Jump to content

Russia and its “Special Operation” in Ukraine


maqroll

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Apparently some Russian bigwig called Dmitry Peskov as stated that the idea of Ukraine joining NATO was "the main threat" to Russia.

Paving the way for Ukraine to state publicly they will not join NATO allowing Russia to say OK then, we can call off the invasion? 

I think it's too late for that now. Peskov is just another Putin slave. Obviously if Putin's close advisers, like Peskov and Lukashenko are softening their words towards the West and Ukraine it's safe to say they're shitting it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 19.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • bickster

    1855

  • magnkarl

    1618

  • Genie

    1342

  • avfc1982am

    1156

3 minutes ago, avfc1982am said:

I think it's too late for that now. Peskov is just another Putin slave. Obviously if Putin's close advisers, like Peskov and Lukashenko are softening their words towards the West and Ukraine it's safe to say they're shitting it.  

Absolutely, after killing, raping and torturing the people of Ukraine they cannot go back to the options on the table in February.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This doesn't really add much to our understanding of the tactical and strategic situation, but it gives some flavour.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2022/09/13/a-hundred-wrecked-tanks-in-a-hundred-deadly-hours-heavy-losses-gut-russias-best-tank-army/

"Damaged, divided, demoralized, cut off from reliable logistics owing to Ukrainian deep strikes on Russian supply lines and lacking effective air support, the 4th GTD and 2nd GMRD were no match for the dozen Ukrainian brigades, including the powerful 4th Tank Brigade, that attacked north, east and south of Kharkiv last week."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way Ukraine is going to back track on joining NATO now. If they called a ceasefire now on earth could they ever trust them  in invading again in a few years time?

It is impetrative for their national security to join NATO as shown by the disgraceful invasion by Russia in February.

Edited by The Fun Factory
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said:

No way Ukraine is going to back track on joining NATO now. If they called a ceasefire now on earth could they ever trust them  in invading again in a few years time?

It is impetrative for their national security to join NATO as shown by the disgraceful invasion by Russia in February.

Also, they've passed the audition. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said:

as shown by the disgraceful invasion by Russia in February.

Until Ukraine's leaders meet Putin in some weird railway carriage of Ukraine's choosing,  just to sign some documents,  keep going until Putin or some other word removed asks for this very scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/09/2022 at 12:09, Mandy Lifeboats said:

 

Cheltenham bombed by a B52.  Sounds ok to me.      

image.png.bc18aacd4c20f51e1e2513bb33467fd0.png

I was on my lunch walk yesterday with that bugger booming overhead for ages. Also flew over my house in a storm recently albeit a lot lower and louder. Even when they're way up there's no mistaking them 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/09/2022 at 12:09, Mandy Lifeboats said:

 

Cheltenham bombed by a B52.  Sounds ok to me.      

image.png.bc18aacd4c20f51e1e2513bb33467fd0.png

The official story is that the plane developed a fault and had to burn off its fuel before landing 4 hours later.  

Would anyone like to comment on that explanation? 

I was on a plane that had to dump its fuel to do an emergency landing.  It took minutes.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, avfc1982am said:

Some excellent multitasking here.

There's a longer version of that video where he lets off the 2nd rocket launcher but is hiding under the level of the armour due to incoming fire

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mandy Lifeboats said:

The official story is that the plane developed a fault and had to burn off its fuel before landing 4 hours later.  

Would anyone like to comment on that explanation? 

I was on a plane that had to dump its fuel to do an emergency landing.  It took minutes.  

 

It makes complete sense. In an emergency, yes dump fuel (with the consequential pollution of the sea or land with a plane load of F34), but if it’s a non-emergency fault then getting down to the max landing weight via burning off the fuel is the better action.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Russian President Vladimir Putin does not realise the invasion of Ukraine is a mistake, German chancellor Olaf Scholz has said, after the leaders spoke on the phone on Tuesday.

Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Mr Scholz said he urged Mr Putin to withdraw troops and re-enter talks with Ukraine during the 90-minute call.

He called for Russia to respect the sovereignty of Ukraine.

The chancellor has come under pressure to increase military support for Kyiv.

Mr Scholz said the withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukraine would be the only way for "peace to have a chance in the region".

Although he said Mr Putin "unfortunately" had not changed his position on the invasion, Mr Scholz emphasised the importance of continuing to talk to him.

Link

He’s a stubborn bugger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, blandy said:

It makes complete sense. In an emergency, yes dump fuel (with the consequential pollution of the sea or land with a plane load of F34), but if it’s a non-emergency fault then getting down to the max landing weight via burning off the fuel is the better action.

I did wonder whether dumping so much fuel over land would be such a good idea. I'm glad you've cleared that up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Genie said:

Link

He’s a stubborn bugger

Has he got a choice now though? If he back tracks, I think internally he will be under more of a threat. Not because of those wanting an end to the war but by those that wanted it. They're his only cavalry now. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, blandy said:

It makes complete sense. In an emergency, yes dump fuel (with the consequential pollution of the sea or land with a plane load of F34), but if it’s a non-emergency fault then getting down to the max landing weight via burning off the fuel is the better action.

Flying in circles around a heavily populated area with a faulty plane instead of using the  huge expanse of sea and sparsely populated Welsh borders minutes away?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Genie said:

Link

He’s a stubborn bugger

Scholz can’t help himself. He really is a prize word removed. At this stage Ukraine aren’t going to be talking to Putin unless every Russian soldier leaves the whole of Ukraine including Crimea and Donbas. They've got absolutely no reason to trust Putin in any talks.

The mere fact he’s talked to Putin is bad enough, that makes Putin think he’s still in the game, it gives him options it gives him propaganda opportunities and he also gets an insight into how Western leaders are possibly thinking.

And all so Scholtz can try and revive his own flagging fortunes because he’s right royally stuffed up himself. The time for talks was months ago, Ukraine has the upper hand now

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

exclamation-mark-man-user-icon-with-png-and-vector-format-227727.png

Ad Blocker Detected

This site is paid for by ad revenue, please disable your ad blocking software for the site.

Â