News Forum - Ukraine’s Zelensky defies Russia’s ultimatum to lay down weapons

[oldschooler]

1 hour ago, birdman said:

That is a very interesting opinion,

Some people see this war as something that was bound to happen sooner

or later.

Maybe the West(i call them this for this purpose)is actually happy the fight is contained

where it is.

So is Russia?

Sure it does cost a lot of money and lives but it happens far away from home for most people.

It looks like Putin is getting his xss kicked but the fight is not over yet. Money is pouring into the Ukraine and so are weapons.It would be a lot more costly for all parties except the Ukraine of course if the fight got extended into other countries.

I do not think Putin has the balls or the manpower to go into any other country.If he does NATO will quickly send in their air force and wipe out the Russian army.

What options does Putin have? Not many i think.As long as the fighting stays where it is no one will consider nukes.

After the war the Ukraine will receive massive support from the EU and the US to rebuild the country and of course they will try to make Russia pay for it.

In the end it will be viewed as one of the better options.I truly feel for the Ukrainian people who did not ask for this terrible tragedy to happen to them.

I think the West is as much to blame for this as is Putin.

Russia needed to be dealt with.

Yes, Ukraine was always going to get wrecked by Russia so that needed to be used by NATO to break & reduce Russia there militarily and with resultant economic sanctions.

[oldschooler]

2 hours ago, Fanta said:

Not everyone hates everyone. 

Anti- west westerners are contemptible traitors, despised by all. “useful idiots” & gullible fools unworthy of “ hate”. 

How strange, once unmasked, rejected & mocked (like Corbyn), they don’t bugger off to live in their beloved tyrannical “socialist” gangster lands.  

[Poolie]

Crank.

[billywillyjones]

5 hours ago, oldschooler said:

Childish simplistic naive drivel attracting “ likes” from the usual anti -western pro- Russian ( western) crowd.

Lol you really don't have  clue what you are talking about.  Old schooler needs to go back to school lol.

[billywillyjones]

1 hour ago, oldschooler said:

Anti- west westerners are contemptible traitors, despised by all. “useful idiots” & gullible fools unworthy of “ hate”. 

How strange, once unmasked, rejected & mocked (like Corbyn), they don’t bugger off to live in their beloved tyrannical “socialist” gangster lands.  

Nothing to do with lef ot right the issue is about the preservation of the planet.  Nato stooges are as quick to grab their guns as the Russians they criticize.  This is not child 's play.  We are entering territory where only fools go.  Russian has Nuclear capability.  Have you every heard of the Cuban missile crisis?  I don't think so.

[Fester]

11 minutes ago, billywillyjones said:

Nothing to do with lef ot right the issue is about the preservation of the planet.  Nato stooges are as quick to grab their guns as the Russians they criticize.  This is not child 's play.  We are entering territory where only fools go.  Russian has Nuclear capability.  Have you every heard of the Cuban missile crisis?  I don't think so.

Hang on, I'll get your soapbox.

[EdwardV]

22 minutes ago, billywillyjones said:

Russian has Nuclear capability.

Besides the fact Putin has shown no inclination that he is either crazy or suicidal, both of which would be needed to release nuclear weapons. To what end would he use them? What possible advantage would Russia get out of the use of nuclear weapons? Drop them on a NATO country? That's committing suicide. Drop them on Ukraine? What does that get you? The Ukrainian forces are dispersed, you wouldn't kill enough of them to change the course of the war. Never mind the resulting NATO forward deployment and massive conventional strike. Drop one in a remote area, say out at sea? Ok, an escalation and warning to back off and let Russia finish the job? Besides the fact at this point it doesn't appear Russia is capable of finishing the job even if NATO backed off. There is no guarantee the eastern nations would follow suit and instead keep supplying Ukraine with weapons on their own. After all, they know what happens after Ukraine. I'm not saying it couldn't happen, just there isn't much logic behind the use. 

Keeping in mind even if Putin ordered the use, doesn't mean it happens. The Russian generals know if they follow through, there is a good chance they are committing suicide at worse, or end up in front of a war crimes tribunal at best. The better option at that point is Putin coming down with a 9mm headache. 

[Crazy-Ruskie]

Slowly the truth is starting to emerge in Russia no matter how hard they try to brainwash their population.

A retired colonel strongly criticized Russia in live tv:

"We have turned the global population against us..."

"Our leadership has threatened other countries with nuclear weapons too many times and now they have turned on us...."

"We will be losing in Ukraine as weapons arrive and they have a strong will to defend their country..."

"The situation for us will frankly get worse..."

Wow, their actually is intelligence in Russia. As more and more reveal the truth this horrific war Russia has started will eventually end as the leaders and war criminals In Russia eventually get held accountable.

 

[oldschooler]

1 hour ago, billywillyjones said:

Nothing to do with lef ot right the issue is about the preservation of the planet.  Nato stooges are as quick to grab their guns as the Russians they criticize.  This is not child 's play.  We are entering territory where only fools go.  Russian has Nuclear capability.  Have you every heard of the Cuban missile crisis?  I don't think so.

NATO doing fine so far. Prevented Russia re- occupying east Europe. Your weak pacifist surrender mode would doom is all. 

NATO is so bad that every free European nation threatened by Russia wants to join ! I prefer their better judgement to your naivety & vague generalities. We are “entering territory” where Russia had led us by unjustly invading Ukraine.

NATO should disband itself & not support east Europe ? Yes, I know . ….because NATO makes the tyrant unhappy perhaps? That’s their job and how they protect Free Europe

How would Europe be protected against Russia menace without NATO?  

[EdwardV]

Russia has been spending about a billion rubles—or around $15.5 million—per hour on the Ukraine war since Russian President Vladimir Putin's military campaign began nearly three months ago, according to Russian Ministry of Finance data released Tuesday.

In April, Russia's national defense budget ballooned to around 628 billion rubles. In April of 2021, that figure was 275 billion. From January through April, Russia spent a total of 1.681 trillion rubles on military expenses, according to The Moscow Times. This amount is three times more than the country spent on education (517 billion rubles) and health care (615 billion rubles), the Times said. With sanctions and oil embargoes taking a severe toll on Russia's economy, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov said in late April that the country's budget had gone from a surplus to a projected deficit of 1.6 trillion rubles. He also said the country's National Wealth Fund (NWF) would be used as the main source for financing the budget deficit, Reuters reported.

Russia's Spending $15.5 Million an Hour on Ukraine War (msn.com)

That's just the money going out the front door. It's not counting the increased spending to replace many of the weapon systems destroyed, or the extra cost to care for those injured soldiers, etc.  

 

[Fanta]

2 hours ago, EdwardV said:

Russia has been spending about a billion rubles—or around $15.5 million—per hour on the Ukraine war

Russia earns about $40 million per hour from oil and gas. Plus their exports of agriculture products, weapons and mail order brides. Russia won’t be declaring bankruptcy any time soon and Winnie the Pooh will sling Russia some yuan if need be.

“Russia's Donbas offensive has lost momentum and fallen significantly behind schedule.”

Who set the schedule? Seems rather unfair that Russia is supposed to deploy their tanks into mud fields in the middle of an artillery battle. If I was Russia I never would have agreed to that timetable as it almost seems unfair.
Britain’s Ministry Of Denial and the Institute of Stories for Washington are both quoted in the same article so it must be totally credible and unbiased /s ISW just reprints stories from Ukraine’s misinformation department and the MOD were winning in Northern Ireland. They are both full of shit. 90% of Luhansk is under Russian control and the rest of Donbas region will likely follow. And I wouldn’t waste my money on a metro ticket in Ukraine because the railway won’t be running for much longer.

[Fanta]

4 hours ago, Crazy-Ruskie said:

As more and more reveal the truth this horrific war Russia has started will eventually end as the leaders and war criminals In Russia eventually get held accountable.

held accountable? as in actually punished? You are so precious. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_war_crimes

[EdwardV]

19 minutes ago, Fanta said:

Russia earns about $40 million per hour from oil and gas. Plus their exports of agriculture products, weapons and mail order brides. Russia won’t be declaring bankruptcy any time soon and Winnie the Pooh will sling Russia some yuan if need be.

Whatever they are clearing is not enough to cover their expenses. Hence why their balance sheet flipped negative. Keeping in mind April income was at record levels to boot and they blew through that like a Thai bar girl at Terminal 21. Lets not forget Russia is having issues finding people to buy it's oil, and having to discount at record levels for what they can find (India is just loving it). Now they are self sanctioning their own gas and electricity sales. I still say those pipelines running through Ukraine and Poland are living on borrowed time. All they need is now is a naval battle in the Black Sea and 80% of their agriculture sales go offline. Yes Russia isn't going to declare bankruptcy anytime soon, but don't count on uncle Pooh to bail you out when that day comes. If you haven't noticed, they are having a few issues of their own.  

 

19 minutes ago, Fanta said:

Seems rather unfair that Russia is supposed to deploy their tanks into mud fields in the middle of an artillery battle. If I was Russia I never would have agreed to that timetable as it almost seems unfair

I fully agree. What fool decided to invade in February? 

[vlad]

17 hours ago, Fanta said:

Armies cannot win battles without weapons and supplies. Ukraine’s oil refineries, fuel depots, manufacturing, supply & repair area are hit daily, bridges and railways are being destroyed to name the most obvious. Ukrainian is flying 5-10 sorties a day. 

Maybe Haw-Haw but there not dropping Bombs on Schools like your Comrades are.

[Fanta]

15 minutes ago, EdwardV said:

All they need is now is a naval battle in the Black Sea and 80% of their agriculture sales go offline

The UN dude was saying the he intends to get sales of Russian and Ukrainian agricultural products back on track so I doubt that Black Sea will be the scene of a naval battle. Clear out all those mines (that Ukraine absolutely positively didn’t lay there 555) out of the ports, give Russia a few megayachts or similar back and the foodstuffs will flow. 

[EdwardV]

1 minute ago, Fanta said:

The UN dude was saying the he intends to get sales of Russian and Ukrainian agricultural products back on track so I doubt that Black Sea will be the scene of a naval battle. Clear out all those mines (that Ukraine absolutely positively didn’t lay there 555) out of the ports, the Russia a few yachts or similar back and the foodstuffs will flow. 

Yes but he wants Russia to be part of the plan, even if it's just their approval. That's not happening. It's Russia's intention to cut off Ukraine's money, why in the world would they agree to the shipping if that's it's main source of revenue? The mines need to be cleared by Russia, since they are the one's who are controlling that part of the sea. Of course if they let NATO do so, I'm sure they would be more than happy to help. How did Ukraine lay the mines if they had no ships? Just curious. 

[Fanta]

13 minutes ago, EdwardV said:

How did Ukraine lay the mines if they had no ships? Just curious

Why would Russia lay the mines if Ukraine had no ships? This is the same Ukrainian Navy that scuttled their flagship frigate in port. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-navy-frigate-sunk-mykolaiv-b2029108.html

In other news: 
“Russia on Wednesday said it was using a new generation of powerful lasers in Ukraine to burn up drones, deploying some of Moscow's secret weapons to counter a flood of Western arms.”

Zelenskky, as usual didn’t have a good thing to say about the Russians and called the lasers wonder weapons.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-touts-new-generation-blinding-laser-weapons-2022-05-18/

[EdwardV]

4 minutes ago, Fanta said:

Why would Russia lay the mines if Ukraine had no ships? This is the same Ukrainian Navy that scuttled their flagship frigate in port.

That's called a softball. To stop all shipping in and out of Ukrainian ports. Before they can ship out grain or anything else, the mines have to be removed. Same with shipping things in ... 

Still don't see how Ukraine lays those mines without any ships.  

[EdwardV]

Seems the new American "lend-lease" law applies to more countries than just Ukraine: 

The U.S. Army is weighing options for fast-tracking the delivery of M1 Abrams tanks to Poland to boost the NATO nation’s armor capabilities and replace old tanks donated to Ukraine for use in the war against Russia. Through new pathways opened by Congress, including the recently revived Lend-Lease program, Poland could take possession of U.S.-built armor years ahead of current schedules, the Army’s chief weapon buyer told lawmakers yesterday.

Bush said the Army could deliver the tanks and other vehicles through the recently-passed Ukraine Democracy Defense Lend-Lease Act. That law provides explicit authority for transfers of U.S. arms to Ukraine, but also mentions helping other "Eastern European countries impacted by the Russian Federation’s invasion of Ukraine," which would include neighboring Poland. The stated goal of that assistance would be “to help bolster those countries' defense capabilities and protect their civilian populations from potential invasion or ongoing aggression by the armed forces of the Government of the Russian Federation," the legislation states.

U.S. Army Could Use New Lend-Lease Act To Speed M1 Abrams Tanks to Poland (msn.com)

Would allow the US to backfill Poland even faster, and in turn allow them to continue to send tanks to Ukraine. I think they still have about 350 more T-72s and the Polish variant the PT-91 left in it's stocks. Enough to outfit another three brigades (they have already donated 230 T-72s). 

[Fanta]

Just now, EdwardV said:

That's called a softball. To stop all shipping in and out of Ukrainian ports. Before they can ship out grain or anything else, the mines have to be removed. Same with shipping things in ... 

Still don't see how Ukraine lays those mines without any ships.  

Are you serious? Ukraine sunk their own ships and the balance were converted into submarines the day after the Russians invaded. What is the gain for  Russia to lay mines in waters they already control? It’s the same logic as laying landmines behind you to ensure you cannot retreat - madness. Shipping in and out of Ukraine ports is controlled by Russian warships. Ukraine has been as quiet about this sea mine business as they have about the total number of soldiers involved in their “special evacuation” from Mariupol.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/03/opinion-is-there-a-serious-sea-mine-threat-in-the-black-sea/

[EdwardV]

46 minutes ago, Fanta said:

What is the gain for  Russia to lay mines in waters they already control?

But they don’t control the waters do they? It takes a lot more than a frigate to sail around a few days to control a major sea lane. Besides the fact Ukraine didn’t have the ships or time to mine the area, I’m guessing they just magically appeared. 

[Fanta]

32 minutes ago, EdwardV said:

But they don’t control the waters do they? It takes a lot more than a frigate to sail around a few days to control a major sea lane. Besides the fact Ukraine didn’t have the ships or time to mine the area, I’m guessing they just magically appeared. 

If the Russian Black Sea Fleet doesn’t control the Black Sea  then it must be another navy that is not even there /s Russia does not need mines to control ship movements into the ports. Both Russia and Ukraine deny laying the mines. I’d bet money that a country that sunk their own ships on day 1 of the war had given up on controlling the sea and decided to turn the sea into a weapon. This was not a spur of the moment decision and the mines would have been laid well in advance. It just makes sense. 

One of the UN Chief’s proposal is for a 20 mile wide corridor that ships can traverse for grain shipments. That’s why they need Russian agreement to any naval plan to move grain. 

[EdwardV]

12 minutes ago, Fanta said:

This was not a spur of the moment decision and the mines would have been laid well in advance. It just makes sense. 

One of the UN Chief’s proposal is for a 20 mile wide corridor that ships can traverse for grain shipments. That’s why they need Russian agreement to any naval plan to move grain. 

So the country that called up its reserves a day before the invasion, mined its waters well in advance? Ok if you say so. 
 

They don’t need Russian agreement, they want it. Not the same thing. 

[Fanta]

And don’t forget those underwater nuclear drones! Radioactive man made tsunamis! Who the hell thought of that and approved their commission. Those people are freaking nutcases. Someone needs to take their toys away or get them to chill out. 

https://hindustannewshub.com/world-news/poseidon-drone-how-dangerous-is-russias-underwater-nuclear-drone-poseidon-threatening-to-remove-britain-from-the-map/?amp=1

[Fanta]

18 minutes ago, EdwardV said:

So the country that called up its reserves a day before the invasion, mined its waters well in advance? Ok if you say so. 

Oh come on… as if the Ukrainians couldn’t see it coming. In 2014 Russia sunk 75% of the Ukrainian Navy. Ukraine would have been negligent in the extreme not to have expected Russia to control access to the ports. At worst they get some Russian minesweepers to come in nice and close and they can throw some Harpoons at them.

Russian agreement is clearly needed otherwise it will be no coincidence that Odessa’s ports are attacked the same day transport ships move in to load grain. Russia may or may not want Odessa’s ports however if it is a choice between choking Ukrainian exports or firing in some “Don’t go there” missiles we know which one the Russians will choose.

What’s the big deal anyway? I would have mined the heck out of the area in advance knowing full well that the sea was soon to be a no go zone.