Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments

[OldTwilight]

Dude, they can't even repel or slow down Russia's advances in their territory. Attack where?
Whatever they have now, they are using it to defend themselves, which is what any sane person under tremendous pressure of invasion by the world's 2nd most powerful army would do.

dude , attacking main land and cities of invader is one of classical ways of disrupting invaders focus ...

and if Ukraine have any scud missile , they should lunch those at Moscow and kremlin in retaliation .... anything less than this , mean they already accepted defeat , so they should surrender and don't wast their human resources and infrastructures ...

 

[R Wing]

In the same world calling for everything against Russia, this is happening since long.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1498703716588965893

Speaks volume of priorities for US/West HR police.

Even worse are the Pakistanis who fall for this hypocrisy. Unforgivable.

The West has its reasons for these ridiculous double-standards --- but people from Muslim nations (and other places on the wrong end of American hegemony) also buying into these veneers hook, line, and sinker is especially painful.

 

[QWECXZ]

I don't think it's a major reason. They helped but they could have done a lot more a lot sooner.

Syrians are pretty white to me. Assad is whiter than most white people I know and his wife is fully white as far an I am concerned. And they are doing the opposite of helping them.

It plays some role, but nothing major I think. The rohyngya are the opposite of white and there is genuine sympathy for them and desire to help. I personally think Rohingya are very attractive people.

I suppose you're a Bosnian. As a Bosnian, you probably know that it goes deeper than just skin color kind of "racism", and yes, I am loosing racism loosely here. It has a religious element to it as well. The Europeans dislike Muslims. Yes, Assad is white but because he's a Muslim that doesn't count.

In fact, xenophobia is usually accompanied by religious bigotry, even when Protestants fought Catholics.

 

[nang2]

dude , attacking main land and cities of invader is one of classical ways of disrupting invaders focus ...

and if Ukraine have any scud missile , they should lunch those at Moscow and kremlin in retaliation .... anything less than this , mean they already accepted defeat , so they should surrender and don't wast their human resources and infrastructures ...

Then they wouldn't play the victim card anymore. In addition, NATO is a defense pack, not an offense pack. Though this kind of offense is really a defensive move, it may not look good to NATO, which doesn't really appreciate aggressive members.

 

[Titanium100]

dude , attacking main land and cities of invader is one of classical ways of disrupting invaders focus ...

and if Ukraine have any scud missile , they should lunch those at Moscow and kremlin in retaliation .... anything less than this , mean they already accepted defeat , so they should surrender and don't wast their human resources and infrastructures ...

No broski..

1. The scud missiles won't really deter Russia or do more then limited damage like one house in the suburbs etc etc

2. This will only force Russia take extreme measures and ground levelling policies hence they will end up paying heavy price for an assualt that didn't do anything whatsoever

Fighting them conventionally is the best choice here and creating a battle of attrition.. chopping off Russia's resources, Manpower and will to continue

 

[dbc]

What would be the US response to China having a presence on its borders in 20 years?

Its like asking The Terminator how he feels about Count Dracula moving into his neighbourhood. There is nothing Dracula can do to hurt a T800.

If the US continues to maintain it's lead against her adversaries in military, economy and technology - there is no cause for concern, is there? Any hurt your adversary can visit upon you......if you can return it a thousand fold then we have established a sound security paradigm.

Russia needs to focus on establishing itself, its economy, its lost technology leadership...invading its neighbour isn't going to make Russia more secure.

 

[_Nabil_]

I don't think it's a major reason. They helped but they could have done a lot more a lot sooner.

Syrians are pretty white to me. Assad is whiter than most white people I know and his wife is fully white as far an I am concerned. And they are doing the opposite of helping them.

It plays some role, but nothing major I think. The rohyngya are the opposite of white and there is genuine sympathy for them and desire to help. I personally think Rohingya are very attractive people.

Are you dumb or playing the dumb? obviously by the word White it's meant European, westerns, Christians, Jews, .....

 

[nang2]

If the US continues to maintain it's lead against her adversaries in military, economy and technology - there is no cause for concern, is there?

Whose concern?

 

[QWECXZ]

dude , attacking main land and cities of invader is one of classical ways of disrupting invaders focus ...

and if Ukraine have any scud missile , they should lunch those at Moscow and kremlin in retaliation .... anything less than this , mean they already accepted defeat , so they should surrender and don't wast their human resources and infrastructures ...

How would they do that? Russia has already invaded most of the east and south of Ukraine.

The UAF is not capable of flying over Russian territory. Not even an iota of chance to even approach Russia's airspace without getting intercepted or shot down.
The best they can do is to fire Tochka missiles and hope that it would hit somewhere because the CEP is not that good. And I believe they did it once, but if they resort to this pitiful tactic which has a high chance of not hitting its target and would most probably lead only to civilian casaulties, assuming that it won't get intercepted by S-300, S-400 and S-500, Russia will literally bomb them to the stone age without mercy. Russia is an extremely large country and Ukraine has only short range missiles if I'm not wrong. Meanwhile, Moscow is like 800 km far from Ukraine's borders. So, there's very little, if anything, that Ukraine can do.

 

[OldTwilight]

Then they wouldn't play the victim card anymore. In addition, NATO is a defense pack, not an offense pack. Though this kind of offense is really a defensive move, it may not look good to NATO, which doesn't really appreciate aggressive members.

They are not part of NATO

 

[Titanium100]

How would they do that? Russia has already invaded most of the east and south of Ukraine.

The UAF is not capable of flying over Russian territory. Not even an iota of chance to even approach Russia's airspace without getting intercepted or shot down.
The best they can do is to fire Tochka missiles. And I believe they did it once, but if they resort to this pitiful tactic, assuming that it won't get intercepted by S300, S400 and S500, Russia will literally bomb them to the stone age. Russia is an extremely large country and Ukraine has only short range missiles if I'm not wrong.

I have to correct you there. UAV's can access Russia's airspace at will and there air-defence systems are not as good as the Western systems that is just a fact. S-400 is an overhyped dud including SU-57

 

[nang2]

They are not part of NATO

Not yet but they are applying. So, consider this as an interview with NATO.

 

[OldTwilight]

No broski..

1. The scud missiles won't really deter Russia or do more then limited damage like one house in the suburbs etc etc

2. This will only force Russia take extreme measures and ground levelling policies hence they will end up paying heavy price for an assualt that didn't do anything whatsoever

Fighting them conventionally is the best choice here and creating a battle of attrition.. chopping off Russia's resources, Manpower and will to continue

The missile has tremendous psychological effects on Russians ....

They can target military base in Moscow....



simple , if the are afraid wrath of Russia , then they should surrounder immediately and don't turn they country to wastland and act as canon fodder for NATO

 

[Titanium100]

Then they wouldn't play the victim card anymore. In addition, NATO is a defense pack, not an offense pack. Though this kind of offense is really a defensive move, it may not look good to NATO, which doesn't really appreciate aggressive members.

NATO defensive pact? Come one mann.. They are anything but defensive pact but a flatout bully for the last 50 years and one of the biggest bullies. It is an offensive pact.

Many Layman in here think Israel stands because of Israel They have been shouting at the wrong tree and also some even think China is sparing Taiwan? The Israel-Taiwan situation is the same they are both being shielded. NATO is why China has not taken Taiwan.. Also the so-called 6 days war was fake and ended as soon as it started with one phone call from washtingon none of these countries waging the 6 days war were dumb enough to take on NATO... They just rolled out their tanks and basically just rolled in again

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

I already told you I cannot start a religious debate upon slavery on this forum.

As far as the abolition of slavery is concerned, then at no point in the 1400 years of history of Islam it came anywhere near to abolition. But the numbers of slaves only increased under the Islamic rule, right from the beginning.

Here is the complete TIMELINE of abolition of Slavery. There were almost 200 notable movements against slavery in human history, but NOT even a SINGLE of them came from Islam and its followers.

Timeline of abolition of slavery and serfdom - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Sorry but Islam in 7th Century began the idea of freeing slaves for free, fast forward 1000 years and the world witnessed the worst case of animalistic slavery from the colonial powers. Legally aboloshing slavery doesn't justify the fact that the west had the worst record of slavery and American still had slavery in living memory, long after Muslims aboloshed slavery "legally". Islam started all of this. Never compare a Muslim slave with a European. Muslim slaves had always lived better quality of life than European freemen.