Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments PART 2

[A.P. Richelieu]

That is not how regime change was done, the actual things happen behind the curtain, what you say happened is for common people.

The actual thing happened as a vote in the parliament.

 

[dBSPL]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1565364577117814784

Same ministry also claimed that all tb-2's shot downed, but

(volume up)

https://twitter.com/x/status/1565372183244951552

 

[F-22Raptor]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1565346198751350784

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1565348540335161345

 

[dBSPL]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1565383263954378752

 

[RoadAmerica]

LOL your rebuttals are hilarious at best, Go back and comprehend the gist and then see the difference in Amreekan behavior... Putins plutonium rod is way too big for combined NATO to take on.. LOLzz...

Just stop, you’re the one without a clear argument.
Please learn to spell, I don’t spell it Ruusiaaa

 

[RoadAmerica]

Iraqi air defense shot down plenty of Coalition aircraft. If they were supplied and had sufficient ammo they would have won Gulf war.

Coalition Fixed-Wing Attrition in Desert Storm

www.rjlee.org

Come on, please turn your brain on

 

[Thinker3]

So what you are speculating is that if Iraq of Desert Storm got 30 yrs worth of technological advancement to fight the US of Desert Storm, then Desert Storm would not have been so lopsided? So in order for Desert Storm to be a 'real' war, it has to be 1991 US vs 2022 Iraq? You guys do not see how intellectually distorted that is?

When I got orders to deploy to Desert Storm, our F-16s just finished transition over to the C/D digital models. It is not our fault that Soviet jets were shiddy compared to US. Neither is it our fault that our people were better trained. The predictions were that US and allies WOULD, not merely could, incur Vietnam War era casualties. We took the Iraqi military seriously from the Iran-Iraq War and planned accordingly. I used to be on the F-111E and that jet was of the same technological time as the Iraqi Air Force. What the world's military leaderships, especially the Soviet Union and China, saw was that Desert Storm was %75 people and %25 hardware. Why do you think the PLA re-format itself to the US model?

I am taking nothing away from US military, they are indeed extremely well trained.
I did not say that in 1991 Iraqi Army had to be equipped with 2022 era weapons, I was saying that if Iraqi army at that time had the support like Ukraine is getting today they would have defended their land, the fact is that Iraqi army in 1991 or in 2003 had outdated Soviet weapons, in 1991 the Soviet weapons were very advanced and if Soviets had provided Iraq with those things would have been different, same with 2003.
This discussion started when someone was mocking Russian military that they are thought to be a mighty power but they are failing in Ukraine.

It doesn’t say explicitly, it states
Page 6:

…respect for sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all states and their inherent right to choose the means to ensure their own security, the inviolability of borders and peoples' right of self-determination as enshrined in the Helsinki Final Act and other OSCE documents.”

Page 12:

“The member States of NATO reiterate that they have no intention, no plan and no reason to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new members, nor any need to change any aspect of NATO's nuclear posture or nuclear policy - and do not foresee any future need to do so.”

So the US and NATO used these loopholes in the agreement, I am sure there must be some lack of communication and Russins were not able to anticipate the cunning and deception hidden in the agreement, the page 12 new members nuclear weapons, they might have thought about NATO talking about East Germany.

 

[Thinker3]

So what you are speculating is that if Iraq of Desert Storm got 30 yrs worth of technological advancement to fight the US of Desert Storm, then Desert Storm would not have been so lopsided? So in order for Desert Storm to be a 'real' war, it has to be 1991 US vs 2022 Iraq? You guys do not see how intellectually distorted that is?

When I got orders to deploy to Desert Storm, our F-16s just finished transition over to the C/D digital models. It is not our fault that Soviet jets were shiddy compared to US. Neither is it our fault that our people were better trained. The predictions were that US and allies WOULD, not merely could, incur Vietnam War era casualties. We took the Iraqi military seriously from the Iran-Iraq War and planned accordingly. I used to be on the F-111E and that jet was of the same technological time as the Iraqi Air Force. What the world's military leaderships, especially the Soviet Union and China, saw was that Desert Storm was %75 people and %25 hardware. Why do you think the PLA re-format itself to the US model?

Soviets had pretty good military hardware in 1991 but they did not provide Iraq those weapons, eg SU 30 or new versions of mig 29 would have been a good match for f16 C/D and S300 would have been extremely deadly.

 

[Viet]

I am taking nothing away from US military, they are indeed extremely well trained.
I did not say that in 1991 Iraqi Army had to be equipped with 2022 era weapons, I was saying that if Iraqi army at that time had the support like Ukraine is getting today they would have defended their land, the fact is that Iraqi army in 1991 or in 2003 had outdated Soviet weapons, in 1991 the Soviet weapons were very advanced and if Soviets had provided Iraq with those things would have been different, same with 2003.
This discussion started when someone was mocking Russian military that they are thought to be a mighty power but they are failing in Ukraine.


So the US and NATO used these loopholes in the agreement, I am sure there must be some lack of communication and Russins were not able to anticipate the cunning and deception hidden in the agreement, the page 12 new members nuclear weapons, they might have thought about NATO talking about East Germany.

The agreement says “new members”. East Germany is not a “new member” because part of Germany. Yes, I would say the West was clever in the formula of the agreement. the russians were probably drunken.

 

[Thinker3]

The agreement says “new members”. East Germany is not a “new member” because part of Germany. Yes, I would say the West was clever in the formula of the agreement. the russians were probably drunken.

So finally we agree on something, so you see west was never sincere from the start with Russia, and western propaganda says that Putin was not sincere.

 

[ZeGerman]

So finally we agree on something, so you see west was never sincere from the start with Russia, and western propaganda says that Putin was not sincere.

Yes, how cunning and evil from nato to add that formerly colonised and occupied eastern europe countries could choose their own security and their sovereignity would be respected…..

Poor poor russia…..

 

[Thinker3]

Yes, how cunning and evil from nato to add that formerly colonised and occupied eastern europe countries could choose their own security and their sovereignity would be respected…..

Poor poor russia…..

Russia was not threatening or attacking anyone at that time, there was no need for NATO after Soviet Union let alone its expansion.
Even if we look 1 or 2 years ago, Russia had very good relations with European countries and both were getting socio economic benefits from eachother. But then Ukraine Issue was created, some countries did not wanted Russia and EU to get closer. Now instead of socio-economic development both EU and Russia will focus on military, which will hamper their socio-economic development.
Same with the Taiwan, the issue can easily be solved peacefully but then someone wants to create war.

 

[jhungary]

I am taking nothing away from US military, they are indeed extremely well trained.
I did not say that in 1991 Iraqi Army had to be equipped with 2022 era weapons, I was saying that if Iraqi army at that time had the support like Ukraine is getting today they would have defended their land, the fact is that Iraqi army in 1991 or in 2003 had outdated Soviet weapons, in 1991 the Soviet weapons were very advanced and if Soviets had provided Iraq with those things would have been different, same with 2003.
This discussion started when someone was mocking Russian military that they are thought to be a mighty power but they are failing in Ukraine.


So the US and NATO used these loopholes in the agreement, I am sure there must be some lack of communication and Russins were not able to anticipate the cunning and deception hidden in the agreement, the page 12 new members nuclear weapons, they might have thought about NATO talking about East Germany.

The West actually did not supply Ukraine the way Soviet Union did with Iraq. In fact, if the West supply Ukraine the way SU supplied Iraq back in 1991, Russia would most likely had already been beaten back by now.

You need to look at what the West had supplied Ukraine with vis-a-vis What Soviet Union did with Iraq.

Western Aid in Ukraine
136 M777 Artillery System
16 HIMARS
7 M270 MLRS
~20,000 Javelin Missile System
~5000 stinger Missile System
15 Caesar Mobile Artillery
10 Pzh2000 SPG
2 NASAM System
45 M109 SPG
~250 T-72M/T-72M1
~200 BMP-1
~100 M113
50 Bushmaster AFV
70 Krabs
40 BM-21 Grad
20 Mi-8/Mi-17
80 Mastiff
40 FV-107
30 FV-104
10,000 AT-4 Launcher
5500 NLAW Launcher
40 MRAP
500 Switchblade Drone
160 Phoenix Ghost Drone
Assorted Small Arms, Drones, Helmet and etc.

Soviet Supplies of Iraq
1000 T-72(A/M/M1)
72 Su-25
40 Mig-29
1000 BMP1
250 BMP2
1100 BM-21 Grad
300 SCUD-B
A combination of SA-2, SA-8 and SA-13.

Notice that the West did not deliver a hell lot of advance weapons to Ukraine, the most advance weapon in that list is HIMARS and Drones, MLRS and other SPG existed for more than 30 years. The West also did not supply Ukraine with Tank (Other than the 200 or so donated T-72), Aircraft and SAM. While SU supplies of Iraq are more comprehensive, it ranges from Tanks to Fighter Jets to Ballistic Missile.

 

[Thinker3]

The West actually did not supply Ukraine the way Soviet Union did with Iraq. In fact, if the West supply Ukraine the way SU supplied Iraq back in 1991, Russia would most likely had already been beaten back by now.

You need to look at what the West had supplied Ukraine with vis-a-vis What Soviet Union did with Iraq.

Western Aid in Ukraine
136 M777 Artillery System
16 HIMARS
7 M270 MLRS
~20,000 Javelin Missile System
~5000 stinger Missile System
15 Caesar Mobile Artillery
10 Pzh2000 SPG
2 NASAM System
45 M109 SPG
~250 T-72M/T-72M1
~200 BMP-1
~100 M113
50 Bushmaster AFV
70 Krabs
40 BM-21 Grad
20 Mi-8/Mi-17
80 Mastiff
40 FV-107
30 FV-104
10,000 AT-4 Launcher
5500 NLAW Launcher
40 MRAP
500 Switchblade Drone
160 Phoenix Ghost Drone
Assorted Small Arms, Drones, Helmet and etc.

Soviet Supplies of Iraq
1000 T-72(A/M/M1)
72 Su-25
40 Mig-29
1000 BMP1
250 BMP2
1100 BM-21 Grad
300 SCUD-B
A combination of SA-2, SA-8 and SA-13.

Notice that the West did not deliver a hell lot of advance weapons to Ukraine, the most advance weapon in that list is HIMARS and Drones, MLRS and other SPG existed for more than 30 years. The West also did not supply Ukraine with Tank (Other than the 200 or so donated T-72), Aircraft and SAM. While SU supplies of Iraq are more comprehensive, it ranges from Tanks to Fighter Jets to Ballistic Missile.

First of all this military aid is not even 10% west has given Ukraine, plus add mercenaries, volunteers, training camps in border countries.
Secondly even if we compare your figures of military aid, still aid to Ukraine is much bigger.
If Iraq had 5000 Soviet latest manpads and 10000+ atgm's that can destroy Abrams imagine what would have happened.
The real damage Russia is taking and has taken is from manpads and ATGM's all other weapons don't matter much.