Ukraine

HBS Guy

Head Honcho 💉💉
Staff member
Looks like the Russians are just going to flatten Ukraine cities with artillery, MRL, planes.

Yeah, about all the demoralised Russian soldiers can do I suppose. This could get the world/NATO to act, so inhumane a policy.
 

johnsmith

Administrator
Staff member
Looks like the Russians are just going to flatten Ukraine cities with artillery, MRL, planes.

Yeah, about all the demoralised Russian soldiers can do I suppose. This could get the world/NATO to act, so inhumane a policy.

they want to free their Ukrainian brothers from the nazi's :tease
 

HBS Guy

Head Honcho 💉💉
Staff member
Russia has been trying to recruit Syrians to fight in Ukraine to bolster Moscow’s flagging invasion, according to the Pentagon.

A senior US defence official said it was unclear how many Syrians Vladimir Putin is seeking to recruit, but said “we find it noteworthy that he believes he needs to rely on foreign fighters”. The official added there was no evidence of Syrian fighters having arrived in Ukraine so far.


The Russian recruitment effort was first reported by a Syrian news website, DeirEzzor24, which said Moscow was seeking volunteers to act as guards on six-month contracts, for between $200 and $300 a month. The same report said the Russian mercenary firm Wagner had been equipping its Syrian operatives, who had served in the Libyan war on the side of the general, Khalifa Haftar, to transfer to Ukraine.

The Wall Street Journal reported that some Syrian mercenaries were already in Russia and prepared to enter the fight in Syria. Russia has also deployed Chechen forces in Ukraine, according to the Chechen leader, Ramzan Kadyrov, a close ally of Putin’s.

Last week, Oleksiy Danilov, the secretary of Ukraine’s national security and defence council, alleged that a unit of Chechen special forces had been sent to kill the country’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy. Danilov said Ukraine had received a tipoff from within Russia’s FSB intelligence agency and had intercepted and killed the Chechen hit squad on the outskirts of Kyiv.

There has been so sign yet of any Belarus troops taking part in the Russian invasion of Ukraine or even preparing to take part, according to the Pentagon, despite reports that they may be sent to the front.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...uit-syrians-to-fight-in-ukraine-says-pentagon

So Putin must be getting a tad desperate?
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
I support the U.S. position of not intervening in this war with our own forces. They would slaughter Russian forces, forcing Putin to withdraw in defeat or to resort to the use of nukes, and that is a risk we cannot take for Ukraine.

But I don’t think we are risking nuclear war by giving them weapons and imposing sanctions.
Posturing, really? Firstly, WHY do you support the US not intervening in this war, by not using its military forces directly? Secondly, if we are arming the Ukrainian military with armament, intelligence, and munitions, then aren't we intervening in their war by proxy?? Thirdly, Wouldn't providing paid mercenaries/volunteers(from other war-mongering, fake-pacifist countries), be COMPLICIT in prolonging the war? Wouldn't this "non-intervention", be COMPLICIT in producing more body bags for both Russian and Ukrainian soldiers? Fourthly, sanctions only hurt the Russia people(that you somehow seem willing to absolve of ANY blame), and NOT THEIR GOVERNMENT LEADERS! And, finally, what legal, international, or treaty agreements, justifies forcing any sovereign countries to bend to your will. Or, YOUR BELIEFS! But, saying that the consequences of their disobedience/resolve is their own fault, is just irresponsible and arrogant. America should really practice what it preaches!

U.S. and NATO forces would annihilate Russian forces in a purely conventional air/ground war. We would establish air superiority and then systematically destroy their ground forces.
Are you still being hypothetical? Do you really think that today's wars will be only fought in the air, or on the ground?? And, since Russia DOES have the most powerful, and the largest number of nukes, your hypothetical is irrelevant and academic. Also, did the US systematically annihilate the ground forces in Cuba(Bay of Pigs), Korea, Formosa, Samoa, Somalia, Viet Nam, Afghanistan, etc.?? And you really think that the the US(3rd) will destroy the Soviet's ground forces(5th)? But you are just still being hypothetical right?

So, hypothetically, if they tried to do that, according to you, the U.S. should not interfere because this would be a conflict between sovereign nations that had nothing to do with us.
Firstly, this would NOT happen because of the logistic, cultural, language, and occupational realities, that I have already mentioned. Even hypotheticals should be realistic, reasonable, and plausible. Other wise, we can add superman to the mix! But, most importantly, WE HAVE A FUCKING MILITARY TREATY WITH THESE CONTRIES! Why do you keep ignoring this important distinction? Why don't you use a countries like Nauru, or Granada to make your point? But if Russia did try to take over the world, then I would suggest that we do everything to stop them. But there is a big difference in a policy of non-intervention between two warring countries, and a country trying to take over the world. But you are the one trying to rationalize this biased belief. Not me.

Yes, military equipment we send to Ukraine will be used to kill Russians by the Ukrainians in defense of their country. They will be used for defensive purposes on Ukrainian soil.
This is sheer arrogance! What are the guarantees that these weapons will NOT be used for OFFENSIVE purposes only? NONE! Just because you call them defensive weapons, DON'T MAKE IT SO!! And whether they are used offensively or defensively, the results will still be the same. MORE FUCKING BODY BAGS FOR BOTH SIDES!!

I’m NOT saying anything is going to happen to those areas if we don’t help Ukraine, so don’t accuse me of fearmongering. I’M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND YOUR POSITION ON HELPING A COUNTRY DEFEND ITSELF FROM NAKED AGGRESSION.
It's really not that hard to understand. And, you are fear-mongering with hypotheticals and platitudes. My position is based only on common sense, that will result in the least amount of harm. Your position comes from a position that military might is the moral right! And, the irrational belief that you are the world's police. That all countries should be either ingratiating second rate democracies, or insignificant banana republics. Countries like Russia, China, N. Korea, etc., are cultural are political threats, because that is what you want to believe. Even though many have fought alongside America in war.

You don’t think we should help them because it’s none of our business. So let’s just take that position a step further. How about if the U.S. just defends our own shores from now on, no matter what happens anywhere? … because until a foreign army attacks our shores, it’s none of our business.
Another oversimplification, and misrepresentation. In this particular case, I'm saying DON'T GET INVOLVED IN A PROXY WAR WITH RUSSIA! That does not mean that in ALL cases the US should not get involved. There are even diplomatic avenues that can be used. How do you think the Cuban Crisis was aborted. I guess in your mind, Russian was just afraid of the US, right? By all means, provide all the humanitarian aid you want! But, NO MILITARY, NO SANCTIONING, NO MERCS, AND NO THREATS OR HOSTILE RHETORIC! I can't be any more clearer than this.

But I don’t think we are risking nuclear war by giving them weapons and imposing sanctions.

And yes, the history will be written. And it will say that we helped Ukraine defend itself. And it will say that the free world punished Russia economically.

That’s better than the history saying we cowered before the bully and did nothing.
Well, God help us all if you are wrong. And, if the US and its allies are brought into this war? OOPS?? Will you just keep changing the goal posts, while the world is burning? History will only judge us by the results of our actions, NOT BY THE MEANS OR THE RATIONALE. You are naïve, and just projecting that it is the US that is cowering before a bully and doing nothing. The same inciteful rhetoric that may result in anther unnecessary war. There are only two justifications for war. Self-defense of your own sovereignty, and the self-defense of a treated member's sovereignty. That's it!

So if you want to mischaracterize me as someone who doesn't give a shit about anything that happens in the world, then go for it!! My principles are not based on capitalist/nationalist meaningless platitudes, or from the ego-gratifications I receive from watching too many John Wayne movies. It is not based on the pseudo-sophistry of paid actors, spewing out their staged, rehearsed, and packaged truths. I have seen the realities of wars first hand, and what it does to the human spirit. I have seen the evils that man can do to man. But our eager acceptance of this evil as being justifiable, is a true reflection of the mental health of our society.

Europe, Australia, Japan and the other Pacific Rim countries? Fuck ‘em. None of our business.
This is your straw man!! Or, are you still just being hypothetical?? Anyway, my two cents.
 

HBS Guy

Head Honcho 💉💉
Staff member
Russia will have a huge problem soon: Rasputitsa

As winter gives way to spring roads will turn into deep mud, good luck moving tanks and especially etc in that bottomless slop!
 

HBS Guy

Head Honcho 💉💉
Staff member
One guys’ view of the conflict. Russians are ahead of supply units—and roads are about to turn into quagmires.
 

Sir Bobby

Active member
You watch - one by one we'll all get sucked into WW3.

It's gunna be all on soon:
Russia will get more desperate and Poland will get their military airfields bombed when they give Ukraine jet fighters - that is a NATO country -
so NATO will be drawn into it directly.

1 hr 24 min ago
UK warns Poland that sending fighters to Ukraine may put them into Russia's "direct line of fire"
Defense Secretary Ben Wallace told Sky News on Tuesday that whilst the UK would "support" a Polish choice to supply Ukraine with fighter jets the country should be aware of Russia's warning of "retribution."

The news comes a day after the US Ambassador to NATO Julianne Smith told CNN Chief International Anchor Christiane Amanpour that US officials are discussing with the Polish government the potential for Poland to send MiG-29 Soviet-era fighter jets in support of Ukraine. Smith emphasized that this is a "sovereign decision" for Poland take.

 

SethBullock

Captain Bullock
Staff member
Posturing, really? Firstly, WHY do you support the US not intervening in this war, by not using its military forces directly?
Because I do not want to get into a shooting war between Russia and the U.S.

Secondly, if we are arming the Ukrainian military with armament, intelligence, and munitions, then aren't we intervening in their war by proxy??
Yes.

Thirdly, Wouldn't providing paid mercenaries/volunteers(from other war-mongering, fake-pacifist countries), be COMPLICIT in prolonging the war?
The primary thing prolonging this war is the Russians invasion. The secondary thing is the Ukrainian military resisting the invasion. And it would appear that the Ukrainians' alternative to prolonging the war is surrender. Would you choose surrender to an invading force? Or would you fight?

Wouldn't this "non-intervention", be COMPLICIT in producing more body bags for both Russian and Ukrainian soldiers?
That's what happens when you defend your country.

Fourthly, sanctions only hurt the Russia people(that you somehow seem willing to absolve of ANY blame), and NOT THEIR GOVERNMENT LEADERS!
Time will tell.

And, finally, what legal, international, or treaty agreements, justifies forcing any sovereign countries to bend to your will.
I think you should be asking Putin that question.

Or, YOUR BELIEFS! But, saying that the consequences of their disobedience/resolve is their own fault, is just irresponsible and arrogant. America should really practice what it preaches!
No. It's logical. Actions have consequences, and Putin knew in advance what the consequences were going to be.

Are you still being hypothetical? Do you really think that today's wars will be only fought in the air, or on the ground?? And, since Russia DOES have the most powerful, and the largest number of nukes, your hypothetical is irrelevant and academic. Also, did the US systematically annihilate the ground forces in Cuba(Bay of Pigs), Korea, Formosa, Samoa, Somalia, Viet Nam, Afghanistan, etc.?? And you really think that the the US(3rd) will destroy the Soviet's ground forces(5th)? But you are just still being hypothetical right?
I was merely giving my opinion as to the relative capabilities of conventional air/ground forces of the Russians.

This is sheer arrogance! What are the guarantees that these weapons will NOT be used for OFFENSIVE purposes only? NONE! Just because you call them defensive weapons, DON'T MAKE IT SO!! And whether they are used offensively or defensively, the results will still be the same. MORE FUCKING BODY BAGS FOR BOTH SIDES!!
Ukraine has no intention of invading Russia. Therefore, Ukraine's weapons will be used to defend Ukraine.

Another oversimplification, and misrepresentation. In this particular case, I'm saying DON'T GET INVOLVED IN A PROXY WAR WITH RUSSIA! That does not mean that in ALL cases the US should not get involved. There are even diplomatic avenues that can be used. How do you think the Cuban Crisis was aborted. I guess in your mind, Russian was just afraid of the US, right? By all means, provide all the humanitarian aid you want! But, NO MILITARY, NO SANCTIONING, NO MERCS, AND NO THREATS OR HOSTILE RHETORIC! I can't be any more clearer than this.
I think the Biden administration, predictably, failed in diplomacy with Russia.

Well, God help us all if you are wrong. And, if the US and its allies are brought into this war? OOPS?? Will you just keep changing the goal posts, while the world is burning? History will only judge us by the results of our actions, NOT BY THE MEANS OR THE RATIONALE. You are naïve, and just projecting that it is the US that is cowering before a bully and doing nothing. The same inciteful rhetoric that may result in anther unnecessary war. There are only two justifications for war. Self-defense of your own sovereignty, and the self-defense of a treated member's sovereignty. That's it!



So if you want to mischaracterize me as someone who doesn't give a shit about anything that happens in the world, then go for it!! My principles are not based on capitalist/nationalist meaningless platitudes, or from the ego-gratifications I receive from watching too many John Wayne movies. It is not based on the pseudo-sophistry of paid actors, spewing out their staged, rehearsed, and packaged truths. I have seen the realities of wars first hand, and what it does to the human spirit. I have seen the evils that man can do to man. But our eager acceptance of this evil as being justifiable, is a true reflection of the mental health of our society.



This is your straw man!! Or, are you still just being hypothetical?? Anyway, my two cents.
I too am well aware of the realities of war.

I question the position NATO and Biden have taken on Ukraine's intention to join NATO.

But that aside, Russia is carrying out a war of aggression against a nation that was no threat to them. I admire the Ukrainians will to resist them. Most of the world agrees that Russia has no justification for this.

I don't want to fight the Russians over Ukraine. I think that could lead to an escalation that we do not want with a nuclear power. But I don't mind helping the Ukrainians defend their country.
 

HBS Guy

Head Honcho 💉💉
Staff member
Looks like some Arab fighters are in Ukraine to fight against the Russians:



Bin Ghaleb

@GhalebM0nz1i7


About 450 militants of Arab and foreign nationalities arrived from Idlib Governorate to #Ukraine to participate in the fight against the #Russian forces, just less than 3 days after they left the #Syrian territory, passing through the #Turkish territory. The sources revealed 1/


Image

12:54 AM · Mar 9, 2022·Twitter for Android

https://twitter.com/GhalebM0nz1i7/status/1501202082468147208/retweets

Replying to
@GhalebM0nz1i7
that the number of foreign militants who arrived in #Ukraine from several areas in Idlib and its countryside reached about 150, most of whom belong to nationalities (#Belgian, #French, Chinese, Moroccan, #Tunisian, #Chechen, #British), while the other 300 militants are from 1/3

https://twitter.com/GhalebM0nz1i7

several nationalities. Areas in the countryside of Idlib and Aleppo, most of whom are fighting in the ranks of “Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham” and “Ansar al-Tawhid,” while a smaller number belong to the “Faylaq al-Sham”and “National Liberation Front”who are loyal to the #Turkish army. 1/

https://twitter.com/GhalebM0nz1i7

Regarding the material temptations that were promised to the departing militants, the sources confirmed that the salaries that the #Syrian fighter will receive will range between 1200-1500 dollars, while she denied knowing the size of what foreign militants will receive.
 

mothra

Moderator
Staff member
"I think the Biden administration, predictably, failed in diplomacy with Russia"

- Seth

Oh my god. Even this you hang Biden out to dry for? Even after he did such fantaastic work with NATO?

Seth, i accuse you of vengefullness. You're just revisiting everything levelled at Trump straight onto Biden. You are highly partisan.

I'm really sad to see it. I think you are capable of much more than this.
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
Ukraine has no intention of invading Russia. Therefore, Ukraine's weapons will be used to defend Ukraine.
What? Whether the Ukraine does or doesn't have any intentions of invading Russia, has absolutely nothing to do with how they will use their "defensive" weapons. You and I both know that preemptive attacks are often used in war. All retaliation strikes are also preemptive strikes. Or, do you really believe that the Ukrainian military will only respond when they are attacked first? And, then retaliate by using these "defensive" weapons? Really??? All weapons are defensive, UNTIL THEY ARE USED! And, all wars are acts of aggression. There is no such thing as a defensive war. It is an oxymoron.

Because I do not want to get into a shooting war between Russia and the U.S.
Then don't create a proxy war with Russian. Don't make threats to to turn the world against Russia, or supply arms, intelligence, munitions, or even mercs to the Ukrainian army. Provide only diplomatic solutions and humanitarian aid to either, or both sides.

The primary thing prolonging this war is the Russians invasion. The secondary thing is the Ukrainian military resisting the invasion. And it would appear that the Ukrainians' alternative to prolonging the war is surrender. Would you choose surrender to an invading force? Or would you fight?
Not sure what you are saying here. You don't blame one boxer for prolonging the bout. YES, by not surrendering to the Russian invaders and defending their sovereignty, they are prolonging this war. And, YES, by not surrendering they are also prolonging this war. It is irrelevant what I would do in this situation. Since I'm not in anyway affected by it. This is a decision for the Ukrainian people to make. NOT a decision to be made by well-meaning foreign interests. Or, by global armament manufacturers, trying to make more bucks out of more body bags. But, if the impossible did happen, and Australia was being invaded by another country, I would definitely never surrender.

That's what happens when you defend your country.
I wasn't talking about the the Ukrainian people defending their country. I was talking about the foreign contractors, mercs, and foreign leaders, being complicit in their role of producing MORE body bags for both sides. If these foreign war-mongers would just stay out of it, it would mean LESS body bags, and an early end to the conflict. All they are doing is forcing Putin to become MORE aggressive, and commit more resources. He does want to win the war, and he does want to protect his soldiers. And this would include, warning and attacking anyone who gives any military aid to the enemy. We've seen what the US does to countries that harbor terrorists.

Time will tell.
We've already seen who will suffer the most, whenever sanctions are being imposed on any country. The poor!! They won't have access to food, medical supplies, petrol. And, the prices on their gods and services will skyrocket. The wealthy not so much! Also, if America didn't have control over the petrol-dollar at OPEC, they wouldn't be able to sanction a police station in Dubbo!

I think you should be asking Putin that question.
So if Putin violates international law, then it is okay for other countries to do the same? We are responsible for our own actions, NOT HIS! Are you saying that Russia should bend to the will of the US? Or, to any other country's? Here is a hypothetical. What if Texas decided to secede from the Union today, and form its own independent and sovereign nation. What do you think the federal government would do to stop them? And, what if this new nation of Texas then decided to ask to become a recognized, and full member of NATO? Again, what do you think the federal government would do? Remember the Civil War??

No. It's logical. Actions have consequences, and Putin knew in advance what the consequences were going to be.
What are these consequences? That if Russia shoots at people in another country, that they might just shoot back? Outside interference also have consequences too. They prolong a conflict that is none of their business. I asked you before. Do you even know why the Russians have invaded the Ukraine? This detail is important, don't you think? It is not simply that "Russia, China, Africa, and N. Korea bad, and the rest of the world good!".

I was merely giving my opinion as to the relative capabilities of conventional air/ground forces of the Russians.
Even great teams may look great on paper. But the real test is what happens on the field. We have seen the failures of the US military, in conflicts involving nations with hardly any ground forces. So why are you of the opinion that the US would annihilate the Russian ground troops? The 5th largest in the world! History doesn't support your opinion. Did you know that the US has NEVER won a war on its own? Even in its War of Independence(Revolutionary War), it received assistance from its allies, France, Spain, Netherland, and Norway.

I question the position NATO and Biden have taken on Ukraine's intention to join NATO.
His position is irrelevant. The Ukraine is NOT a full member of NATO. So he is NOT defending a NATO member, or any NATO sovereignty! So his rhetoric and saber-rattling against Russia is only provocative and threatening.

"If Russia proceeds, we will rally the world,” Biden said, adding that Washington’s allies were ready to impose powerful sanctions that will “undermine Russia’s ability to compete economically and strategically.”.


It is madness to provoke WWIII. By provoking a country capable of destroying the entire planet! Just stay out of it! Your opinions are your business. But your actions can become everyone's business. There is no moral high ground in a global graveyard!
 

HBS Guy

Head Honcho 💉💉
Staff member
A hint of light at the end of the tunnel?

  • The Kremlin’s spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said Ukraine becoming a neutral state with a status comparable to Austria and Sweden was being discussed at talks with Kyiv and would be a “compromise”. “This is an option that is being discussed now and that can be considered as a compromise,” Peskov told journalists today.
  • Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, and the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, suggested talks were making progress despite continued bloodshed and fears from some EU leaders that the Kremlin was toying with Kyiv. “The negotiations are not easy for obvious reasons,” Lavrov told RBC News. “But nevertheless, there is some hope of reaching a compromise.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2022/mar/16/ukraine-russia-war-latest-zelenskiy-says-peace-talks-are-more-realistic-three-eu-leaders-vow-support-on-kyiv-visit-live

Wasn’t Ukraine a neutral state?
 
Top