on October 21.
Fighter aircraft of the Russian Aerospace Forces also shot down a Su-24 aircraft.
“The fighter aircraft of the Russian Aerospace Forces shot down a Ukrainian Su-24 aircraft near the city of Odessa,” the message says.
In addition, during the day, air defense destroyed 23 Ukrainian drones in the Donetsk People's Republic (DPR), Lugansk People's Republic (LPR) and Zaporozhye region.
Earlier, on October 20, it was reported that the air defense shot down 10 MiG-29 fighters and two Su-25 attack aircraft. In addition, two Mi-8 helicopters were shot down.
The special operation to protect Donbass , the start of which was announced by Russian President Vladimir Putin on February 24, 2022, continues. The decision was made against the backdrop of an aggravation of the situation in the region due to shelling by the Ukrainian military.
https://iz-ru.translate.goog/1593155/2023-10-21/pvo-rf-za-sutki-sbila-dva-ukrainskikh-istrebitelia-mig-29?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp
GarryB, dino00, kvs, GunshipDemocracy, VARGR198, zardof, Sprut-B and like this post
Regular- Posts : 3894
Points : 3868
Join date : 2013-03-10
Location : Ukrolovestan
It’s accurate. He didn’t embezzle it himself, but let the money to melt with no results. It probably means hundreds if not thousands rats ate the “cheese”.JohninMK wrote:Don't know how accurate this claim is but it probably isn't that far out, but rather than Reznikov getting it all this is probably the total from which, as the boss, he got the biggest cut.
dana
@dana916
Former Ukrainian defense minister Reznikov stole a cool Billion Dollars! 1,000,000,000
He was fired for corruption, but left without being charged. He’s drinking champagne on a yacht somewhere.
In case you were wondering why more tax money needs to be sent.
Lord Bebo
Following original post by anti-corruption commissioner- Reznikov is not blamed directly.
If they will go ahead (doubt) they will find less important scapegoat. Not so different when Yanukovich was in charge. Whole system is rotten.
GarryB, JohninMK, VARGR198, Broski and ucmvulcan like this post
Dr.Snufflebug- Posts : 1131
Points : 1129
Join date : 2017-12-27
Two Mi-8s destroyed, one Ka-52 slightly damaged (canopy damaged, one fuselage panel perforated, armored panels just slightly discolored) as far as I can tell?
bandit6- Posts : 50
Points : 50
Join date : 2015-04-23
After a week of chemical and nuclear bombing all they will be left to do is mopping up.
Ukraine will never be buddies with them, why not permanently cripple it.
Arkanghelsk- Posts : 3936
Points : 3942
Join date : 2021-12-08
bandit6 wrote:I just don't understand why Russia seems to be wasting a lot of it's soldiers lives while it has the means of ending this conflict quickly.
After a week of chemical and nuclear bombing all they will be left to do is mopping up.
Ukraine will never be buddies with them, why not permanently cripple it.
If Russia could end it early, it would have, but it cannot due to limitations associated with the capabilities of its own military forces as well as the political ramifications of the military losses since the beginning of the special military operation
Currently Russia and Ukraine are in a stalemate throughout the frontline,
The capture of Artemovsk did not bring Russia any large territory or change the frontline, and neither are the small attacks at Kupyansk and Avdeyevka
The front moves there meters only
Same goes for Ukrainian advances at Rabotino, Verbovoe, novoprokopovka and the other small villages Ukraine captured during the offensive
This is in the conditions where funding for Ukraine have been frozen effectively, and Russia cannot change the frontline realities except for small tactical changes of land , which give only positional benefits , same for Ukrainians
In the Grand scheme neither side can conduct large maneuvers, and so they fight positional battles and this is the state of affairs for 1 year now
It's a frozen conflict, it's just most of the observers on both sides don't want to accept this reality
The rest are just mid range and short range missile launches at each other where both sides inflict damage to airfields, storages, and in this aspect Russia can deal more damage, but even that has no real effect as Ukraine has way more resources then Russia estimated when the war began
It will just end as a frozen conflict, remember that the donbass war went on in frozen situation for 7+ years, it's just multiple ceasefires and episodic clashes marked the timeline
Now in the conditions of cold War 2, no ceasefire will happen, but the "armistice line" is de facto the current front line and both sides will leave it as so, as neither has the political capital to effectuate any real change, or the military supplies to conduct mass maneuvers,
Both sides have just enough for replacement and rotations, in the conditions of a slow attritional artillery war , and I would say Ukraine has shown incredible fighting ability, as Russia has the overwhelming advantage in all aspects, but cannot translate them into practical terms
psg, Firebird, Backman and ucmvulcan dislike this post
mnztr- Posts : 2923
Points : 2961
Join date : 2018-01-21
kvs wrote:The Ukr regime and army are demented. That is why they spend valuable resources on pointless terror attacks.
This is the "democracy" that NATzO is backing.
It a conitant pattern. Israel, USA shock and awe, its all the same.
GarryB- Posts : 40688
Points : 41190
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
I just don't understand why Russia seems to be wasting a lot of it's soldiers lives while it has the means of ending this conflict quickly.
After a week of chemical and nuclear bombing all they will be left to do is mopping up.
Ukraine will never be buddies with them, why not permanently cripple it.
Of course... ending this is just a decision Russia needs to make and it will happen.
Just like America just needed to want to end things in Afghanistan instead of wasting 20 years there and leaving in defeat.
Murdering Ukrainian citizens enmass is not something that will end this conflict any time soon... as was shown in Afghanistan and Vietnam and Korea and Afghanistan again if a superpower wants to support the enemy then there can be no victory until that support ends.
The Soviets didn't win in Afghanistan until they left and then US support stopped.
kvs, GunshipDemocracy, littlerabbit, Broski, jon_deluxe, Belisarius and ucmvulcan like this post
bandit6- Posts : 50
Points : 50
Join date : 2015-04-23
Of course... ending this is just a decision Russia needs to make and it will happen.
Just like America just needed to want to end things in Afghanistan instead of wasting 20 years there and leaving in defeat.
Murdering Ukrainian citizens enmass is not something that will end this conflict any time soon... as was shown in Afghanistan and Vietnam and Korea and Afghanistan again if a superpower wants to support the enemy then there can be no victory until that support ends.
The Soviets didn't win in Afghanistan until they left and then US support stopped.
I didn't mean using mass weapons against civilians. Military targets only. Gas can clear fortifications very effectively
Backman- Posts : 2715
Points : 2729
Join date : 2020-11-11
Backman- Posts : 2715
Points : 2729
Join date : 2020-11-11
Some pro Russian daily accounts are saying that the casualties for Russia are elevated to almost Bakhmut levels. This better be worth it. I don't see why planning a decapitation attack of Kiev isn't a better use of resources to put the war to an end
sepheronx- Posts : 8877
Points : 9137
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
Anyway, why rely on telegram channel's and Twitter? Remember Rybars constant dooming?
How many Russians actually died so far? Is it accurate and proven?
I seriously wonder, do you and others like Ark go through this like a woman on her period every month or is this a weekly thing?
kvs, ALAMO, nlyh, Sprut-B, Hole, Mir, Broski and Belisarius like this post
higurashihougi- Posts : 3443
Points : 3530
Join date : 2014-08-13
Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.
ALAMO- Posts : 7614
Points : 7704
Join date : 2014-11-25
sepheronx wrote:Are you on doomer mode again.
Anyway, why rely on telegram channel's and Twitter? Remember Rybars constant dooming?
How many Russians actually died so far? Is it accurate and proven?
I seriously wonder, do you and others like Ark go through this like a woman on her period every month or is this a weekly thing?
Maybe they identify as woman, who knows those crazy days ...
This is a wall of fame from a small village somewhere in nowhere.
Feel free to show me the same in Russia.
We can start to talk seriously about eargasmic loses later on.
higurashihougi wrote:One of the popular arguments of the pro-US people I found on the Internet is that they claimed that as the West only supply missiles in small numbers and managed to bypass Russian defences => if USA supply missiles en masse then Russian defense will be overwhelmed. => Russia is outdated, backward, weak, unprepared blah blah blah bleh.
They still don't get that Murica has no missiles "en masse". Sad.
sepheronx, GarryB, Big_Gazza, kvs, PapaDragon, littlerabbit, Sprut-B and like this post
sepheronx- Posts : 8877
Points : 9137
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
higurashihougi wrote:One of the popular arguments of the pro-US people I found on the Internet is that they claimed that as the West only supply missiles in small numbers and managed to bypass Russian defences => if USA supply missiles en masse then Russian defense will be overwhelmed. => Russia is outdated, backward, weak, unprepared blah blah blah bleh.
So while Russia has anywhere between 70 - 90% interception rate against American missiles and what not, what's is US'? Less than that considerably. And with that said, the other side can do the exact same thing, but even on a grander scale as Alamo said, the US doesn't even have the weapons to send. Can only send small amounts.
If Russia send theirs to Iraqi's who are currently attacking US forces in Iraq at their base, then the base won't be standing at all.
And that is something the pro western crowed doesn't seem to understand. Russia improves and adapts to these hits against it and gets minimal losses. Does the west? And, can they afford the losses like the Russians can take?
GarryB, Big_Gazza, kvs, littlerabbit, Sprut-B, Hole, Mir and like this post
TMA1- Posts : 1199
Points : 1197
Join date : 2020-11-30
GarryB, kvs, JohninMK, littlerabbit and ucmvulcan like this post
Arrow- Posts : 3590
Points : 3580
Join date : 2012-02-12
he US doesn't even have the weapons to send. Can only send small amounts. wrote:
NATO itself has huge amounts of cruise missiles. Several thousand Tomahowk, thousands of AGM 158, and probably hundreds of Storm Shadow, Scalp, Taurus.
sepheronx- Posts : 8877
Points : 9137
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
It expended a lot and now giving to Israel. Their production rates alone are pathetic small and they won't give everything they got or they leave themselves with nothing.
TMA1 wrote:That is a heartbreaking image. Imagine all the mothers and sons and daughters without the men in their lives. Makes me angry thinking about it.
They had a choice, they could have seeked handing their guns in and surrendering to Russia, they didn't and they paid with their lives so Zelensky can continue clowning around and buying villas in other countries.
GarryB, kvs, littlerabbit, Mir, Broski and Belisarius like this post
Arrow- Posts : 3590
Points : 3580
Join date : 2012-02-12
It had. It expended a lot and now giving to Israel. Their production rates alone are pathetic small and they won't give everything they got or they leave themselves with nothing. wrote:
They didn't spend much. Where was the last time they shot from Tomahowk or AGM 158. In Syria. It wasn't a big salvo. So the US alone has thousands of cruise missiles in stock.
sepheronx- Posts : 8877
Points : 9137
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
Wanna tell me more of your bullshit? I've had you on block for so long because od your consistent lying.
Yes, the US has thousands. And that is for their own need. Russia also has thousands plus large production. Something the US currently lacks is a large production.
Hole, Mir, Broski, Belisarius and ucmvulcan like this post
Arrow- Posts : 3590
Points : 3580
Join date : 2012-02-12
sepheronx- Posts : 8877
Points : 9137
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
Arrow wrote:Sepheronx where am I lying? I only stated that the USAF has received about 2,000 AGM 158 missiles over the years and that they certainly still have a large number of Tomahowk missiles in their stockpiles and in their fleet? It's a lie ?
You seem to have reading comprehension and knowledge issues.
Re read everything going back before replying. If you can. I'll repeat though one last time:
Yes, US has thousands. Possibly less than you think they do. Anyway, their production (you do know this word, right?) isn't as large as you think it is. The US complained about it. So has plenty others. So no, they cannot provide to Ukraine en mass, not without jeopardizing their own stock and needs. Now they are also giving plenty to Israel.
Now, you can imagine anything you want. You can live in a fantasy thinking US still has a large industrial base to do this. They don't. They know it and expressed it. Their enemies know it. And so do everyone else since they like to lay their laundry for everyone to see.
Arrow, Hole, Mir, Broski and Belisarius like this post
GarryB- Posts : 40688
Points : 41190
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
I didn't mean using mass weapons against civilians. Military targets only. Gas can clear fortifications very effectively
If gas was an effective weapon of war it would not be banned.
Look at how many people got killed during WWI by artillery and machine gun fire compared with by gas and it is pretty clear that gas was not a reliable killer even when used correctly,
This better be worth it. I don't see why planning a decapitation attack of Kiev isn't a better use of resources to put the war to an end
Because if Russia wipes out their leadership the replacements will be more of the same... so nothing at all will change.
When Ukrainians kill their own leadership they will do it for a chance at peace.
One of the popular arguments of the pro-US people I found on the Internet is that they claimed that as the West only supply missiles in small numbers and managed to bypass Russian defences => if USA supply missiles en masse then Russian defense will be overwhelmed. => Russia is outdated, backward, weak, unprepared blah blah blah bleh.
The use of Stingers and Javelins was going to have the Russians operating on foot because all their air power and armour would be defeated.
The only targets western weapons seem to be effective against are secondary barely military targets and civilian targets, which suggests HATO is actually screwed because their super weapons are rubbish.
Russia is dedicating a small fraction of its military power and HATO will catch up with production levels that Kiev needs in about 10 years time... who is unprepared?
And that is something the pro western crowed doesn't seem to understand. Russia improves and adapts to these hits against it and gets minimal losses. Does the west? And, can they afford the losses like the Russians can take?
When the west attacked Russian forces in Syria with drones Russia upgraded and improved their sensors and missiles and systems and also upgraded their own drones... when Iranian drones and missiles destroyed targets in Saudi Arabia and also US bases in Iraq the US WITHDREW their Patriot batteries to prevent bad publicity... they couldn't care less about protecting their men and facilities...
They ran away so they couldn't be called losers... which makes them the biggest losers.
That is a heartbreaking image. Imagine all the mothers and sons and daughters without the men in their lives. Makes me angry thinking about it.
And all for what... so a few very very rich people in the US could try to get those people to break the country next door to them so they could get richer from them as well.
NATO itself has huge amounts of cruise missiles. Several thousand Tomahowk, thousands of AGM 158, and probably hundreds of Storm Shadow, Scalp, Taurus.
They wont send any because they now know they will just get shot down and look weak... and HATO wants to look strong.
Their production rate was for peace time and they haven't changed that production rate... many of those missiles are hand made which explains their cost.
It expended a lot and now giving to Israel. Their production rates alone are pathetic small and they won't give everything they got or they leave themselves with nothing.
The thing you have to understand about the west... they talk about morals and ethics and good and bad and civilised and barbarians, but as you saw during the recent pandemic, they will steal from any ally they have to get the things they need... even if it sits in storage till its expiry date without being used....
They didn't spend much. Where was the last time they shot from Tomahowk or AGM 158. In Syria. It wasn't a big salvo. So the US alone has thousands of cruise missiles in stock.
That is what most people would assume but those missiles are so expensive they don't have a lot of them sitting in stock... in most conflicts they use them they run out and have to put them back into production to get stocks available... Syria managed to shoot down 70% without an IADS network and just some BUK and Pantsir... and it seems the only missiles that got through were the ones that targeted a suspected chemical weapons lab that had been unused for years so there was no air defence systems located anywhere near it. The western missiles aimed at airfields were mostly shot down... easily.
Having thousands of missiles only matters if you have thousands of launch platforms and when Russia is fighting an enemy with thousands of missiles on thousands of platforms they will have thousands of targets to destroy, so the few that actually get launched can be shot down too.
Sepheronx where am I lying? I only stated that the USAF has received about 2,000 AGM 158 missiles over the years and that they certainly still have a large number of Tomahowk missiles in their stockpiles and in their fleet? It's a lie ?
The Ukraine has nothing that can carry and launch AGM-158 missiles, and any HATO bases within range of Russia that host aircraft carrying such weapons would not last long in a full scale conflict.
Such missiles are trivial to shoot down too, they are like dumb high flying drones...
HATO has nothing like Iskander or Kinzhal or Zircon... or even Onyx or Kh-32... or for that matter Kh-22M or Granit.
kvs, zardof, Sprut-B, Hole, Broski, Belisarius and ucmvulcan like this post