Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments

[The SC]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1524780017275834368

https://twitter.com/x/status/1524820765727662080

 

[The SC]

United Nations: More than six million Ukrainian refugees abroad
@alhurra

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Libya was the wealthiest and African country with probably the highest HDI. Now its a hellhole after NATO bombing.

Your exuses for Libyan intervention are so dull and pathetic. Using the same argument there are tons of nations that deserve to be bombed including western. Because political leaders in almost all countries are a bunch of thiefs and rapists. Some are just better at hiding it. In order to be a top politician there almost always involve some kind of psychopathy, according to research.

Libya was invaded on behalf of America, France and UK. You know what is the most laughable part? Libya could have provided the much needed gas and petroleum that now is sourced from Russia.

Its ridiculous that western governments still has not understood that in todays interconnected world you cannot destroy a nation without it harming yourself in one or another way (something Russia is also learning). Even more worrying is that China has climbed to the top without firing a single bullet since the Sino-Vetnamese War more than four decades ago! Proving that you DONT have to interfere and attack or invade countries anymore in order to become a strong nation. You simply have to be a good businessman and provide goods that someone needs.

Summary:
Foreign intervention as solution to every problem, is a outdated stategy that no longer suits the 21st century. The West is loosing the competition by not trying to enchane its own competitiveness. That in turn leads to interventionist policies, which at its core is a way of treating the symptoms and not the disease itself. That disease is western reluctance to accept the realities and change its own thinking and market competitiveness.

Gaddafi had no legal basis for his rule having grabbed power in a coup. Gaddafi should simply have resigned and call for democratic elections when the Arab Spring movement emerged. He is ultimately responsible for the current situation and got a deserving end.

NATO put a stop to Gadaffi after a UNSC resolution.
The Islamists created the ”Hellhole” afterwards. Now Russia and Turkey is supporting factions in Libya.

 

[khansaheeb]

Silly excuses . if people have issues with the west they should address them , not take it out on Ukraine.

Today it is Ukraine tomorrow it can be your country .

People who support Russia on this , have something wrong with their moral compass.

~

Very funny coming from an Israeli, perhaps you can define the Israeli moral compass?

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Neither Soviet or Russia was/is an Angel.

Germany and Soviet both carved up eastern Europe in order to creater big buffer against eachother. Communists and Nazis hated eachother. Hitler despised communists and accused it for being a jewish conspiracy.

Still, looking at the result theres no doubt the Soviet Union was the real warrior of WW2. Although Nazi Germany was defeated theough Allied afforts, it was Soviet who dealt the biggest blow to Hitler.

You obviously have not looked at the economics of WWII.
Hitler used much more resources against the West than he used against the Soviets.
The cost of the V-2 program exclusively used against the West was higher than the cost of development and production of the Panther tank.
In 1944, the Heer fielded as many troops against the West as it did against the Soviets.
The West defeated Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine.
Zjukov and Stalin (according ti Chrustjev) both said that it would have been unlikely for the Soviets to win,without the help from the West.

 

[Wergeland]

NATO put a stop to Gadaffi after a UNSC resolution.
The Islamists created the ”Hellhole” afterwards. Now Russia and Turkey is supporting factions in Libya.

Lets say NATO did the right thing as you say.
Removed a non-democratic Ghaddafi.
In that case NATO in the aftermath, has a obligation to create a new state which atleast provide better conditions for Libyans than what Ghaddafi-government could provide, whatever it may cost. Its the only way NATO intervention can be somewhat justified. But reality shows a completely different picture.

Radical insurgent groups and warlords gained power simply because NATO removed a stable functioning government and did not even try to build a new and better government. Chaos thrives in powervacum.

 

[Paul2]

You seem to have a hard on about US cruise missiles.. we get it, let it go, you've barked the same bark a hundred times on this thread already. The US has other weapons and choices as well. The Russians have equal cruise missile capability, but you can't seem to see beyond that. Cruise missiles are but one tool in the box. Attacking their nuclear infrastructure would mean a nuclear exchange (MAD scenario), can you not see that in your myopic, limited vision?

Nuclear exchange... Do you know why Russia never did it, because it would've lost.

If USSR, or Russians, OR Beijing were sure they have even 70% chance to win, they would've pushed the button the very second they knew they can do that.

 

[The SC]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1524824505092390917

https://twitter.com/x/status/1524824894042689547

 

[The SC]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1524833248005738501

 

[Corax]

Nuclear exchange... Do you know why Russia never did it, because it would've lost.

If USSR, or Russians, OR Beijing were sure they have even 70% chance to win, they would've pushed the button the very second they knew they can do that.

No, look up the concept of mutually assured destruction (M.A.D). Using your twisted logic, if the USSR or Russians can't win a nuclear exchange with the US, why hasn't the US simply wiped it out already?! Do people who advocate a nuclear holocaust actually have a brain cell?

 

[The SC]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1524812896135421952

No, look up the concept of mutually assured destruction (M.A.D). Using your twisted logic, if the USSR or Russians can't win a nuclear exchange with the US, why hasn't the US simply wiped it out already?! Do people who advocate a nuclear holocaust actually have a brain cell?

The Russian nuclear doctrine provides for the possibility of using nuclear weapons in the event of an existential threat to the country - Deputy Representative of Russia to the United Nations Polyansky.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1524828013354962945

 

[SalarHaqq]

Saddam killed a million of his people.

1) Iran lost 280.000 of her citizens in the 1980-1988 Imposed War (not a million).

2) Saddam was enabled by the US as well as other NATO regimes to commit crimes against Iran.

 

[Paul2]

if the USSR or Russians can't win a nuclear exchange with the US, why hasn't the US simply wiped it out already?!

Because they are weak

 

[letsrock]

You obviously have not looked at the economics of WWII.
Hitler used much more resources against the West than he used against the Soviets.
The cost of the V-2 program exclusively used against the West was higher than the cost of development and production of the Panther tank.
In 1944, the Heer fielded as many troops against the West as it did against the Soviets.
The West defeated Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine.
Zjukov and Stalin (according ti Chrustjev) both said that it would have been unlikely for the Soviets to win,without the help from the West.

what revisionism.

 

[The SC]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1524832734744563733