What's new

Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments

Status
Not open for further replies.
So this talk about 70 warplanes donated to Ukraine was also just another massive dose of copium for the neo Nazis..

Poland and Bulgaria deny warplanes supply to Ukraine


Polish President Andrzej Duda said on Monday Poland and NATO were not part of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine and therefore can’t send jets to join the combat. “We are not sending any jets to Ukraine because that would open a military interference in the Ukrainian conflict. We are not joining that conflict. NATO is not a party to that conflict,” he said at a press conference after his meeting with NATO General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg, adding that they were supporting Ukrainians with humanitarian aid.

NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg has also confirmed that NATO was not to be part of the conflict, and therefore was not to send any troops and planes to Ukraine. However, he confirmed that NATO will continue to provide Ukraine with financial and military support, such as anti-tank weapons, air defense systems, and other types of military equipment.

Earlier on Tuesday, the Ukrainian Air Force officially announced on their Facebook page that three NATO countries – Poland, Slovakia, and Bulgaria – would deliver more than 70 warplanes for the Ukrainian army. The jets were supposed to be able to operate from Polish airfields.

The Bulgarian Defense Ministry told local media on Tuesday that it has not considered providing combat aircraft to Ukraine.

Military conflict between Russia and Ukraine broke out on Thursday after Russian authorities launched a military operation, claiming it was necessary to “demilitarize” and “denazify” Ukraine to protect the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics. The international community imposed heavy sanctions against Russia and closed airspace of more than 30 countries worldwide as a response to the “unprovoked” hostilities.

The first round of negotiations between Russia and Ukraine was held on Monday in an undisclosed location on the Belarus-Ukrainian border. The key goal of the negotiations was to achieve a ceasefire.


Europe dosent want this war.
If one analyse the whole situation from a geostrategic and geoeconomic standpoint, the Russo-Ukrainian war is completely against the interest of Germany and France.

It is United States that is the Grand Architect of this war, with UK and Poland as its foremost supporters.

The United States dosent trust France and Germany because these are proud, strong and independent minded states who both historically has proven, and still is capable and INTERESTED in, carving out its own spheres in a new multipolar world.

What is the US plan for hindering a Franco-German ascendence? Its AUKUS!!! and using AUKUS to prevent any US competitor from arising in the World Island.
With AUKUS the US now has core group of countries which are linguistically and culturally mirror copies of itself, and whom which it can trust to a much higher degree than forexample Germany. On this AUKUS bandwagon there are codependents like former soviet republics Poland, balticum, Scandinavia etc.
 
Last edited:
FMxxa0_XwAoAVFZ.jpeg


The Ukrainian Army just captured a Russian TOS-1A thermobaric MRL. 🇺🇦🇷🇺
FMxpZB_XEAAOxBF.jpeg

FMxpZBcXMAcKx6t.jpeg

Rob Lee
@RALee85
·
1h
An abandoned Russian Tor-M2 air defense system 9A331M TLAR in Ukraine, which is Russia’s best short-range air defense system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HRK
It's our moment to claim our firm position in Non-Aligned Movement and the reason of my opinion is explain below in summarize manner

- Moscow is just 700 Km from Kyiv
01.jpg


so for Russia situation is same as it was in 1962 during the days of Cuban Missile Crisis , only thing different today is the reversal of roles previously US was seeking to defend against the 'Potential threats' to its Nation & was trying to safeguard its Political and Strategic Interest in the region.

Now it's Russia who is defending against the Potential Threat you can see that Moscow is Just 750 KM from Ukraine's Capital Kyiv and in the days of Hypersonic missiles it is just negligible, so Moscow and main population centers of Russia could not be defended if hostile forces to Russia manage to install their missiles in Ukraine.

This thing alone shows the importance of Ukraine for Russia in her defence posture so Russia could seriously go to any extent to defend itself against the potential threat and by any extent I mean I could not rule out the possibility of use of Nuclear weapon, if need arise.

- We have seen Hillary Clinton remarks about Ukraine crisis in which she hinted the possibility of application of Afghan Jihad Model, BUT we must understand Ukraine is not Afghanistan neither in terms of train nor in terms of Social Behaviour, secondly we know to implement a successful model of Afghan Jihad the whole region has to pay the price not just in terms finance but social and political prices as well, we have paid it therefore we know how destructive it could be.

Therefore I don't think Europe would prefer to apply Afghan Jihad Model at their doorstep (Ukraine) so what could be the possible outcome of Ukraine crisis .... ??

- In my opinion Europe would try to resolve the matter on table but till the resolution will keep supporting mid to low scale military operations by Ukraine arms forces and allied militias & mercenaries from all over the world.

One thing for sure is that this crises would give raise to the feelings and political ideologies of Ultra Nationalism based on Racism in Europe, we have seen this happening within the first few days of this conflict, I don't want to repeat the media reportings and certain actions of far right groups, this thing will again affect the migrants in Europe negatively.

IF Europ chose to defuse conflict in its immediate neighbourhood (which it should) then it will respond to Russia somewhere else may be in Middle East, which mean a destabilize Syria and possibly Iran as well, Turkey might also face some of the toughest situation on its borders

In any case this crisis could affect us negatively irrespective of our stance of favoring to any party of the conflict, so rather to pick one side and make other enemy it's better IF we stick with our stance that we respect Sovereignty of every State and all the crisis must be resolved diplomatically.

One thing is sure general public of west will now understand that the so called Rules based International System which West used to claim to establish was not working for the rest of the world, but now it is not even working for them as well.
 
Last edited:
I read in some German news, not only have the refused to be part of sanction regime against Russia but have also criticized banning of RT and Sputnik.

This is why I was wondering whether it is true.
MEXICO CITY, March 1 (Reuters) - Mexico will not impose any economic sanctions on Russia for invading Ukraine, Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said on Tuesday.

He also criticized what he called censorship of Russian state-sponsored media by social media companies.

"We are not going to take any sort of economic reprisal because we want to have good relations with all the governments in the world," Lopez Obrador told a news conference.

 
Last edited:
👍

In view of following developments:

[1] Germany approved Nord Stream 2 in 2011 (construction complete in 2021);
[2] Donald Trump courted Vladimir Putin during his Presidency (2017 - 2021);
[3] UK approved Brexit in 2020;

- the impression was that the European Identity is falling apart and it is only a matter of time that NATO will be irrelevant as well.

Putin looked focused and unstoppable - he was winning on the global chess board. The American Deep State was in PANIC mode. Putin's mere smile was sufficient to send a shiver down the spine of anybody in Pentagon.

But Putin shot himself in the foot instead - he decided to bite more than he could chew by attempting 'regime change' in Ukraine. He managed to rally the entire OECD against him with this gross miscalculation. He rejuvenated the Western hemisphere in the process. The American Deep State is on the move now.

There is a lesson to be learnt in this.

Putin have attempted to malign his peer in Ukraine and created a major humanitarian crises in the country.


There is a saying in Urdu: Baaz Ajao Khuda Ki Lathi Be Awaz Hoti Hai

Some will not get it though - the ultimate tragedy of mankind.

Just because another party was oppressive at some point - doesn't means that YOU follow suit and JOIN the club as well.

Where is the mighty Bush family today? It became irrelevant.

Do NOT oppress the weak. Simple.
NATO is an American creation and bears the American identity, not an European one. Europeans have been searching for their own identity independent from Americans and they haven't found it yet. So, they still rely on Americans and suffer from the latter.

I think Trump is the true pacifist. Those who can acknowledge and listen to the voice of the opposite side have the true capability to maintain peace, unlike those self-righteous people filled with high-sounding words in their mouths and cotton balls in their ears.

With Trump, NATO would not be so aggressive in expansion and other member countries should pick up more responsibility in the effort of self-defense, which means less attractive to those cheap countries that just want something without paying for it. In fact, this would help Europe find its own identity when major European countries step up in maintaining the peace of Europe, instead of relying on NATO.
 
1.) No Mobilisation on Convoy mostly because the drone and fighter run out of ammo. IT's a 6 days old war, US/EU only resupplying them 2 days ago, it's not surprise the Ukrainian had run out of bombs and missile.

2.) The Eastern State traditionally is not a strong supporter for the Ukrainian central government, also the difficulty to supply weapon to Eastern province. But despite that, unconfirm info suggest Kharkiv have form a 20,000 TDF,

3.) The south is open woodland, they aren't dense urban area like in the North, and the fact that Southern Urban cities (Mariupol and Odessa) has not yet fall means the progress is largely on the outskirt.

4.) Logistic is going to be a problem in the eastern city, as most of them are close to Russia border, making Russian interdiction easier.

5.) TDF are the reserve, they need to withhold regular troop on the West to hold down the West in order to get supplies in.

6.) Well, consider now 75% of the invasion force are mobilised, it will be hard to do hit and run, it would work in the early stage but not when they started to swing the number at you.

7.) At this point artillery are probably used as COUNTBAT, it would be wise to deploy it closer to Kyiv.

8.) At this point, precision strike are not going to be effective, as they started to mass their troop, in case you have not notice, there is a shift of Russian tactics, now they are more align to old Soviet style Armor Column attack, Precision Strike can be use to target Russian C&C and command structure, but nothing else. And even if they do, the sheer number will still dwarf them

9.) As I said before, now it's the traditional siege, they are going to thrust at Ukrainian defence with overwhelming number of Armor, at this point, you should reposition every available support fire to the rear, and absorb the first strike, then use artillery to mess up the second line.

10.) Don't think this is an Ukrainian C&C problem, this is what we called a static phase, basically Russia is going to come at Ukrainian with everything they got, sure, using support asset take out one or two unit here and there, you can do that, but it would not make any different as you are facing a giant head on assault, Tradition NATO playbook is hunker down, let the Amour rolled thru and then attack the infantry that followed with your unit and artillery support.

11.) I think they are now incapable to act on Intel, again, a combination of trying to preserve force and logistic issue..

12.) It wouldn't do much, as I said before, the Russian tried to disable Ukrainian airfield by launching missile on precision strike, we all know how that goes, and Russian have more advance missile.

13.) Well, as I said before, you can only do so much hit and run. once they are adapted to your strategy, you can't really do that anymore. Now it's way pass that, this is now a siege warfare. You need to be able to absorb damage now, which mean for Ukrainian, every unit counts

14.) That's Russian battleplan tho. The Russian south need to take both Dnipro and Mariupol and another Marine landing over at Odessa

15.) Russia changed their tactics since last night, no doubt, If Ukraine was smart, they should start resupplying the Kyiv. They can lose any city, but they can't lose Kyiv. Now this is going to turn into a siege warfare, which mean support, supply and troop have to be concentrated. I don't think there are anything Ukrainian can do but Hunker down and take the onslaught at this point,

1.) I meant that on 20th, US told them that Russia effectively telexed their commanders an attack plan, and Ukrainian pres didn't call for mobilisation, and draft. It cost them 3-4 days, and ability to do the last minute resupply.

2.) The East Ukraine holds the most remarkable actually, with a lot of armour kills, thus not much reports of fighting with armour there now, but about Russians doing hide & seek, in woods around Kharkiv, and retreating behind the border in few cases.

Donetsk direction had almost a half of all Ukrainian heavy units, because they were there since 2014. It seems it actually working, and well supplied to hold on for quite some time.

3.) I checked few maps, there are no woodlands in the south, as its almost all agricultural land, and very open fields. My guess they were very afraid of scattered ATGM teams, which effectively outrange Russian tanks, and waited for solid air cover to regroup in larger formations before the push.

And I guess, they are also afraid of a chance for cutoff, as I shown on a map few days ago.

4.) True, but they got there, just very slowly. Legacy Soviet logistics hurts Ukraine as much as Russians.

5.) Ukraine had a lot of initiative early on, they had an option to spare at least something to keep it for longer.

6.) Important to say that Russians had enormous early push completely destroyed in woods north of Kiyv, after which they decided to avoid woods, and go through more open terrain around. Their force in Belo was already 40% spent around late 27th. Ukrainians definitely had an option to sent some men forwards at least to blow up some bridges, and let sappers to their job (mining.)

Look at google maps on Ukrainian Belorussian border, terrible terrain, dense woodlands, multiple rivers, and swamps. This is why they captured Chernobyl first of all things.

If they had them still pinned in woods, their attrition rate would've been much more favourable, and they would've won more time, even at the price of these forces.

7.) Do they need to save them for counterbat when they know that they will not have such opportunity in the future? It would've been the best to spend them early on to inflict maximum casualties on pinned enemy forces in first days. Instead, even now I see videos dated 1st of March of assorted MLRS, and tube artillery coming from the West of the country to somewhere without accompanying force. They probably think they still can reach Kiyv to meaningfully employ these MLRS.

8.) Indeed, I wrote on this seashift 2 days ago. It was Ukrainian overexuberance about getting precision weapons which clouded their vision about them having to fight world's No.2 military by size. These days, NATO military thinkers too are often forgetting the importance of raw firepower.

9.)

11.)

12.)

13.) It seems to be the siege warfare now, but they had an opportunity to delay this a lot, and get more supplies to territorials in Kiyv, which are numerous, but lack heavy weapons.

14.) I think your are right, and they are not really afraid of scattered ATGM teams which harass them. They just wait for regroup, while absorbing the damage in the South. But... Ukrainians still can blow up more bridges there, and delay them by a lot.

15.)
 
I read in some German news, not only have the refused to be part of sanction regime against Russia but have also criticized banning of RT and Sputnik.

This is why I was wondering whether it is true.

There are many German who support Russia.
Many reasons for this;

-Russia is a natural resource provider.
-Russia is a balancer against the UK-US axis
-Russian state and education is modeled after Preussian Germany
- Russian influence in former DDR area is still significant.
- Germans of Russian heritage
- Russia and Germany are geostrategically natural allies
 
MEXICO CITY, March 1 (Reuters) - Mexico will not impose any economic sanctions on Russia for invading Ukraine, Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said on Tuesday.

He also criticized what he called censorship of Russian state-sponsored media by social media companies.

"We are not going to take any sort of economic reprisal because we want to have good relations with all the governments in the world," Lopez Obrador told a news conference.


Thank you for sharing @Shotgunner51

So the news was true then.
 
Well Europe is doing that and has been since 1917, so why should we as Muslims get involved?

Brother, the world is no longer separated into disconnected regions like in the old days. Today everyone is interconnected. Small event far from where we live can evolve and have consequences for us that we couldnt imagine.

It is also our duty as muslims to take the side of the opressed against the opressors.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom