Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress]

[DaRude]

I think Putin is quite confused about what is terrorism. Ruzzia is at war in Ukraine and it is perfectly legit to hit military targets. An strategic bomber perfectly qualifies as a military target since it is a plane intended to drop bombs and missiles to an adversary

Kiev is right that they have been able to hit targets at a long range. The fact that the delivery vehicle apparently was a truck (or a lorry if you live in the UK) does not change the fact that they have effectively being able to hit targets as far as Siberia. As far as strike capabilities, it could have been carried out by using a turtle to hit the bombers - this is war and you do not get points for having a pointy missile instead of a truck as a delivery method.

Ruzzia has been caught completely. It has been said that even the drivers of the trucks were completely unaware of the presence of the military drones that were hidden under a false floor. There are videos of people actually trying to take down the drones with stones.

This operation is going to the history books as the biggest aviation catastrophe for Ruzzia's aviation, done by a country with a force 20 times smaller.

https://youtu.be/M43v9DXCOEM

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/ukraine-stages-major-attack-russian-aircraft-with-drones-security-official-says-2025-06-01/

But speaking of terror, Ruzzia however targeted cities and civil locations. Seems like Putin has some issues with definitions.

...

Yup, Russia took a very significant hit. Â That ain't no lie.

One thing I've noted is that Russia has a strong tendency to defer on the use of certain techniques until after the techniques are used against them. Â Often _shortly_ after. Â Cluster munitions come to mind.

[...]
I have to say that the Russian civilians who took extraordinarily risky action to stop many of the attacks have truly earned my respect. Â Based on my observations of the reactions of Western civilians in the face of a need for action, such a thing would surprise me very much in most of the 'West' these days.

That is false information, Ruzzia used cluster munitions very early and well before Ukraine.

So, some civilians started throwing stones a short distance to a drone loaded with high explosive flying in their proximity. You are basically respecting idiots (and that explains many things).

A bridge overpass in western Russia collapsed late Saturday, derailing a passenger train underneath and killing at least seven people and injuring dozens, officials and the state news media said...In a separate episode, Ukraine’s military intelligence agency, the HUR, said in a statement that Ukraine had blown up a Russian military train that was traveling toward Crimea through a part of the Zaporizhzhia region occupied by Russian forces...Aleksander Bogomaz, the governor of Bryansk, said in a statement that seven people died as a result of the derailment in that region. Mr. Bogomaz added that 47 people, including three children, were taken to medical facilities.

Explosions caused 2 bridges in western Russia to collapse, officials say. 7 people were killed
...
The first bridge, in the Bryansk region on the border with Ukraine, collapsed on top of a passenger train on Saturday, causing the casualties.

The ministry also said that Rubio expressed condolences over deaths that occurred when two bridges were blown up in separate Russian regions bordering Ukraine.

The US State Department said Rubio reiterated US President Donald Trump's call for continued direct talks between Russia and Ukraine to achieve "a lasting peace."

Yet another silly attempt to confuse the ignorant, no one is saying that military airfield is not a military target, a passenger train with children on the other hand is an act of terrorism by everyone's definition.

Please, provide the whole picture. This railway line was being used to supply the frontline. The railway is a perfectly valid target. Just a more clear example: You start landing civilian planes on an airport that has also military use and military planes landing there or you start storing munitions under a civilian building.

TBH, lots of problems with definitions from your side. e.g. a misile hits a restaurant in Odessa - it is just war, but a railway line gets blown with undesired collateral casualties - that is terrorism. You seem to forget the massive use of Shahed and missiles on Ukranian cities, but become all sanctimonious about this.

Ruzzia should stop pretending that the war is something that happens far away and that they can go on with their lives while Ukrainian civilians are massacred every day. And if Ukraine would want to kill people for the shake of it, it would already do it - it is very easy, does not require tech and anyone can do it, or do you think Ruzzia has the monopoly?

https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/06/03/ukraine-russia-using-drones-attack-civilians

In 2024, Russian drone strikes killed dozens of civilians and injured hundreds more in the city of Kherson, in apparently deliberate or reckless attacks that constitute war crimes.
The attacks have the apparent purpose of instilling terror in the civilian population in Kherson, part of a widespread attack against that population.

https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/05/un-commission-concludes-russian-armed-forces-drone-attacks-against-civilians

UN Commission concludes that Russian armed forces’ drone attacks against civilians in Kherson Province amount to crimes against humanity of murder

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/russian-drone-fragments-set-kyiv-apartment-building-ablaze-official-says-2025-05-24/

Russia launches war's largest air attack on Ukraine, kills at least 12 people

I guess that now you are going to tell me that today's strike in Kerch Bridge is also "terrorism"?

https://www.euronews.com/video/2025/06/03/ukraine-strikes-kerch-bridge-in-crimea-with-underwater-explosives

Ukraine strikes Kerch bridge in Crimea with underwater explosives

~

You are simply trying to confuse the issue, as always. Even if the things you say about the START Treaty are true, the point is the same as always. Russia is winning on the ground, and has the capability to do much more damage.

I don't think that Russia will be forced to destroy the European NATO countries. They will capitulate to the overwhelmingly superior strength of the Russian military before Russia has to do this. Of course, Zelensky will be gone before this happens... except that he is taken captive in Russia's taking of Kiev and all of Ukraine.

Nope, there is no confusion. You said Ukraine had broken the START treaty, but that is not true. Ruzzia suspended his participation that treaty.

If Ruzzia feels there is something to gain by using nuclear power, they will use it. The reason why they have and will not is because there is nothing to gain from it, and most likely would turn China into an enemy - and probably force a NATO intervention.

It's really simple, a tank is a valid military target, attacking a school bus just because it drove on the same road that was used by a tank is NOT a valid military target. Attacking military officers/generals while they're at a restaurant is a valid military target, attacking kids birthday party just because its going on at the restaurant that before was used by military officials in NOT a valid military target. How can you not know that?

It is refreshing that you at least acknowledge that it was "undesired collateral casualties" and not gloating over civilian deaths like i see on other resources.

Non terrorist attacks do everything to minimize the casualties to civilians. Attack on a bridge during the night is one thing, but putting a bomb on a civilian bus so it blows up on a bridge during peak traffic hours would be another story.

[BADecker]

~

~

You are simply trying to confuse the issue, as always. Even if the things you say about the START Treaty are true, the point is the same as always. Russia is winning on the ground, and has the capability to do much more damage.

I don't think that Russia will be forced to destroy the European NATO countries. They will capitulate to the overwhelmingly superior strength of the Russian military before Russia has to do this. Of course, Zelensky will be gone before this happens... except that he is taken captive in Russia's taking of Kiev and all of Ukraine.

Nope, there is no confusion. You said Ukraine had broken the START treaty, but that is not true. Ruzzia suspended his participation that treaty.

If Ruzzia feels there is something to gain by using nuclear power, they will use it. The reason why they have and will not is because there is nothing to gain from it, and most likely would turn China into an enemy - and probably force a NATO intervention.

Essentially everything that Ukraine does in this war is terrorism. Why? Because Ukraine doesn't have any strength of its own. The only reason why it has the appearance of strength is that there is NATO military in there.

Russia didn't back out of parts of the START Treaty for nothing. It backed out because the West had already broken the Treaty many times over, even though it tried to hide its breaking of the Treaty in the Ukraine conflict.

Any country with nukes will use them if they feel that there is something worthwhile to gain from using them. What's the use of having nukes as a deterrent if there isn't the promise of using them when necessary?

Currently, Russia and China are essentially in joint military activity. Russia is training China in some of its military prowess.

Meanwhile, there is war brewing in the Baltic Sea, because the West has said that Russian ships are using the Baltic illegally, against the sanctions. Russia is moving its military there to protect the ships. It's the West that is illegally declaring Russian activity to be illegal, and then acting on their illegal declarations. International waters are for use by everybody, not only the West. The West is illegal in its attacks on Russian ships in International waters.

Meanwhile, Russia is overcoming Ukraine militarily all along the line of fighting at the Black Sea Corridor. Certainly, Russia is sustaining some damage in their push. But, they are essentially pushing Ukraine out.

[LTU_btc]

There is lot of speculations how many Russian bombers were destroyed or damaged during operation Spider's Web. So, there is visual proof of at least 22 aircrafts damaged or destroyed
https://t.me/kiber_boroshno/11537
Potentially there is more, maybe not 41, but even 22 is huge number. Also, you can see cruise missiles already mounted on some bombers, so, they were already prepared for another massive attack on Ukraine.
BTW, wondering for what purpose they had tyres on aircrafts?

Please, provide the whole picture. This railway line was being used to supply the frontline. The railway is a perfectly valid target. Just a more clear example: You start landing civilian planes on an airport that has also military use and military planes landing there or you start storing munitions under a civilian building.

TBH, lots of problems with definitions from your side. e.g. a misile hits a restaurant in Odessa - it is just war, but a railway line gets blown with undesired collateral casualties - that is terrorism. You seem to forget the massive use of Shahed and missiles on Ukranian cities, but become all sanctimonious about this.

Ruzzia should stop pretending that the war is something that happens far away and that they can go on with their lives while Ukrainian civilians are massacred every day. And if Ukraine would want to kill people for the shake of it, it would already do it - it is very easy, does not require tech and anyone can do it, or do you think Ruzzia has the monopoly?

Well, dude just have double standarts. When Russia attacks civilian objects like restaurants, hospitals, schools - it's military bases full of NATO generals. But when Ukraine attacks objects which are used for military logistics - it's already terrorism.
Yeah, it's war and it's impossible to avoid deaths of civilians. But I'm just wondering how many civilians were killed by Russia and how many by Ukraine. I guess that answer is clear.
About attack on Kerch bridge - it didn't collapsed, but it's possible that construction was seriously damaged, explosion was really powerful.

[DaRude]

There is lot of speculations how many Russian bombers were destroyed or damaged during operation Spider's Web. So, there is visual proof of at least 22 aircrafts damaged or destroyed
https://t.me/kiber_boroshno/11537
Potentially there is more, maybe not 41, but even 22 is huge number. Also, you can see cruise missiles already mounted on some bombers, so, they were already prepared for another massive attack on Ukraine.
BTW, wondering for what purpose they had tyres on aircrafts?

Please, provide the whole picture. This railway line was being used to supply the frontline. The railway is a perfectly valid target. Just a more clear example: You start landing civilian planes on an airport that has also military use and military planes landing there or you start storing munitions under a civilian building.

TBH, lots of problems with definitions from your side. e.g. a misile hits a restaurant in Odessa - it is just war, but a railway line gets blown with undesired collateral casualties - that is terrorism. You seem to forget the massive use of Shahed and missiles on Ukranian cities, but become all sanctimonious about this.

Ruzzia should stop pretending that the war is something that happens far away and that they can go on with their lives while Ukrainian civilians are massacred every day. And if Ukraine would want to kill people for the shake of it, it would already do it - it is very easy, does not require tech and anyone can do it, or do you think Ruzzia has the monopoly?

Well, dude just have double standarts. When Russia attacks civilian objects like restaurants, hospitals, schools - it's military bases full of NATO generals. But when Ukraine attacks objects which are used for military logistics - it's already terrorism.
Yeah, it's war and it's impossible to avoid deaths of civilians. But I'm just wondering how many civilians were killed by Russia and how many by Ukraine. I guess that answer is clear.
About attack on Kerch bridge - it didn't collapsed, but it's possible that construction was seriously damaged, explosion was really powerful.

How many thousands of Shaheds and missiles Russia launched at Ukraine? How many thousands anti air missiles Ukraine launched to try and intercept them? What's the anti air success rate? Where do Ukrainians put together their UAV's is it in isolated building in the middle of nowhere and away from all civilians or inside the cities?  What happens to a missile/Shahed when Ukraine jams GPS to bring it down so it doesn't reach its intended target? What's the civilian casualty rate to missiles Shaheds/launched? How does that ratio compare to say US or Israels and their offensives on countries that don't have the jamming technology or anti air missiles in such quantities? Compare apples to apples.

That's new, didn't see a claim that that passenger train was used for military logistics? Can you provide a source?

[paxmao]

Furher hits in Ruzzian planes have been video-evidenced:

https://www.twz.com/air/firm-evidence-of-russian-aircraft-losses-after-ukrainian-drone-strikes

This two do hurt. Ruzzia does have ... was it 6 of these AWACS flying rada type? And they cannot build more.

shows two A-50 being targeted. The location was presumably Ivanovo, where these radar planes are home-based.

Several strategic bombers, at roughly 400 millions each. You can pretend nothing happens, but it happens all the same. In some of the videos you can observe some of the planes had missiles ready to be launched right before the "peace negotiations".

Among those aircraft, the new video confirms that several of the Tu-95MS bombers were already loaded with Kh-101 conventionally armed cruise missiles, ready for launch against Ukraine, as seen in the image below. This fact underlines how big a threat these aircraft are to Ukraine and reinforces the fact that they are legitimate targets

If you use your strategic forces to attack Ukraine, they are legit targets. I wonder if they could pull a similar strike against the F-31's, just to make sure Ruzzia also loosses the ability to destroy satelites.

[...]

Please, provide the whole picture. This railway line was being used to supply the frontline. The railway is a perfectly valid target. Just a more clear example: You start landing civilian planes on an airport that has also military use and military planes landing there or you start storing munitions under a civilian building.
[...]
How many thousands of Shaheds and missiles Russia launched at Ukraine? How many thousands anti air missiles Ukraine launched to try and intercept them? What's the anti air success rate? Where do Ukrainians put together their UAV's is it in isolated building in the middle of nowhere and away from all civilians or inside the cities? Â What happens to a missile/Shahed when Ukraine jams GPS to bring it down so it doesn't reach its intended target? What's the civilian casualty rate to missiles Shaheds/launched? How does that ratio compare to say US or Israels and their offensives on countries that don't have the jamming technology or anti air missiles in such quantities? Compare apples to apples.

That's new, didn't see a claim that that passenger train was used for military logistics? Can you provide a source?

I am not claiming the passenger cars where being used for military logistics but since you mention it, it could be perfectly be carrying troops, Since that has happened in the past, railways going near the front become a target. Can you provide evidence to the contrary?

However, I am saying that the line was being used for military logistics, that is very close to the front and that Ruzzia cannot keep living as if they were not at war. If you have an area of fighting, you do not send civilian trains, you evacuate. Ukraine does it all the time.

The problem is that Ruzzia's government is pretending that "nothing is happening", but since two years to now, more and more is happening in Ruzzia and it is difficult to hide.

I do not know where the drone factories of Ukraine are and I would not tell you if I knew. Sending an inherently innacurate drone in the middle of Kiev or killing randomly in Kherson is not targeted to a military objective, it is a strategy of terror very clearly. So, as usual, trying to use a double standard here.

[DaRude]

Furher hits in Ruzzian planes have been video-evidenced:

https://www.twz.com/air/firm-evidence-of-russian-aircraft-losses-after-ukrainian-drone-strikes

This two do hurt. Ruzzia does have ... was it 6 of these AWACS flying rada type? And they cannot build more.

shows two A-50 being targeted. The location was presumably Ivanovo, where these radar planes are home-based.

Several strategic bombers, at roughly 400 millions each. You can pretend nothing happens, but it happens all the same. In some of the videos you can observe some of the planes had missiles ready to be launched right before the "peace negotiations".

Among those aircraft, the new video confirms that several of the Tu-95MS bombers were already loaded with Kh-101 conventionally armed cruise missiles, ready for launch against Ukraine, as seen in the image below. This fact underlines how big a threat these aircraft are to Ukraine and reinforces the fact that they are legitimate targets

If you use your strategic forces to attack Ukraine, they are legit targets. I wonder if they could pull a similar strike against the F-31's, just to make sure Ruzzia also loosses the ability to destroy satelites.

[...]

Please, provide the whole picture. This railway line was being used to supply the frontline. The railway is a perfectly valid target. Just a more clear example: You start landing civilian planes on an airport that has also military use and military planes landing there or you start storing munitions under a civilian building.
[...]
How many thousands of Shaheds and missiles Russia launched at Ukraine? How many thousands anti air missiles Ukraine launched to try and intercept them? What's the anti air success rate? Where do Ukrainians put together their UAV's is it in isolated building in the middle of nowhere and away from all civilians or inside the cities? Â What happens to a missile/Shahed when Ukraine jams GPS to bring it down so it doesn't reach its intended target? What's the civilian casualty rate to missiles Shaheds/launched? How does that ratio compare to say US or Israels and their offensives on countries that don't have the jamming technology or anti air missiles in such quantities? Compare apples to apples.

That's new, didn't see a claim that that passenger train was used for military logistics? Can you provide a source?

I am not claiming the passenger cars where being used for military logistics but since you mention it, it could be perfectly be carrying troops, Since that has happened in the past, railways going near the front become a target. Can you provide evidence to the contrary?

However, I am saying that the line was being used for military logistics, that is very close to the front and that Ruzzia cannot keep living as if they were not at war. If you have an area of fighting, you do not send civilian trains, you evacuate. Ukraine does it all the time.

The problem is that Ruzzia's government is pretending that "nothing is happening", but since two years to now, more and more is happening in Ruzzia and it is difficult to hide.

I do not know where the drone factories of Ukraine are and I would not tell you if I knew. Sending an inherently innacurate drone in the middle of Kiev or killing randomly in Kherson is not targeted to a military objective, it is a strategy of terror very clearly. So, as usual, trying to use a double standard here.

Last I checked Ukraine didn't have any military satellites, so why would it care about Russia's abilities to destroy satellites? Or are we at the point where it's just ridiculous to deny that this is a proxy war with Ukraine being used just for the supply of souls with no chance of ever getting into NATO?

Once again, just because a military vehicle drives on some paved surface, does it make a school bus driving on that same surface a valid military target in your eyes?

Why are drones inherently inaccurate? Then, the drones Ukraine is sending at Russia's cities is a strategy of terror, just with less quantities?

Thu, March 6, 2025 - US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has claimed that Moscow's full-scale invasion of Ukraine is in fact a proxy war between the US and Russia.

One Trump adviser said: "From an international perspective, you've got a chihuahua inflicting some real damage on a much bigger dog."

[BADecker]

Essentially this is all about MAGA. Get the US back home and out of the war. Europe and its Ukraine puppet will fail without US help. Once this has happened, tariffs won't be necessary to allow MAGA to grow. Then the US can start limited trade with Europe again. Right now, US trade with Russia is more important than trade with the 'rest of Europe', anyway.


Waiting for the Oreshniks, While the Istanbul Kabuki Proceeds "Not Negatively"


https://www.lewrockwell.com/2025/06/no_author/waiting-for-the-oreshniks-while-the-istanbul-kabuki-proceeds-not-negatively/
The attack on Russian strategic bombers – part of the nuclear triad – was a US-UK joint operation. Especially MI6. The overall tech investment and strategy was provided by this intel combo.

It's patently unclear whether Trump is really in charge – or not. This was confirmed to me at night by a top intel source; he added that the Kremlin and the security services were actively investigating all possibilities, especially who issued the final green light.

Near universal popular consensus: Release the Oreshniks. Plus waves of ballistic missiles.

Predictably, the Instabul kabuki came and went like a tawdry spectacle, complete with the Ukrainian delegation in military fatigues and Defense Minister Umarov incapable of speaking even mediocre English at a messy press conference after the brief 1h15 meeting. The Turkish Foreign Ministry epically described the kabuki as concluding "not negatively".

Nothing strategic or politically substantial was discussed: only prisoner exchanges. The mood in Moscow, additionally, was that top Russian negotiator Medinsky should have presented an ultimatum, not a memorandum. It was, predictably, interpreted as an ultimatum by the Beggar of Banderastan; but what Medinsky actually handed out to the Ukrainians was a de facto road map memorandum, in 3 sections, with 2 options for the conditions for a ceasefire, and 31 points, a great deal of them expressed in detail by Moscow for months.

Examples: first option for a ceasefire should be a complete UAF withdrawal from DPR, LPR, Kherson and Zaporizhia, within 30 days; international recognition of Crimea, Donbass and Novorossiya as part of Russia; Ukraine neutrality; Ukraine holding elections and then signing a peace treaty – approved by a legally binding UN Security Council resolution (italics mine); and a ban on the receipt and deployment of nuclear weapons.

None of that, of course, will ever be accepted by the terror-infused set up in Kiev, the neo-nazi outfits that control it, and assorted, fragmented collective West warmongering backers. So the SMO will go on. Possibly all the way to 2026. Along with extra versions of the Istanbul kabuki: the next one should be held by late June.

The current kabuki, incidentally, composes the Last Chance Saloon for Kiev to retain some measure of – fractious – "sovereignty". As Foreign Minister Lavrov has been reiterating, everything will be really decided in the battlefield.
...

[paxmao]

Last I checked Ukraine didn't have any military satellites, so why would it care about Russia's abilities to destroy satellites? Or are we at the point where it's just ridiculous to deny that this is a proxy war with Ukraine being used just for the supply of souls with no chance of ever getting into NATO?

Once again, just because a military vehicle drives on some paved surface, does it make a school bus driving on that same surface a valid military target in your eyes?

Why are drones inherently inaccurate? Then, the drones Ukraine is sending at Russia's cities is a strategy of terror, just with less quantities?

Thu, March 6, 2025 - US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has claimed that Moscow's full-scale invasion of Ukraine is in fact a proxy war between the US and Russia.

One Trump adviser said: "From an international perspective, you've got a chihuahua inflicting some real damage on a much bigger dog."

Oh, you do not get it or are prettending not to get it? Ukraine may not care about Ruzzia destroying satelites, but certain Ruzzia cares. Ukraine's strategy during the last couple of years is making the war extremely expensive for Ruzzia by taking down systems Ruzzia cannot replace nor afford to loose (e.g. strategic bombers like this time).

If the road is in the middle of a war zone and you are moving a train towards the front... But hey, it is not really me, it is something Ruzzia has and is doing all the time, so I would like to see you pointing that out. Not gonna happen uh?

Trump has said that many times "do not pick a fight with someone bigger" - but that does not make it an immutable truth. When survival is at risk, you take on the bully and make sure he looses more than he wins.

Not understanding this explains your comment above. BTW damaging the nuclear and missile capabilities of Ruzzia to that scale does not seem like a small dog bite.

[hellflame]

The poor man's aircraft carrier was effective but the same goes for a pick up truck with a good driver and trigger man in the back against a tank these days. Maybe the west could reduce their spending on multi billion dollar projects and subsidize the cost of bread for the people instead? Maybe not ..without the war preparedness and threat how do you build out something that will one day be used upon your own citizenry on a global scale to have absolute economic, cultural,and whatever other form of total control over them? Could be just a conspiracy theory though.

[paxmao]

The poor man's aircraft carrier was effective but the same goes for a pick up truck with a good driver and trigger man in the back against a tank these days. Maybe the west could reduce their spending on multi billion dollar projects and subsidize the cost of bread for the people instead? Maybe not ..without the war preparedness and threat how do you build out something that will one day be used upon your own citizenry on a global scale to have absolute economic, cultural,and whatever other form of total control over them? Could be just a conspiracy theory though.

Yep. Wars have those effects. Without WW II, there might not be nukes.

Apparently Ukraine is targeting Iskanders now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wSfMVVXtdE

[montaga]

The leader of the Crimean Tatar people Refat Chubarov issued a clear warning to the Russian Citizens to get out of Crimea whilst it is still possible.
 Crimean Country has existed long before Russia and when Ukraine was still part of Lithuanian kingdom. Crimea natives hate Russia to the core for what the have done to the native population.

Take a look at the Chechen–Russian wars of what it means to deal with native people of the land.

[tvbcof]

...

Apparently Ukraine is targeting Iskanders now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wSfMVVXtdE

Better late than never.  If they would have targeted military objects instead of civilians they might not be losing the war so badly.  But everything they do seems to be PR focused, and assaulting civilian markets with cluster munitions plays well with 'their people' which speaks volumes about those who 'stand with Ukraine'.

[LTU_btc]

Other topic was locked while I was typing. But still, I wanted to publish it, so I do it here as it's most related topic:

Attacking targets that are only available because the “enemy” is following nuclear treaties is one of the more cowardly war moves I’ve seen. Leave it to Ukraine to have done it right before peace talks while asking for a ceasefire. I’m having a tough time sympathizing with them. They seem to be begging for Russia to respond with nuclear weapons.

I'm not really sure how attacking targets which are used against you is coward move? These bombers were used in massive missiles attack on Ukraine. This is the most legitimate targets - Ukraine has right to defend themselves. It's not like attacking civilian or critical infrastructure.
BTW, as paxmao said, Russia don't follow nuclear treaty, they even exit it 2 years ago.
And these peace talks, for how long we hear about it? Probably already half of 2025. But in reality nothing happens and there is no signs that something is going to happen anytime soon.

[BADecker]

Other topic was locked while I was typing. But still, I wanted to publish it, so I do it here as it's most related topic:

Attacking targets that are only available because the “enemy” is following nuclear treaties is one of the more cowardly war moves I’ve seen. Leave it to Ukraine to have done it right before peace talks while asking for a ceasefire. I’m having a tough time sympathizing with them. They seem to be begging for Russia to respond with nuclear weapons.

I'm not really sure how attacking targets which are used against you is coward move? These bombers were used in massive missiles attack on Ukraine. This is the most legitimate targets - Ukraine has right to defend themselves. It's not like attacking civilian or critical infrastructure.
BTW, as paxmao said, Russia don't follow nuclear treaty, they even exit it 2 years ago.
And these peace talks, for how long we hear about it? Probably already half of 2025. But in reality nothing happens and there is no signs that something is going to happen anytime soon.

Russia only backed out of certain parts of the New START Treaty. Ukraine attacked Russian bombers that were still adhering to the Treaty. So, Ukraine acted like a terrorists, because that's the only little strength they have.

However, part of the Treaty said that the West would not push Eastward. The West broke the Treaty first, by pushing Ukraine into, and supporting Ukraine in, a war with Russia. The West broke the Treaty already in 2014 with its Ukrainian attacks in Russian Donbas and into Russia, itself.

Meanwhile, Russia is steadily clobbering Ukraine on the ground.


Globalists Go Radio Silent As NATO Flirts With World War III


https://alt-market.us/globalists-go-radio-silent-as-nato-flirts-with-world-war-iii/
Where have all the globalists gone? Yes, unfortunately they're still out there free when they should be rotting in a frozen gulag or fertilizing an unmarked field somewhere.  I get that.  However, if you've been tracking the elitist cabal as long as I have you might have noticed a sudden and abrupt shift in public activity among the most prominent globalist institutions.

From at least 2019 onward the mask had come completely off. The elites were flooding western media with woke propaganda through their NGO operations. You couldn't go anywhere without being bombarded with multiculturalism, DEI and LGBT nonsense. There was a clear attempt to engineer a massive cultural shift in the western world; an expedited progressive coup.

Conservatives were relentlessly targeted as "insurrectionists" and a "threat to democracy". Pandemic hysteria opened the door to an array of mandates as well as legislation designed to erase constitutional protections in the name of "health safety". The plan was openly admitted: An endless cycle of covid lockdowns and vaccine passports. A perpetual loop of medical tyranny. Globalists were ecstatic, reveling in the fear and calling for the implementation of forced vaccinations, covid tracking apps and even covid camps for people who refused to comply.

In the midst of the frenzy the WEF and other organizations pushed their economic agenda, asserting that the world needed to go cashless, that carbon controls and "climate lockdowns" needed to become normalized.  They wanted what they called a "Great Reset" of the global financial framework. Everything was admitted, they barely tried to hide their intentions. It was the New World Order we "conspiracy" analysts had been warning about for decades.

In the past they would mention details of the plan in obscure white papers or in moments of unguarded discussion. Over the past five years the globalists were essentially dancing in the streets and advertising the NWO for all too see. Why? Because they thought they had already won.
...

[DaRude]

Other topic was locked while I was typing. But still, I wanted to publish it, so I do it here as it's most related topic:

Attacking targets that are only available because the “enemy” is following nuclear treaties is one of the more cowardly war moves I’ve seen. Leave it to Ukraine to have done it right before peace talks while asking for a ceasefire. I’m having a tough time sympathizing with them. They seem to be begging for Russia to respond with nuclear weapons.

I'm not really sure how attacking targets which are used against you is coward move? These bombers were used in massive missiles attack on Ukraine. This is the most legitimate targets - Ukraine has right to defend themselves. It's not like attacking civilian or critical infrastructure.
BTW, as paxmao said, Russia don't follow nuclear treaty, they even exit it 2 years ago.
And these peace talks, for how long we hear about it? Probably already half of 2025. But in reality nothing happens and there is no signs that something is going to happen anytime soon.

Donald Trump has openly vented in recent weeks about Putin’s unwillingness to end the war. But since Sunday’s attack, which hit a series of Russian military airfields, the president has privately expressed frustration that the strike could escalate the conflict, according to three administration officials and an outside adviser to the White House. (They spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.)
These sources told me that the drone strike has reignited the president’s long-held displeasure with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and prompted a new debate in the White House about whether the United States should abandon Ukraine. Throughout the war, Trump has deemed Zelensky a “bad guy” and a “hothead,” the outside adviser said—someone who could be pushing the globe toward World War III. Trump privately echoed a right-wing talking point this week by criticizing Zelensky for supposedly showboating after the drone attacks; according to the adviser, Trump was impressed with the audacity of the strikes but believes that Zelensky’s focus should have been on Ukraine-Russia negotiations in Istanbul.

Look at the bigger picture (macro). Problem with that is that it's a clear indication that Zelenskii doesn't want to end this now and wants Ukraine to continue fighting. Doubling down naturally also raises risks and moves this into all or nothing stage. This means further deterioration in financial, political, and manpower positions on both sides. Not much politics happening in Russia and Ukraine, so short term the political risks fall on Europe. We see more and more right-wing nationalists coming into power (Poland) putting further pressure on the whole concept of EU, who benefits from this? Finances in Ukraine are non existent, so financial risks also fall on Europe further reducing the wealth of its citizens. So not much for Europeans to be happy about. Financial aspect also effects Russia, but Russians overall have a much higher tolerance for reduced buying capacity and I don't think anyone foresees food shortages in this day and age. Manpower is obvious, 4-1 difference in population thus the "to the last Ukrainian" cliche.

President Trump compared Russia and Ukraine with "children fighting in the park" on Thursday and suggested it might be better to let them keep on fighting for a while. Why it matters: Trump's remarks were another signal that he thinks Russia and Ukraine aren't ready to make peace, and that he's considering stepping back from his initiative to convince them to do so.

Ukrainian officials are concerned that retreat from Trump will only serve Russia's interests.

But Trump said the "bad blood" and deep "hatred" between the sides — combined with Russian President Vladimir Putin's commitment to hitting back hard for the surprise attack inside Russia — would make it hard to reach a ceasefire any time soon.

Trump sees what's going on and indicates that he wants to step back and let "Russia and Ukraine fight it out a while longer". Trump cannot be any clearer in his intent to distance from this conflict, so those risks wouldn't effect US. Once again who benefits from this the most? I couldn't find a single angle where Ukrainian people would stand to benefit, they're just getting completely fucked and cannot do anything about it, it's a shame but that's the role of a sacrificial pawn.

One would need complete lack of critical thinking and a lobotomy to believe that Ukrainian intelligence went from total incompetence to some super advanced unit capable of pulling the most sophisticated attacks on a territory of another country that even major powers wouldn't risk of attempting, all in just three years. While we're supposed to believe that European intelligence services are all incompetent clowns, unable to even change a light bulb or for three years cannot figure out who's responsible for committing the largest sabotage inside of Europe everyone totally believes that right?

[BADecker]

Other topic was locked while I was typing. But still, I wanted to publish it, so I do it here as it's most related topic:

Attacking targets that are only available because the “enemy” is following nuclear treaties is one of the more cowardly war moves I’ve seen. Leave it to Ukraine to have done it right before peace talks while asking for a ceasefire. I’m having a tough time sympathizing with them. They seem to be begging for Russia to respond with nuclear weapons.

I'm not really sure how attacking targets which are used against you is coward move? These bombers were used in massive missiles attack on Ukraine. This is the most legitimate targets - Ukraine has right to defend themselves. It's not like attacking civilian or critical infrastructure.
BTW, as paxmao said, Russia don't follow nuclear treaty, they even exit it 2 years ago.
And these peace talks, for how long we hear about it? Probably already half of 2025. But in reality nothing happens and there is no signs that something is going to happen anytime soon.

Donald Trump has openly vented in recent weeks about Putin’s unwillingness to end the war. But since Sunday’s attack, which hit a series of Russian military airfields, the president has privately expressed frustration that the strike could escalate the conflict, according to three administration officials and an outside adviser to the White House. (They spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.)
These sources told me that the drone strike has reignited the president’s long-held displeasure with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and prompted a new debate in the White House about whether the United States should abandon Ukraine. Throughout the war, Trump has deemed Zelensky a “bad guy” and a “hothead,” the outside adviser said—someone who could be pushing the globe toward World War III. Trump privately echoed a right-wing talking point this week by criticizing Zelensky for supposedly showboating after the drone attacks; according to the adviser, Trump was impressed with the audacity of the strikes but believes that Zelensky’s focus should have been on Ukraine-Russia negotiations in Istanbul.

Look at the bigger picture (macro). Problem with that is that it's a clear indication that Zelenskii doesn't want to end this now and wants Ukraine to continue fighting. Doubling down naturally also raises risks and moves this into all or nothing stage. This means further deterioration in financial, political, and manpower positions on both sides. Not much politics happening in Russia and Ukraine, so short term the political risks fall on Europe. We see more and more right-wing nationalists coming into power (Poland) putting further pressure on the whole concept of EU, who benefits from this? Finances in Ukraine are non existent, so financial risks also fall on Europe further reducing the wealth of its citizens. So not much for Europeans to be happy about. Financial aspect also effects Russia, but Russians overall have a much higher tolerance for reduced buying capacity and I don't think anyone foresees food shortages in this day and age. Manpower is obvious, 4-1 difference in population thus the "to the last Ukrainian" cliche.

President Trump compared Russia and Ukraine with "children fighting in the park" on Thursday and suggested it might be better to let them keep on fighting for a while. Why it matters: Trump's remarks were another signal that he thinks Russia and Ukraine aren't ready to make peace, and that he's considering stepping back from his initiative to convince them to do so.

Ukrainian officials are concerned that retreat from Trump will only serve Russia's interests.

But Trump said the "bad blood" and deep "hatred" between the sides — combined with Russian President Vladimir Putin's commitment to hitting back hard for the surprise attack inside Russia — would make it hard to reach a ceasefire any time soon.

Trump sees what's going on and indicates that he wants to step back and let "Russia and Ukraine fight it out a while longer". Trump cannot be any clearer in his intent to distance from this conflict, so those risks wouldn't effect US. Once again who benefits from this the most? I couldn't find a single angle where Ukrainian people would stand to benefit, they're just getting completely fucked and cannot do anything about it, it's a shame but that's the role of a sacrificial pawn.

One would need complete lack of critical thinking and a lobotomy to believe that Ukrainian intelligence went from total incompetence to some super advanced unit capable of pulling the most sophisticated attacks on a territory of another country that even major powers wouldn't risk of attempting, all in just three years. While we're supposed to believe that European intelligence services are all incompetent clowns, unable to even change a light bulb or for three years cannot figure out who's responsible for committing the largest sabotage inside of Europe everyone totally believes that right?

Time to look at the even bigger picture. The US just signed a trade agreement with China. China and Russia already have a military alliance going. Soon there will be 'military' trade between the US and Russia thru China. Western Europe and Ukraine will ultimately fail, and the killing over there might stop sooner than we expect.

Trump announces trade agreement with China: 'We have the deal' - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYGAIZXc2jM

But there will be some fighting for a while, yet, between Russia and Ukraine. Poor troops... pawns.


Ukraine Scores More Hits On Airbase, Defense Factories Deep Inside Russia


https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/ukraine-scores-more-hits-airbase-defense-factories-deep-inside-russia
"Kyiv came under another attack involving drones and ballistic missiles. Rescuers are responding to the aftermath at several locations across the city," the State Emergency Service of Ukraine announced on Telegram. Russia allegedly fired over 400 projectiles into Ukraine, though most were said to be downed by air defenses. On the other side, two airbases, a fuel depot and aviation were reportedly struck deep in Russia overnight.

"A successful strike was carried out on the Engels airfield in the Saratov region, a place where enemy aircraft are concentrated," Ukraine's General Staff said in a statement, in reference to the Engels-2 base which lies roughly 500 kilometers (300 miles) east of the Ukrainian border,
...

[paxmao]

Other topic was locked while I was typing. But still, I wanted to publish it, so I do it here as it's most related topic:

Attacking targets that are only available because the “enemy” is following nuclear treaties is one of the more cowardly war moves I’ve seen. Leave it to Ukraine to have done it right before peace talks while asking for a ceasefire. I’m having a tough time sympathizing with them. They seem to be begging for Russia to respond with nuclear weapons.

I'm not really sure how attacking targets which are used against you is coward move? These bombers were used in massive missiles attack on Ukraine. This is the most legitimate targets - Ukraine has right to defend themselves. It's not like attacking civilian or critical infrastructure.
BTW, as paxmao said, Russia don't follow nuclear treaty, they even exit it 2 years ago.
And these peace talks, for how long we hear about it? Probably already half of 2025. But in reality nothing happens and there is no signs that something is going to happen anytime soon.

Donald Trump has openly vented in recent weeks about Putin’s unwillingness to end the war. But since Sunday’s attack, which hit a series of Russian military airfields, the president has privately expressed frustration that the strike could escalate the conflict, according to three administration officials and an outside adviser to the White House. (They spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.)
These sources told me that the drone strike has reignited the president’s long-held displeasure with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and prompted a new debate in the White House about whether the United States should abandon Ukraine. Throughout the war, Trump has deemed Zelensky a “bad guy” and a “hothead,” the outside adviser said—someone who could be pushing the globe toward World War III. Trump privately echoed a right-wing talking point this week by criticizing Zelensky for supposedly showboating after the drone attacks; according to the adviser, Trump was impressed with the audacity of the strikes but believes that Zelensky’s focus should have been on Ukraine-Russia negotiations in Istanbul.

Look at the bigger picture (macro). Problem with that is that it's a clear indication that Zelenskii doesn't want to end this now and wants Ukraine to continue fighting. Doubling down naturally also raises risks and moves this into all or nothing stage. This means further deterioration in financial, political, and manpower positions on both sides. Not much politics happening in Russia and Ukraine, so short term the political risks fall on Europe. We see more and more right-wing nationalists coming into power (Poland) putting further pressure on the whole concept of EU, who benefits from this? Finances in Ukraine are non existent, so financial risks also fall on Europe further reducing the wealth of its citizens. So not much for Europeans to be happy about. Financial aspect also effects Russia, but Russians overall have a much higher tolerance for reduced buying capacity and I don't think anyone foresees food shortages in this day and age. Manpower is obvious, 4-1 difference in population thus the "to the last Ukrainian" cliche.

President Trump compared Russia and Ukraine with "children fighting in the park" on Thursday and suggested it might be better to let them keep on fighting for a while. Why it matters: Trump's remarks were another signal that he thinks Russia and Ukraine aren't ready to make peace, and that he's considering stepping back from his initiative to convince them to do so.

Ukrainian officials are concerned that retreat from Trump will only serve Russia's interests.

But Trump said the "bad blood" and deep "hatred" between the sides — combined with Russian President Vladimir Putin's commitment to hitting back hard for the surprise attack inside Russia — would make it hard to reach a ceasefire any time soon.

Trump sees what's going on and indicates that he wants to step back and let "Russia and Ukraine fight it out a while longer". Trump cannot be any clearer in his intent to distance from this conflict, so those risks wouldn't effect US. Once again who benefits from this the most? I couldn't find a single angle where Ukrainian people would stand to benefit, they're just getting completely fucked and cannot do anything about it, it's a shame but that's the role of a sacrificial pawn.

One would need complete lack of critical thinking and a lobotomy to believe that Ukrainian intelligence went from total incompetence to some super advanced unit capable of pulling the most sophisticated attacks on a territory of another country that even major powers wouldn't risk of attempting, all in just three years. While we're supposed to believe that European intelligence services are all incompetent clowns, unable to even change a light bulb or for three years cannot figure out who's responsible for committing the largest sabotage inside of Europe everyone totally believes that right?

Trump finally passed the "Ruzzian diplomacy" 101 test. Took him just a few months as the average student he is.

1. Trump is not distancing himself from the conflict. The interpretation is simple: he finally figured out that Ukraine and Ruzzia have differences that cannot be solved by compromise, thus, they both need to destroy each other until a military based conculsion.

If you ask me, Ukraine is going to step up the attack on assets that Ruzzia cannot afford to loose. Critical aviation, critical infrastructure, oil industry... And there is no other way to play this, because Ruzzia and particularly Putin have painted themselves into a corner with his military and his society in which only surrender is acceptable.

To "Unpaint", the military and Ruzzian society must be "convinced" that they may loose critical assets that will make them  (again, the military) specifically be afraid of loosing power, influence and deterrence.

This is what you get after decades of convincing your population that you are stronger than you really are, that conflicts are solved simply by proving who is stronger and that Ruzzia has some elemental right (God given or the like) to dominate over others.

Of course it takes time to change that inertia and oftentimes required a crisis.

2. Ukraine has always been revceiving intelligence from the US and to a point from EU. Nothing new.

[Branko]

Another billion+ Patriot bites the dust:

https://youtu.be/-76tCLufWi0

Zelensky claims 99.37% Russian missiles are hit by AA:

https://youtu.be/oJI-RL8sOUw

[montaga]

If Crimean Bridge gets completely destroyed Russia most likey also has a Civil War to deal with, with the Crimea nation/ Crimea native people.
Civil War is not fought with iskander and nukes.
https://x.com/qirimlia
If anyone thinks there will be peace with a ethnically Russian Crimea, lives in fantasy world.

[Branko]

If Crimean Bridge gets completely destroyed Russia most likey also has a Civil War to deal with, with the Crimea nation/ Crimea native people.
Civil War is not fought with iskander and nukes.
https://x.com/qirimlia
If anyone thinks there will be peace with a ethnically Russian Crimea, lives in fantasy world.

Crimea bridge is almost irrelevant except for PR purposes since Russia took land corridor between
Russia and Crimea