Russia/Ukraine from Another Perspective (Relaunch Part Deux)

475,873 Views | 9108 Replies | Last: 2 hrs ago by nortex97
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teslag said:

PlaneCrashGuy said:

Teslag said:

PlaneCrashGuy said:

GAC06 said:

Russia and their proxy's are squealing over Ukraine allegedly doing to Russia what Russia has been doing to Ukraine for years? Say it ain't so.


Toddler mentality.


Was Russia wrong to purposely target Ukrainian civilians prior to this attack on Belgorod? Yes or no.


Yes. Neither Russia nor Ukraine should be blowing up civilians. This should not be a controversial opinion.


So why did it take you three days condemn Russias attacks instead of using it as proof of being a key part of Russias offensive just yesterday?


That's not a condemnation of attacks against civilians. You've also lost any moral high ground you thought you had.

Yesterday Ukraine AD hit civilians in Ukraine. That is poor aim, not a Russian attack against civilians.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
And that's what this all comes down to. The Russian supporters will criticize every single thing the ukes do, from conscription to save their nation to asking the US for aid with a steadfast ferocity.

Yet when Russia does anything, like launch 122 missiles into Ukraine to purposely target civilians there's nay a mention of it being wrong. You literally have to drag it out of them. And even then still no blame for Putin. Just complete and totally support and justification for his position there would make their state media proud.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Yesterday Ukraine AD hit civilians in Ukraine. That is poor aim, not a Russian attack against civilians.


According to?
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teslag said:

Quote:

Yesterday Ukraine AD hit civilians in Ukraine. That is poor aim, not a Russian attack against civilians.


According to?


According to common sense.

But you are welcome to explain how a rocket from Russia got in that low at that angle. In fact, I asked you to do so just that a few pages back bur you ignored it. Nows the time. I'll wait to post the video until after you can tell us what happened.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Go ahead, blame them all on errant ADA

MARCH 9, 2022 An apartment building in Izium in eastern Ukraine was hit in an attack that Human Rights Watch later said killed at least 44 people. Russian forces took control of the city and surrounding area beginning in late March and occupied it for six months. At the time of the strike, HRW said the area was under the control of Ukrainian forces who were trying to keep Russian troops from entering the city.

MARCH 16, 2022 A Russian airstrike hit a theater in Mariupol, killing hundreds of civilians sheltering in the basement. Ukrainian officials initially put the death toll at 300, but an Associated Press investigation later found evidence that the attack was far deadlier and killed closer to 600 people inside and outside the building. Russia claimed the theater was demolished by Ukrainian forces or served as a Ukrainian military base.

APRIL 8, 2022 The train station in Kramatorsk in eastern Ukraine was hit by a Russian missile as passengers, mostly women and children, tried to flee the fighting. Sixty-one people were killed and 135 wounded. The remnants of a rocket were painted with the words "For the children" in Russian, implying that children were being avenged by the strike, though the exact reason for the wording was unclear. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said it was a deliberate attack. Russia's Defense Ministry accused Ukraine of carrying out the strike.

JUNE 27, 2022 Long-range Russian bombers struck a crowded shopping mall in Ukraine's central city of Kremenchuk with a supersonic missile, killing more than 20 people. About 1,000 people were inside the building. Zelenskyy called the strike "one of the most daring terrorist attacks in European history." Russia said the missile was directed at a nearby weapons depot.

JULY 1, 2022 A Russian airstrike on residential areas killed at least 21 people near the Ukrainian port of Odesa, a day after the withdrawal of Russian forces from an island in the Black Sea. Zelenskyy's office said warplanes fired three missiles that struck an apartment building and a campsite.

JULY 9, 2022 Russian rockets smashed into apartment buildings in eastern Ukraine, killing at least 15 people in the town of Chasiv Yar. The buildings were mostly home to people who work in nearby factories. At least six people were dug out of the rubble.

JULY 14, 2022 Kalibr cruise missiles fired from a Russian ship in the Black Sea killed at least 29 people and wounded more than 100 others in the central Ukrainian city of Vinnytsia. Zelenskyy accused Russia of deliberately targeting civilians in locations with no military value. He said the victims included a 4-year-old girl. Russia said it was attacking a Ukrainian officers' residence.

SEPT. 30, 2022 Four Russian missiles targeted a convoy of cars on the outskirts of the southern city of Zaporizhzhia, killing 30 people, including children. Ukrainian officials said the missiles were launched from an S-300 anti-aircraft missile system and hit a column of vehicles sent to ferry people to safety from Russian-occupied territory.

JAN. 14, 2023 One of the deadliest attacks on civilians took place when a Russian missile hit an apartment building in the southeastern city of Dnipro, killing 45 people, including six children. Ukrainian military officials said at the time that they did not have a system that could take down the type of the supersonic missile that was used, Russia's Kh-22 missiles.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PlaneCrashGuy said:

Teslag said:

Quote:

Yesterday Ukraine AD hit civilians in Ukraine. That is poor aim, not a Russian attack against civilians.


According to?


According to common sense.

But you are welcome to explain how a rocket from Russia got in that low at that angle. In fact, I asked you to do so just that a few pages back bur you ignored it. Nows the time. I'll wait to post the video until after you can tell us what happened.


When not even Russian mil bloggers are trying this ludicrous angle you should maybe think it through.
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PlaneCrashGuy said:

Ag with kids said:

PlaneCrashGuy said:

Teslag said:

PlaneCrashGuy said:

GAC06 said:

Russia and their proxy's are squealing over Ukraine allegedly doing to Russia what Russia has been doing to Ukraine for years? Say it ain't so.


Toddler mentality.


Was Russia wrong to purposely target Ukrainian civilians prior to this attack on Belgorod? Yes or no.


Yes. Neither Russia nor Ukraine should be blowing up civilians. This should not be a controversial opinion.
Then Russia could just GTFO of Ukraine and we wouldn't have this issue, now would we?


Thats not a condemnation of attacks against civilians. You've lost the moral high ground you never had.
Ukraine should not target civilians.

And you've never had any moral high ground since you've been supporting this invasion from the beginning.
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teslag said:

PlaneCrashGuy said:

Teslag said:

Quote:

Yesterday Ukraine AD hit civilians in Ukraine. That is poor aim, not a Russian attack against civilians.


According to?


According to common sense.

But you are welcome to explain how a rocket from Russia got in that low at that angle. In fact, I asked you to do so just that a few pages back bur you ignored it. Nows the time. I'll wait to post the video until after you can tell us what happened.


When not even Russian mil bloggers are trying this ludicrous angle you should maybe think it through.


Should be easy for you to explain it then. Can't wait to see it.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It was a Russian missile. End of story.
Brewskis
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You realize that there are tactical guided weapons (both air and ground launched) that fly profiles that aren't ballistic, right? Iskander is an example among probably 100s.
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teslag said:

And that's what this all comes down to. The Russian supporters will criticize every single thing the ukes do, from conscription to save their nation to asking the US for aid with a steadfast ferocity.

Yet when Russia does anything, like launch 122 missiles into Ukraine to purposely target civilians there's nay a mention of it being wrong. You literally have to drag it out of them. And even then still no blame for Putin. Just complete and totally support and justification for his position there would make their state media proud.
It's Biden's fault Putin suddenly became an ******* years ago.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Brewskis said:

You realize that there are tactical guided weapons (both air and ground launched) that fly profiles that aren't ballistic, right? Iskander is an example among probably 100s.


No he doesn't realize this
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teslag said:

Brewskis said:

You realize that there are tactical guided weapons (both air and ground launched) that fly profiles that aren't ballistic, right? Iskander is an example among probably 100s.


No he doesn't realize this



I do, thanks. And I'm still waiting on you.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Waiting on what? Guided ordinance can meet the angle required for the impact in that building.
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
nortex97 said:

TheGreatEscape said:

The War of 1812 was caused by the cessation of trade between the United States and namely France and Great Britain. France and England were at war during the Napoleonic Wars.

We invaded British Canada for timber and American ego.
This caused the British to retaliate.

They also saw the US expansionism as a threat to their establishment. Was the US going to literally take over Mexico and all of South America, including British islands in the Western Hemisphere? No.

And the same basic thing is happening with Eastern Orthodox Russia being blocked by Western powers over a pipeline and farmland. This isn't communist Russia.
They don't want to expand into Europe. This is hogwash thinking. Russians enjoy drinking vodka and being Russian.
I believe this has always been the case.
Now China? China is a different story. They are untethered from Christian influence in their government and I fear them in valid economic reasons as well.
Excellent post. Strengthening their alliance/block economically and militarily, as well as politically against the US and Europe is absolute insanity.



Quote:

Ukraine's armed forces have lost up to 350 personnel in the Donetsk area over 24 hours, the Russian Defense Ministry said.

According to its statement, the Ukrainian losses amounted to 350 troops killed and wounded, two armored vehicles and six pick-up trucks. Counterbattery work has wiped out a M777 artillery system and a US-made Paladin self-propelled howitzer.




This is why we needed to stop funding/sending weapons to Zelensky nearly 2 years ago, instead of deliberately provoking Putin. But with China running the White House…


We are on the same historical page.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG









Quote:

Here's why Russia enters 2024 in a better position than it was in 12 months ago

Russian politics has moved from crisis mode to a new normality. And the divorce from the West is permanent
Quote:

The second is the military situation in Ukraine. 2023 began with much-hyped expectations fromKiev's planned counteroffensive. It was fueled by informational and political statements by Western leaders and its success was supposed to justify, among other things, large military and financial injections by Ukraine's Western partners.

The failure of the offensive can be considered one of the most important military results of 2023. The Russian army did not opt for an immediate retaliatory attack, instead exerting pressure along the entire front line.

Right now, Western diplomats have rational reasons for exploring the ground for ceasefire talks, even if their government's positions have not officially changed. Moscow, on the other hand, has no good reason to agree to a halt in the fighting. A pause will allow Ukraine to rearm, increase the capacity of its military-industrial complex and resume the conflict at a moment favorable to Kiev. Obviously, Russia believes that only a painful and large-scale defeat of Ukraine can lead to the consideration of Russian demands and interests. Moreover, such a defeat can be either a crushing blow or from attrition. The second option appears to be the fundamental one.

The third is sanctions against Russia. The year 2022 was marked by a "sanctions tsunami," when a wide range of restrictive measures were imposed in a very short period of time. These included the blocking of sovereign assets and financial sanctions against systemically important companies, export controls, import bans on oil, coal, steel, gold and other goods, transport and other restrictions. In 2023, all these measures were extended. They caused damage, but they didn't crush the economy.

The shock effect hung in the air in 2022 and was replaced by a plateau in 2023. The US, the EU and other sanctions initiators have tried to combat evasion of the restrictions. Secondary sanctions are being introduced and criminal cases are being opened against alleged violators, including Russian citizens. But even these measures do not radically increase the campaign's effects. Also, Moscow shows no interest in raising the issue of sanctions relief in response to political concessions.

2023 saw the formalization of new doctrinal foundations of Russian foreign policy. One of the key events was the appearance of a new foreign-policy concept. Among the conceptual innovations is the notion of a state-civilization and the perception of the external world as a set of civilizational entities with varying degrees of political consolidation. Theoretically, this is one of the most serious changes of recent times, and it has strengths and weaknesses. Thus, serious theoretical and political-philosophical elaboration of the new approach is needed. But the very fact of its emergence indicates the beginning of a movement to rethink Russian identity, to answer the questions "who are we?", "who are we not?" and "who are our significant partners?"

Changes are also taking place in Russian society. 2022 was characterized by shock after the start of the Ukrainian conflict. This was inevitable, given the radical nature of the foreign-policy changes. In 2023, Russian society seems to have adapted. Despite the conduct of large-scale military operations, the country has generally maintained a stable and fairly predictable way of life. Some alarming effects, such as higher inflation, labor shortages and the decline of a number of industries are combined with record low unemployment, the rapid development of new market niches following the withdrawal of foreign companies, and an industrial revival based on import substitution and military contracts.

The internal situation remains stable, an important psychological factor for society. Meanwhile, the attempted military mutiny in June and its failure demonstrated the stability of the political system. The adaptation of society to new conditions is also part of the new normal.

How long will it last? What new transitions await us in the future? How exactly will Russia manage them? All these questions remain unanswered.

For now, it is clear that the upheaval of 2022 has been offset by the stabilization of 2023.
Pretty much.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG


I guess Michael "Sarah" Cirillo is no longer in drag making Baghdad bob-level insane rambling claims/predictions?





Back to reality:

Quote:

As we've discussed before, a country outlining huge military surges for the next several years, building entirely new field armies from scratch by calling up over 500k men this year, is likely not expecting to stop fighting anytime soon. It's clear that Russia is preparing for the long haul, and so the "5 year" timeline is not entirely implausible.

Several times in recent months I've reported statements from top Russian officials insinuating that the war could last several years. Medvedev himself suggested this year that the conflict could last "decades":
Quote:

"This conflict is for a very long time. It is all probably for decades," Medvedev told journalists during his visit to Vietnam.
The point is to say, that since there's a chance that the conflict could last at least several more years, such a span of time is bound to encompass vast developmental surges in battlefield technologies and innovations. Of course, I myself don't see the conflict lasting past 2025. But given the signaling from Russia that it's quite content to fight passively in order to privilege economic and geopolitical development and stability over the society-destabilizing "high intensity" commitments of a full war-footing, it is remotely possible that Russia could slow-roll the war into 2026 and beyond.

One of the reasons is: things feel terminal now as a consequence of the cut in funding owing to the US Congressional spat. But many rightly believe this uniparty squabble will be resolved in the new year, and Ukraine will still receive its hoped-for boon nearing a hundred billion dollars, which could keep it going for quite a while longer.

Compound this with the fact they've gone on defense and are now heavily conserving equipment, which is leading to relatively few losses of their armor at present, as evidenced by what we're seeing. Add the now launched major mobilization drive and they have a chance to hold out for very long if that funding comes through.

Some will scoff, wishing that Russia would just pull the plug and end this misery all the quicker. But that gets to the very heart of the technological discussion: Russia simply isn't able to do that at the moment, because it's finding itself embroiled in a type of future war that few could have predicted.

In the broad sense, anyone could, and did, predict the general slant of modern warfare: drones, AI, etc. But I'm not sure that many quite predicted, specifically, how lethal and un-counterable the FPV threat, in particular, has gotten. This has really become one of the main issues presently, and it's a quite intractable one.

Suffering from standard artillery shell hunger, Ukraine has asymmetrically invested into small, cheap drone productionand it's paying off for them, as Russia is struggling to develop a consistent counter against them. Sure, Russia itself outproduces Ukraine in raw FPVs, but the issue is, since it's Russia that is now on the offensive, the situation favors Ukraine. Russian forces have to go out in the open to attack, creating a target-rich environment for the AFU. The Ukrainians on the other hand are all bunkered up and no longer assault, so despite having a positive FPV ratio, Russia doesn't have as many easy or open targets to hit. Most of the FPVs are spent simply pelting AFU fortifications to occasional success. Sure they still get plenty of kills but it now costs them far more drones to do so.

Russia is rushing out many anti-drone technologies, both for the trench and mobile armor. We see it with increasing regularity on every front:

This seems credible/balanced, looking forward: near future battlefields will truly be terrifying with such machines roving the skies autonomously:
Quote:


However, this Termit platform reportedly has the new S-8L variant, for "laser" designationwhich means it's a laser-guided versionperfect for picking off armor and vehicles.

By far the most successful weapons platform in the Russian arsenal over the past year has been the Ka-52with perhaps only the Lancet contesting it. If Russia can actually roll out this miniaturized copter drone, it would be equivalent to vastly multiplying the Ka-52 threat over a much broader area, allowing fronts with less access to Ka-52s to basically have their own on-demand call-in air support.

So yes, ifand it's a big ifRussia can actually make these in number sometime soon, they can be a real game changer, making up for the glaring lack of UCAV presence. And that's not even mentioning the fact that these "Termites" are claimed to sport AI autonomous hunt mode capability. That being said, I still remain skeptical they'll roll them out anytime soon only because, for whatever reason, Russia's aerospace industry remains the biggest straggler thus far, and I have seen nothing to convince me that they have the capability to suddenly pump these out like hotcakes when after two years they still can't produce Orions or Forposts in number.

That's not to mention Russia had previously "unveiled" a similar Katran rotary drone several years ago, and that went no whereso we'll see how serious they are about this one.
More available, for those who dare to read the substack summary.
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
nortex97 said:


Quote:

Here's why Russia enters 2024 in a better position than it was in 12 months ago

Russian politics has moved from crisis mode to a new normality. And the divorce from the West is permanent
Quote:

The second is the military situation in Ukraine. 2023 began with much-hyped expectations fromKiev's planned counteroffensive. It was fueled by informational and political statements by Western leaders and its success was supposed to justify, among other things, large military and financial injections by Ukraine's Western partners.

The failure of the offensive can be considered one of the most important military results of 2023. The Russian army did not opt for an immediate retaliatory attack, instead exerting pressure along the entire front line.

Right now, Western diplomats have rational reasons for exploring the ground for ceasefire talks, even if their government's positions have not officially changed. Moscow, on the other hand, has no good reason to agree to a halt in the fighting. A pause will allow Ukraine to rearm, increase the capacity of its military-industrial complex and resume the conflict at a moment favorable to Kiev. Obviously, Russia believes that only a painful and large-scale defeat of Ukraine can lead to the consideration of Russian demands and interests. Moreover, such a defeat can be either a crushing blow or from attrition. The second option appears to be the fundamental one.

The third is sanctions against Russia. The year 2022 was marked by a "sanctions tsunami," when a wide range of restrictive measures were imposed in a very short period of time. These included the blocking of sovereign assets and financial sanctions against systemically important companies, export controls, import bans on oil, coal, steel, gold and other goods, transport and other restrictions. In 2023, all these measures were extended. They caused damage, but they didn't crush the economy.

The shock effect hung in the air in 2022 and was replaced by a plateau in 2023. The US, the EU and other sanctions initiators have tried to combat evasion of the restrictions. Secondary sanctions are being introduced and criminal cases are being opened against alleged violators, including Russian citizens. But even these measures do not radically increase the campaign's effects. Also, Moscow shows no interest in raising the issue of sanctions relief in response to political concessions.

2023 saw the formalization of new doctrinal foundations of Russian foreign policy. One of the key events was the appearance of a new foreign-policy concept. Among the conceptual innovations is the notion of a state-civilization and the perception of the external world as a set of civilizational entities with varying degrees of political consolidation. Theoretically, this is one of the most serious changes of recent times, and it has strengths and weaknesses. Thus, serious theoretical and political-philosophical elaboration of the new approach is needed. But the very fact of its emergence indicates the beginning of a movement to rethink Russian identity, to answer the questions "who are we?", "who are we not?" and "who are our significant partners?"

Changes are also taking place in Russian society. 2022 was characterized by shock after the start of the Ukrainian conflict. This was inevitable, given the radical nature of the foreign-policy changes. In 2023, Russian society seems to have adapted. Despite the conduct of large-scale military operations, the country has generally maintained a stable and fairly predictable way of life. Some alarming effects, such as higher inflation, labor shortages and the decline of a number of industries are combined with record low unemployment, the rapid development of new market niches following the withdrawal of foreign companies, and an industrial revival based on import substitution and military contracts.

The internal situation remains stable, an important psychological factor for society. Meanwhile, the attempted military mutiny in June and its failure demonstrated the stability of the political system. The adaptation of society to new conditions is also part of the new normal.

How long will it last? What new transitions await us in the future? How exactly will Russia manage them? All these questions remain unanswered.

For now, it is clear that the upheaval of 2022 has been offset by the stabilization of 2023.
Pretty much.
BTW, why don't you attribute these long walls of quote text?

I mean, besides the fact that it's from rt.com the Russian state media...
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PlaneCrashGuy said:


I'm sure this Russian propagandist that'll y'all love to quote on here would never lie.

Oh wait, that's his job.
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Pulling receipts.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I stopped providing some links when 'some' just whined about what was not (fair use) excerpted by me. Just trying not to be in a silly back and forth about that.

If you have a tough time finding it or a substantive critique please do let me know, curious what any might be, from the 'pro Biden proxy-war' side of our political spectrum.

It sounds to me like the EU is unlikely to hit 50% of their targeted/promised 155mm 'aid' to Ukrainians. One mustn't look just to Russian sources of course to see the Ukrainians being largely abandoned. Reuters (admittedly a pro-CCP outfit) in early December:

Quote:

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - European Union countries have placed orders for only 60,000 artillery shells under an EU scheme to help get 1 million rounds of ammunition to Ukraine by next spring, according to people familiar with the figures.

The scheme was a centrepiece of an EU initiative to ramp up the supply of vital 155mm artillery shells to Ukraine, allowing countries to place orders with industry through contracts negotiated by the bloc's European Defence Agency (EDA).

The broader initiative, launched in March, offered various schemes to get 1 million shells and missiles to Ukraine within a year for the war against Russia's invasion.

Together, those schemes have yielded some 480,000 munitions, according to the EU - less than half of the target, with about four months to go.

The particularly small volume of orders for the scheme at the heart of the programme highlights bigger struggles that the EU is facing in trying to hit the target.

In a sign of concern at the low volume of orders so far, a draft declaration for an EU summit next week "stresses the urgent need to accelerate the delivery of missiles and ammunition, notably under the one million rounds of artillery ammunition initiative".

Artillery rounds are a crucial element in the war of attrition between Ukrainian troops and Russia's invasion forces, with each side firing thousands of shells every day.

The European Defence Agency said in September that seven countries had ordered ammunition through the pioneering joint procurement scheme. Lithuania, Denmark and Luxembourg said they were among the seven.

The EDA did not specify the size of the orders. But people familiar with the figures told Reuters on condition of anonymity the total was just 60,000 shells.
GAC06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You stopped providing links after time after time you were found misrepresenting what was actually said and routinely quoting Hamas/Iran/Chinese/Russian advocates and outright propaganda. Strange you don't seem as interested in some of the Hamas fan accounts on the Israel vs Hamas thread.
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
nortex97 said:

I stopped providing some links when 'some' just whined about what was not (fair use) excerpted by me. Just trying not to be in a silly back and forth about that.

If you have a tough time finding it or a substantive critique please do let me know, curious what any might be, from the 'pro Biden proxy-war' side of our political spectrum.

It sounds to me like the EU is unlikely to hit 50% of their targeted/promised 155mm 'aid' to Ukrainians. One mustn't look just to Russian sources of course to see the Ukrainians being largely abandoned. Reuters (admittedly a pro-CCP outfit) in early December:

Quote:

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - European Union countries have placed orders for only 60,000 artillery shells under an EU scheme to help get 1 million rounds of ammunition to Ukraine by next spring, according to people familiar with the figures.

The scheme was a centrepiece of an EU initiative to ramp up the supply of vital 155mm artillery shells to Ukraine, allowing countries to place orders with industry through contracts negotiated by the bloc's European Defence Agency (EDA).

The broader initiative, launched in March, offered various schemes to get 1 million shells and missiles to Ukraine within a year for the war against Russia's invasion.

Together, those schemes have yielded some 480,000 munitions, according to the EU - less than half of the target, with about four months to go.

The particularly small volume of orders for the scheme at the heart of the programme highlights bigger struggles that the EU is facing in trying to hit the target.

In a sign of concern at the low volume of orders so far, a draft declaration for an EU summit next week "stresses the urgent need to accelerate the delivery of missiles and ammunition, notably under the one million rounds of artillery ammunition initiative".

Artillery rounds are a crucial element in the war of attrition between Ukrainian troops and Russia's invasion forces, with each side firing thousands of shells every day.

The European Defence Agency said in September that seven countries had ordered ammunition through the pioneering joint procurement scheme. Lithuania, Denmark and Luxembourg said they were among the seven.

The EDA did not specify the size of the orders. But people familiar with the figures told Reuters on condition of anonymity the total was just 60,000 shells.

Ah...so now if I'm not pro-Putin like you, I must be pro-Biden?

Funny...

BTW, if you actually read that WHOLE article from Reuters (that you didn't attribute), it doesn't say what you're claiming...

The Link in case people want to read with context...
GAC06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yet another example of why to avoid links
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
GAC06 said:

You stopped providing links after time after time you were found misrepresenting what was actually said and routinely quoting Hamas/Iran/Chinese/Russian advocates and outright propaganda. Strange you don't seem as interested in some of the Hamas fan accounts on the Israel vs Hamas thread.
Well, posting excerpts and leaving out context helps to shape 'another perspective' on the issue.
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ag with kids said:

nortex97 said:

I stopped providing some links when 'some' just whined about what was not (fair use) excerpted by me. Just trying not to be in a silly back and forth about that.

If you have a tough time finding it or a substantive critique please do let me know, curious what any might be, from the 'pro Biden proxy-war' side of our political spectrum.

It sounds to me like the EU is unlikely to hit 50% of their targeted/promised 155mm 'aid' to Ukrainians. One mustn't look just to Russian sources of course to see the Ukrainians being largely abandoned. Reuters (admittedly a pro-CCP outfit) in early December:

Quote:

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - European Union countries have placed orders for only 60,000 artillery shells under an EU scheme to help get 1 million rounds of ammunition to Ukraine by next spring, according to people familiar with the figures.

The scheme was a centrepiece of an EU initiative to ramp up the supply of vital 155mm artillery shells to Ukraine, allowing countries to place orders with industry through contracts negotiated by the bloc's European Defence Agency (EDA).

The broader initiative, launched in March, offered various schemes to get 1 million shells and missiles to Ukraine within a year for the war against Russia's invasion.

Together, those schemes have yielded some 480,000 munitions, according to the EU - less than half of the target, with about four months to go.

The particularly small volume of orders for the scheme at the heart of the programme highlights bigger struggles that the EU is facing in trying to hit the target.

In a sign of concern at the low volume of orders so far, a draft declaration for an EU summit next week "stresses the urgent need to accelerate the delivery of missiles and ammunition, notably under the one million rounds of artillery ammunition initiative".

Artillery rounds are a crucial element in the war of attrition between Ukrainian troops and Russia's invasion forces, with each side firing thousands of shells every day.

The European Defence Agency said in September that seven countries had ordered ammunition through the pioneering joint procurement scheme. Lithuania, Denmark and Luxembourg said they were among the seven.

The EDA did not specify the size of the orders. But people familiar with the figures told Reuters on condition of anonymity the total was just 60,000 shells.

Ah...so now if I'm not pro-Putin like you, I must be pro-Biden?

Funny...

BTW, if you actually read that WHOLE article from Reuters (that you didn't attribute), it doesn't say what you're claiming...

The Link in case people want to read with context...
You did it, good (and no I didn't imply you are pro-biden but this is his proxy war after all). But, you still failed to provide a counter-point. What is it, that 'other explanations' might exist? People should trust in a magical 4 month surge in 155mm shell production for orders not placed from the EU on the basis of 'priorities?'

Quote:

DIFFERENT EXPLANATIONS

Officials and industry leaders have offered different explanations for the EU's struggle to meet the goal.
Some argue that many governments have simply not backed up their rhetoric about supporting Ukraine for the long haul by placing orders with arms firms.

Others insist that it takes time for industry to ramp up and restart production of such artillery shells, which until recently were not viewed as a priority for modern warfare.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said last week he thought the problems were more technical than political.

"People with special knowledge of how things work - how spare parts work, how chains of supply work - they have to sit down and sort it out," he said.

Some officials have also blamed a decision to restrict the joint procurement drive to companies from the EU and Norway.

Asked whether it could confirm the 60,000 figure, the European Defence Agency said it did not comment on numbers.
This is an excellent case in point. Please cite what you think I am missing, and what your point is, in your 'alternative truth' from the article (or elsewhere). This war is going on 2 years old and they are talking about…sitting down to sort out logistics/parts, while up thread here we were just put on notice by a war fan that it's the Russians that don't get logistics.

Thanks and Gig 'em!
911sAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UKE will never recover their lost land do people still deny this?

Also, UKE was so important and Russian must be stopped how come no one helped UKE when Russia took Crimea?
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
People are people. Just because you don't agree with the positions of other people on certain disciplines, doesn't mean that the said person's quotes on other positions that support your viewpoint are invalid.

We do this all the time. I wish I had a post tracker or microphone next to all of conversations of y'all doing the same thing, even in academia, that Nortex has securely done.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TheGreatEscape said:

People are people. Just because you don't agree with the positions of other people on certain disciplines, doesn't mean that the said persons quotes on other positions that support your viewpoint are invalid.

We do this all the time. I wish I had a post tracker or microphone next to all of conversations of y'all doing the same thing, even in academia, that Nortex has securely done.


It simply an issue of credibility. If you consider someone is gospel on one issue you can't simply hand wave away their information on others.

The cold hard reality is these sources (Simplicious, Bebo, Geroman, Olga Bezova, etc) are pro Russia, Pro China, pro Hamas, Pro Iran and make no bones about those positions. They do not like the west. They do not like American ideals. They don't like Biden. They don't like Trump. They do not want good for any of us.

When you lend them credibility you help them accomplish their mission and those they act in agency for.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It's amazing the side that produced, and is unapologetic about, the insane Hate-filled drivel from 'spokeswoman' Sarah Cirrillo this year (and is even now still working for the cause officially) is now bothered that…'well you are just citing propaganda.'



And yet, even here today, no one has produced a substantive data point/argument in refutation of anything I've quoted. I've asked for that, but apparently it is all on point, people just don't like the sources/information.
IslanderAg04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Teslag said:

TheGreatEscape said:

People are people. Just because you don't agree with the positions of other people on certain disciplines, doesn't mean that the said persons quotes on other positions that support your viewpoint are invalid.

We do this all the time. I wish I had a post tracker or microphone next to all of conversations of y'all doing the same thing, even in academia, that Nortex has securely done.


It simply an issue of credibility. If you consider someone is gospel on one issue you can't simply hand wave away their information on others.

The cold hard reality is these sources (Simplicious, Bebo, Geroman, Olga Bezova, etc) are pro Russia, Pro China, pro Hamas, Pro Iran and make no bones about those positions. They do not like the west. They do not like American ideals. They don't like Biden. They don't like Trump. They do not want good for any of us.

When you lend them credibility you help them accomplish their mission and those they act in agency for.


Isnt this thread literally called from another persoective?
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
IslanderAg04 said:

Teslag said:

TheGreatEscape said:

People are people. Just because you don't agree with the positions of other people on certain disciplines, doesn't mean that the said persons quotes on other positions that support your viewpoint are invalid.

We do this all the time. I wish I had a post tracker or microphone next to all of conversations of y'all doing the same thing, even in academia, that Nortex has securely done.


It simply an issue of credibility. If you consider someone is gospel on one issue you can't simply hand wave away their information on others.

The cold hard reality is these sources (Simplicious, Bebo, Geroman, Olga Bezova, etc) are pro Russia, Pro China, pro Hamas, Pro Iran and make no bones about those positions. They do not like the west. They do not like American ideals. They don't like Biden. They don't like Trump. They do not want good for any of us.

When you lend them credibility you help them accomplish their mission and those they act in agency for.


Isnt this thread literally called from another persoective?


This guy gets it.
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teslag said:

TheGreatEscape said:

People are people. Just because you don't agree with the positions of other people on certain disciplines, doesn't mean that the said persons quotes on other positions that support your viewpoint are invalid.

We do this all the time. I wish I had a post tracker or microphone next to all of conversations of y'all doing the same thing, even in academia, that Nortex has securely done.


It simply an issue of credibility. If you consider someone is gospel on one issue you can't simply hand wave away their information on others.

The cold hard reality is these sources (Simplicious, Bebo, Geroman, Olga Bezova, etc) are pro Russia, Pro China, pro Hamas, Pro Iran and make no bones about those positions. They do not like the west. They do not like American ideals. They don't like Biden. They don't like Trump. They do not want good for any of us.

When you lend them credibility you help them accomplish their mission and those they act in agency for.


Your first sentence and your last sentence can't be true at the same time. If you actually believe linking their posts here helps them conquer Ukraine, than it is MUCH more than "an issue of credibility." Its okay to admit that last part was a silly thing to say.
First Page Last Page
Page 144 of 261
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.