Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments PART 2

[gambit]

ICJ is applicable to the countries that recognize it not every country .
also as the ruling of the court imply first it is stablished that the USA trained and provide weapon to the contras during the conflict not before that , and they were non state actors that had no business receiving those weapons .
these are the countries that recognize ICJ


not Iran not Ukraine , not Russia, Not USA, . the problem here is solved

No, the problem is not solved.

The idea that neutrality means exactly that -- neutrality -- is as old as warfare itself. All the Geneva Convention does is codified into a language that everyone can accept. By 'language', I do not mean English or French or whatever, I mean in terms and explanations that everyone understand. So just because some countries do not approve and consent to the GC, it does not mean those who agreed to it will not hold the GC against them if those who do not consent committed war crimes. The bottom line that no one wanted to admit is that if your country has an army, by default you are under the GC.

 

[Viet]

My original estimate was that Russia has 16 to 17 months left in it's war chest, if it wants to sustain war on its original intensity level.

I later revised it up to unexpectedly delayed sanctions on oil, and gas, with 30 month being topmost estimate before the economy croaks for good.

Later, the number of 1.2m men mobilised have also not materialised, but they have certainly lost at least 1+ million men (and also many working age women) leaving the country.

Russia is now certainly revising its war strategy for worse economy to sustain it.

Big question: will they prepare money to spend in one big push, or the opposite, they plan for long sustenance? Or whether they do any planning at all now?

The big question is whether or not Russia military machine can produce enough men and materials for the incoming offensives.

Until now most of weapons, tanks, ammo, artillery come from the reserves of Soviet Union.

 

[Stranagor]

So the guys US bombed in afghan weddings weren't civilians?

Or the guys Russia ethnic cleansed in Chechnya and Dagestan, for that matter.

 

[Hassan Al-Somal]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1621047162334486529

https://twitter.com/x/status/1620907463653605387

Russian losses have now exceeded 9,000!

You can add my name to it as if these randomly generated numbers make any sense.

 

[Hassan Al-Somal]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1620879807671320578

 

[Hack-Hook]

non-neutral == involved in the war.

You are not attacking Iran in this case. You are defending yourself against Iranian aggression, which is allowed.

Sadly for you it's not how the international legal system works.

The chances is that Iran will reap the fruit of not being neutral

That remain to be seen and as of today Iran is legally neutral. That can't be said about certain Nordic country. Let see who reap the fruit.

 

[zectech]

The risk of Putin nuking Europe is higher than before.

If Putin nukes Europe, every clear thinking nation would denounce Putin.

That is where Trump is tasked with blaming Democrats and the Europeans as "scapegoats", for sending tanks.

Trump suggests providing tanks to Ukraine will lead to 'nukes' and says ending the war with Russia would be 'easy'

Trump, who referred to Putin as a "genius" the week Russia invaded Ukraine, was once impeached over his dealings with Kyiv.

news.yahoo.com

Trump sides with Putin planning to use nukes, over the Intel community that says Putin won't use nukes.

MSN

Putin plans on nuking Europe when Putin won't be blamed or won't get nuked back/would get away with nuking Europe. That is where trump is useful to putin. Months ago, Putin shills were saying Ukraine and the USA were planning on using nukes. This was a Putin tactic to have a situation where Putin believes Putinites and the manipulated support Putin using nukes with the scapegoat of Europeans and Democrats.

Trump wants to campaign in 2024, on Joe Biden and the Democrats are to blame for the nuking of Europe, and that Trump predicted Europe being nuked. And the DC Beltways sent arms to Ukraine to defend from a Russian invasion being to "blame". "Shame on those defending Europe from Putin"

Trump also wants to campaign on purging the DC Beltway. Trump plans to blame Democrats for the nuking of Europe and perhaps use the nuking of Europe to demand neo-liberal Democrats that support Zelensky, Ukraine and NATO resign/fired from federal positions.

In first DC appearance since leaving office, Trump signals he wants presidential powers to reshape federal bureaucrats to be more MAGA

In his last months in office, Trump signed an executive order which could have led to a swift purge of federal employees had he not lost the election.

www.businessinsider.com

So if Trump buddy Putin nukes Europe, Trump wants to spin it and have the blame not be on buddy Putin for using nukes. Trump wants to blame Democrats for Putin using nukes, blame Europe for Putin using nukes.

Trump is showing that Trump buddy Putin is planning to use nukes. This is plainly obvious. Putin wants to use nukes on Europe, there are various factors preventing this.

 

[SalarHaqq]

Let me use this old Soviet adage to make it clear:

"We know you're lying, they know you lied and yet you're still lying."

This in fact is akin to a rhetoric figure known as argumentum ad populum ("everyone knows"). A fallacy destined to make up for an argument's lack of substance.

Everybody from Alaska to new Zealand knows that Iran supplied Russia with Drones. That means if Ukrainian did attack that mean it's legitimate.

Supplying drones to Russia does not generate a legally valid nor a legitimate casus belli. For that, two conditions must be met:

1) It must be firmly established that the aggressor in legal terms is actually Russia and not the Ukraine. Considering the Russian legal position outlined above, this is yet to materialize.

2) Iran must have delivered the drones after the start of the war, which is not the case. Iran transferred the equipment in question before 20 February 2022. By that logic, Kiev could as well attack France, Germany and Italy which sold hundreds of millions worth of weaponry to Moscow prior to 20 February 2022. French, German, Italian weaponry which is now being used by Russian forces in their conflict against Ukraine.

France, Germany and Italy sold arms to Russia despite embargo

France, Germany and Italy used a loophole in a ban of exporting arms to Russia to send the Kremlin €296million worth of military equipment that is now being used against Ukraine.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Meaning that since a Kiev regime official claimed responsibility for the failed quadcopter attack at Esfahan, Ukraine has declared to have committed military aggression against Iran. This in turn enables Iran to retaliate militarily against Ukraine from now on.

Now if I were on NATO's side, I wouldn't be celebrating this all too much. Because to keep it short, there's nothing the regime in Ukraine can realistically accomplish to harm Iran. Iran however has the means to inflict serious damage on Ukrainian forces, as if they needed another capable adversary to enter the fray on top of the Russians.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Let me use this old Soviet adage to make it clear:

"We know you're lying, they know you lied and yet you're still lying."

Everybody from Alaska to new Zealand knows that Iran supplied Russia with Drones. That means if Ukrainian did attack that mean it's legitimate.

Then show the evidence to support your accusations.
Not some baseless claims originated in base on....

 

[Hack-Hook]

So if you steal a car, crash it and leaves and noone can trace to You, You are not a car thief? Think Again…

If you can't prove it you can't accuse me of any wrong doing
After all the rule based international legality say you are innocent until proven otherwise and its you who make the accusation that must prove otherwise.

Where in International Law do You find ”non-neutral” countries.
Until You can show that they exist, refrain to use that term.

The correct term is ”countries at war”.

No its not the correct its a complete valid English term. And your laws state that countries can take side but not participate in the war.

That does not change the position of Iran.

No Iran still is neutral. Sweden still participated in the war and Iran position still the same UNSC still a useless toy in the hand of veto right holders

 

[jhungary]

The big question is whether or not Russia military machine can produce enough men and materials for the incoming offensives.

Until now most of weapons, tanks, ammo, artillery come from the reserves of Soviet Union.

If I were Putin, I will probably use the old stock for one more push.

Yes, they can make new thing, but tanks and artillery pieces are not going to be made in an enough number. At the end it will come down to1 of the 3 options

1.) use all he new stuff, with whatever number in it, the other just fist it.
2.) use a mix of old (surplus) stock and new stock, everybody have some, some have better stuff.
3.) use entirely old surplus stuff.

1 would most likely the stupid choice, 2 wouldn't work much, you better off saving the best stuff for future if you know you are going to be tough time ahead, 3 make the most sense, especially when Putin don't really care about his men.

 

[Hack-Hook]

No, the problem is not solved.

The idea that neutrality means exactly that -- neutrality -- is as old as warfare itself. All the Geneva Convention does is codified into a language that everyone can accept. By 'language', I do not mean English or French or whatever, I mean in terms and explanations that everyone understand. So just because some countries do not approve and consent to the GC, it does not mean those who agreed to it will not hold the GC against them if those who do not consent committed war crimes. The bottom line that no one wanted to admit is that if your country has an army, by default you are under the GC.

Me knew what is neutrality, you knew what is it, many other people also knew what is it. But when you discuss it in term of legality, it's definition is not every person consider it so.
And you must say that to lawyer and countries who wrote those laws and opened those loopholes and intentionally left clauses there in hope of using it themselves later, forgetting that others also can use them.

And it's Legality and power of ICJ that I'm talking about not Geneva convections

 

[SalarHaqq]

So if you steal a car, crash it and leaves and noone can trace to You, You are not a car thief? Think Again.

Iran did not supply weapons to Russia after 20 February 2022. Therefore Kiev's official claim to have conducted a failed quadcopter strike on a factory in Esfahan equals military aggression. Iran is now in her internationally guaranteed right to retaliate as massively as she wishes, against Ukrainian armed forces.

The rest of the metaphorical rhetoric quoted above amounts to para-logical wordplay.

 

[Viet]

The risk of Putin nuking Europe is higher than before.

If Putin nukes Europe, every clear thinking nation would denounce Putin.

That is where Trump is tasked with blaming Democrats and the Europeans as "scapegoats", for sending tanks.

Trump suggests providing tanks to Ukraine will lead to 'nukes' and says ending the war with Russia would be 'easy'

Trump, who referred to Putin as a "genius" the week Russia invaded Ukraine, was once impeached over his dealings with Kyiv.

news.yahoo.com

Trump sides with Putin planning to use nukes, over the Intel community that says Putin won't use nukes.

MSN

Putin plans on nuking Europe when Putin won't be blamed or won't get nuked back/would get away with nuking Europe. That is where trump is useful to putin. Months ago, Putin shills were saying Ukraine and the USA were planning on using nukes. This was a Putin tactic to have a situation where Putin believes Putinites and the manipulated support Putin using nukes with the scapegoat of Europeans and Democrats.

Trump wants to campaign in 2024, on Joe Biden and the Democrats are to blame for the nuking of Europe, and that Trump predicted Europe being nuked. And the DC Beltways sent arms to Ukraine to defend from a Russian invasion being to "blame". "Shame on those defending Europe from Putin"

Trump also wants to campaign on purging the DC Beltway. Trump plans to blame Democrats for the nuking of Europe and perhaps use the nuking of Europe to demand neo-liberal Democrats that support Zelensky, Ukraine and NATO resign/fired from federal positions.

In first DC appearance since leaving office, Trump signals he wants presidential powers to reshape federal bureaucrats to be more MAGA

In his last months in office, Trump signed an executive order which could have led to a swift purge of federal employees had he not lost the election.

www.businessinsider.com

So if Trump buddy Putin nukes Europe, Trump wants to spin it and have the blame not be on buddy Putin for using nukes. Trump wants to blame Democrats for Putin using nukes, blame Europe for Putin using nukes.

Easy for him to end the war but don’t tell how? Trump is a psycho. He hardly paid any taxes despite claiming otherwise. To remain in power he was ready to initiate a civil war, leaving the NATO and nuke the world. Trump is very dangerous I hope he fails to return.

 

[Paul2]

The big question is whether or not Russia military machine can produce enough men and materials for the incoming offensives.

Until now most of weapons, tanks, ammo, artillery come from the reserves of Soviet Union.

Russia will not run out of Russians for a very long time. Similarly, they can produce arms like sewage pipe mortars for a very long time with their material capacity.

They will break far sooner than they will become materially unable to field extra forces.