Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress]

[tvbcof]

Took 'em long enough.  If they would have started a year ago there would be a LOT more innocent Ukrainians and somewhat more innocent Russians among the living.

  Fragged Ukrainian Commander Subtitled Version (18+)
  https://www.bitchute.com/video/072Qeywur7bq/

Edit:  It's generally more workable to do fraggings in the field, and when convenient with enemy weapons.  Thinking back, it's been a very common complaint of the Ukrainians who surrender in groups and are taken prisoner by the Russians that their commanding officers 'abandoned them' in the field and they have no leadership (or support.)  Possibly there has been a constant threat of fragging for some time in the Ukrainian military.

[1715028902]

1715028902

[1715028902]

1715028902

[1715028902]

1715028902

[montaga]

It goes back all the way to Louis XVI (1793) and ever since countless "causalities" along the way.
Louis XVI wanted to do such outrages things like abolish serfdom, remove the land tax and also the labour tax (income tax)
For a empire of over 50 million people you did not need a passport to enter until Archduke Franz Ferdinand got canceled and WW1
https://twitter.com/i/status/1661587348730290176

[paxmao]

Took 'em long enough.  If they would have started a year ago there would be a LOT more innocent Ukrainians and somewhat more innocent Russians among the living.

  Fragged Ukrainian Commander Subtitled Version (18+)
  https://www.bitchute.com/video/072Qeywur7bq/

Edit:  It's generally more workable to do fraggings in the field, and when convenient with enemy weapons.  Thinking back, it's been a very common complaint of the Ukrainians who surrender in groups and are taken prisoner by the Russians that their commanding officers 'abandoned them' in the field and they have no leadership (or support.)  Possibly there has been a constant threat of fragging for some time in the Ukrainian military.

That I have heard, but much much more about Russian soldiers left without food. We are talking days without to the point that they will abandon their positions, risk being spotted and shelled to raid anything nearby and when that runs out they are in foreign territory, where anyone there will not only not help, but rather give away their position... if they do not run straight away they will certainly do at the first sight of anything with a gun.

It goes back all the way to Louis XVI (1793) and ever since countless "causalities" along the way.
Louis XVI wanted to do such outrages things like abolish serfdom, remove the land tax and also the labour tax (income tax)
For a empire of over 50 million people you did not need a passport to enter until Archduke Franz Ferdinand got canceled and WW1
https://twitter.com/i/status/1661587348730290176

Is anyone really surprised about Putin living in a 300 years old universe? Anyway, I think the map is shown just to put forward an "objective".

[collinscoinz]

Russia is doing what it wante to do to stay at the defenced side,and my question is what are the nato country done so far concerning this invation progress on ukraine.all this things bolws down to louie xvi in the year 1793 trying to aborlished the sefdom law,https://twitter.com/i/status/1661587348730290176 and also wanted to removed the land tax and also the labour tax income.

[paxmao]

Russia is doing what it wante to do to stay at the defenced side,and my question is what are the nato country done so far concerning this invation progress on ukraine.all this things bolws down to louie xvi in the year 1793 trying to aborlished the sefdom law,https://twitter.com/i/status/1661587348730290176 and also wanted to removed the land tax and also the labour tax income.

Thanks, all that is irrelevant to war. Putin wants Crimea for strategic and economic reasons. All the rest are diversions and propaganda for the weak minds out there.

Something that is relevant, yet still a rumour is that Sweden may be training Ukrainian pilots in the Gripen fighter. This is quite a good fighter jet that very well suited for this war: minimal maintenance, can land and take off pretty much anywhere (e.g. a road) and is quite a decent weapons platform specialised in sensor equipment. Funny fact: it can be loaded in the back of a truck.

I would rather have peace, but if it has to be war, these is what I would like to have if I were Ukrainian.

he Gripen is a fourth-generation, lightweight, single-engine fighter jet that is highly agile and has a small radar signature. It is equipped with advanced avionics, including a modern radar system, electronic warfare equipment, and a helmet-mounted display system that provides pilots with a 360-degree view of their surroundings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOa5zEwUPGc

[Lucius]

There is a lot of debate about whether Ukraine should have defended Bakhmut which according to most military analysts is strategically unimportant, but it seems to me that the decision was still correct because it enabled Ukraine to secure the necessary time to additionally arm and train tens of thousands of soldiers who will participate in a counterattack.

It is true that Ukraine lost a lot of soldiers and equipment in that area, but Russia still lost a lot more because of the strategic positions of the Ukrainian army, which was and still is in elevated positions around the city, from which it prevents the further advance of the Russian army. In addition, advancing forward, the Russian army weakened its flanks all the time, and now this is becoming more and more apparent because the Ukrainian forces have all the prerequisites to surround the city and destroy everyone in it.

Bakhmut played a very important role in fully focusing the Russian forces to conquer it, but I have no doubt that the regular Russian troops will face a real challenge to hold it, because the "bloody musicians" who actually conquered the city are leaving the front, and considering the losses, it will take them months to recover.

[paxmao]

There is a lot of debate about whether Ukraine should have defended Bakhmut which according to most military analysts is strategically unimportant, but it seems to me that the decision was still correct because it enabled Ukraine to secure the necessary time to additionally arm and train tens of thousands of soldiers who will participate in a counterattack.

It is true that Ukraine lost a lot of soldiers and equipment in that area, but Russia still lost a lot more because of the strategic positions of the Ukrainian army, which was and still is in elevated positions around the city, from which it prevents the further advance of the Russian army. In addition, advancing forward, the Russian army weakened its flanks all the time, and now this is becoming more and more apparent because the Ukrainian forces have all the prerequisites to surround the city and destroy everyone in it.

Bakhmut played a very important role in fully focusing the Russian forces to conquer it, but I have no doubt that the regular Russian troops will face a real challenge to hold it, because the "bloody musicians" who actually conquered the city are leaving the front, and considering the losses, it will take them months to recover.

Anything Prigozhin says has to be taken as enemy providing information=nothing, however he has been on a video speaking of casualties and missing in action that seem to come from a WW I scenario more than anything else. https://youtu.be/lu28nWsr-7A?t=23

Bakhmut is not surrounded or encircled at all. It seems that everything now is a "counteroffensive" and all enemy positions are "at risk of encirclement". We need to be realistic about it.

That said, Ukraine forces are doing a decent job in the flanks and, while I do not think they can "encircle" anything, it might very well happen that the RF forces "do an strategic retreat" to "seek better positions" out of Bakhmut which is "not strategic" and "the mission there has been accomplished" AKA as they kicked our ass out of there.

I do think that Ukraine has nearly all the capabilities to create that scenario and seems better supplied of mechanised means, it is just missing some decent air interceptors.

EDITED 28/05/2023 - There seems to be news of massive concentrations of Ukrainian troops in the Zaporilla region, while anecdotally, the Belgorod Oblast seems anything but "under RF's control".

EDITED 28/05/2023 - This bit of video may shed some light on the reality of this war

https://youtu.be/ZUBTyAZg5OA?t=3105

[be.open]

There is a lot of debate about whether Ukraine should have defended Bakhmut which according to most military analysts is strategically unimportant, but it seems to me that the decision was still correct because it enabled Ukraine to secure the necessary time to additionally arm and train tens of thousands of soldiers who will participate in a counterattack.

It is true that Ukraine lost a lot of soldiers and equipment in that area, but Russia still lost a lot more because of the strategic positions of the Ukrainian army, which was and still is in elevated positions around the city, from which it prevents the further advance of the Russian army. In addition, advancing forward, the Russian army weakened its flanks all the time, and now this is becoming more and more apparent because the Ukrainian forces have all the prerequisites to surround the city and destroy everyone in it.

Bakhmut played a very important role in fully focusing the Russian forces to conquer it, but I have no doubt that the regular Russian troops will face a real challenge to hold it, because the "bloody musicians" who actually conquered the city are leaving the front, and considering the losses, it will take them months to recover.

I consider the decision to keep Bakhmut a strategic mistake by Zelensky and a personal fiasco by Syrsky. Ukraine suffered a crushing defeat in Bakhmut, doubly humiliating, which was not even from the regular army of Russia, but from the private military company Wagner with former convicts as the main assault force. Bakhmut is a broken symbol of Ukrainian resistance, the second after Mariupol, and Zelensky made him a symbol of resistance.

Of course, you can look more broadly and consider Bakhmut a gambit sacrifice in order to gain time to prepare for a counteroffensive, this will depend on the success of the counteroffensive. But for now Bakhmut is a crushing fiasco for Ukraine.

[swogerino]

There is a lot of debate about whether Ukraine should have defended Bakhmut which according to most military analysts is strategically unimportant, but it seems to me that the decision was still correct because it enabled Ukraine to secure the necessary time to additionally arm and train tens of thousands of soldiers who will participate in a counterattack.

It is true that Ukraine lost a lot of soldiers and equipment in that area, but Russia still lost a lot more because of the strategic positions of the Ukrainian army, which was and still is in elevated positions around the city, from which it prevents the further advance of the Russian army. In addition, advancing forward, the Russian army weakened its flanks all the time, and now this is becoming more and more apparent because the Ukrainian forces have all the prerequisites to surround the city and destroy everyone in it.

Bakhmut played a very important role in fully focusing the Russian forces to conquer it, but I have no doubt that the regular Russian troops will face a real challenge to hold it, because the "bloody musicians" who actually conquered the city are leaving the front, and considering the losses, it will take them months to recover.

I consider the decision to keep Bakhmut a strategic mistake by Zelensky and a personal fiasco by Syrsky. Ukraine suffered a crushing defeat in Bakhmut, doubly humiliating, which was not even from the regular army of Russia, but from the private military company Wagner with former convicts as the main assault force. Bakhmut is a broken symbol of Ukrainian resistance, the second after Mariupol, and Zelensky made him a symbol of resistance.

Of course, you can look more broadly and consider Bakhmut a gambit sacrifice in order to gain time to prepare for a counteroffensive, this will depend on the success of the counteroffensive. But for now Bakhmut is a crushing fiasco for Ukraine.

That is funny to say the least,it took the Russian side 1 year exactly and it is not completely taken,just a town of 17.000 persons the "second greatest army in the world" it took them 1 year to take about 80% of this town.Why don't you tell us the number of Russians soldier dead in Ukraine,they are well over 200.000 and this is the biggest number of personnel lost in a war from Russia.This number will grow while Russia is just doing what a terrorist state does best,hitting with ballistic missiles civilian infrastructure in the Kyiv capital.That my friend will not make Russia win anything and it will just prolong this war which in the end will have bad consequences for Russia,they are almost completely isolated as a country now and if they keep going this way,it is a lost war whatever happens next.

[paxmao]

There is a lot of debate about whether Ukraine should have defended Bakhmut which according to most military analysts is strategically unimportant, but it seems to me that the decision was still correct because it enabled Ukraine to secure the necessary time to additionally arm and train tens of thousands of soldiers who will participate in a counterattack.

It is true that Ukraine lost a lot of soldiers and equipment in that area, but Russia still lost a lot more because of the strategic positions of the Ukrainian army, which was and still is in elevated positions around the city, from which it prevents the further advance of the Russian army. In addition, advancing forward, the Russian army weakened its flanks all the time, and now this is becoming more and more apparent because the Ukrainian forces have all the prerequisites to surround the city and destroy everyone in it.

Bakhmut played a very important role in fully focusing the Russian forces to conquer it, but I have no doubt that the regular Russian troops will face a real challenge to hold it, because the "bloody musicians" who actually conquered the city are leaving the front, and considering the losses, it will take them months to recover.

I consider the decision to keep Bakhmut a strategic mistake by Zelensky and a personal fiasco by Syrsky. Ukraine suffered a crushing defeat in Bakhmut, doubly humiliating, which was not even from the regular army of Russia, but from the private military company Wagner with former convicts as the main assault force. Bakhmut is a broken symbol of Ukrainian resistance, the second after Mariupol, and Zelensky made him a symbol of resistance.

Of course, you can look more broadly and consider Bakhmut a gambit sacrifice in order to gain time to prepare for a counteroffensive, this will depend on the success of the counteroffensive. But for now Bakhmut is a crushing fiasco for Ukraine.

That is funny to say the least,it took the Russian side 1 year exactly and it is not completely taken,just a town of 17.000 persons the "second greatest army in the world" it took them 1 year to take about 80% of this town.Why don't you tell us the number of Russians soldier dead in Ukraine,they are well over 200.000 and this is the biggest number of personnel lost in a war from Russia.This number will grow while Russia is just doing what a terrorist state does best,hitting with ballistic missiles civilian infrastructure in the Kyiv capital.That my friend will not make Russia win anything and it will just prolong this war which in the end will have bad consequences for Russia,they are almost completely isolated as a country now and if they keep going this way,it is a lost war whatever happens next.

Agree, there is nothing "humiliating" about the battle of Bakhmut for Ukraine. Loses on the RF side have been anything but "gentle" and more than half of these were not convicts.

You must ask yourself not if Bakhmut was the best location to defend or if it could have been defended  differently, you should ask yourself what were the realistic alternatives to setup the red line. Whatever city the RF invades is practically grazed to the ground, and Ukraine took the decision of having that in Bakhmut rather than somewhere else.

Just in case you are not hearing this from your official "sources", remember the name "Maroon Group".

Oh, the official media is not saying anything about Belgorod. Just give them a call and ask

[BADecker]

I wonder what the US and Nato will do when the Ukraine fighting soldiers shut the war down... against the orders of their commanders. Will they draft Americans and Europeans to go fight in Ukraine in place of the Ukrainian soldiers who have rebelled? This is a question even if the soldiers don't rebel. Why? Because if they keep on fighting, they will be dead, and the war will be won by Russia, anyway.

Short video.


Ukraine Army Falling Apart; Shooting the Officers Who order them into no-win battle


https://halturnerradioshow.com/index.php/en/news-page/world/ukraine-army-falling-apart-shooting-the-officers-who-order-them-into-no-win-battle
Tired of being ordered to basically commit suicide by their top officers, Ukrainian soldiers are now "fragging" their officers rather than go into suicidal battle against superior Russian forces.

Here's one such instance where a Battalion Commander lays dead on the ground after a Company Commander shot him in the head rather than obey an order to go into a hopeless battle, where five other Companies ALL got killed minutes earlier.
...

[paxmao]

The preparations - which consist of blasting depots and command centres in Crimea - is ongoing. The RF is corresponding with equivalent missile strikes, although the effect is somehow limited from both sides. I believe Ukraine is being marginally more effective, because the setup in Crimea was based on Ukraine not having medium range cruise missiles, which they now do, so it is not as prepared as it should have for this. One exception, it seems that the RF managed to damage 4 planes in an attack, which are important to keep sending Stormshadows their way.

All signs seem to point to an Ukrainian offensive in the south direction, but I would not hurry it as they will not get 5 chances to do this. Zelensky said "it has been decided", which does not offer much information on dates - as it should not for obvious reasons.

[be.open]

The preparations - which consist of blasting depots and command centres in Crimea - is ongoing. The RF is corresponding with equivalent missile strikes, although the effect is somehow limited from both sides. I believe Ukraine is being marginally more effective, because the setup in Crimea was based on Ukraine not having medium range cruise missiles, which they now do, so it is not as prepared as it should have for this. One exception, it seems that the RF managed to damage 4 planes in an attack, which are important to keep sending Stormshadows their way.

All signs seem to point to an Ukrainian offensive in the south direction, but I would not hurry it as they will not get 5 chances to do this. Zelensky said "it has been decided", which does not offer much information on dates - as it should not for obvious reasons.

I think both sides are exchanging harassing blows to force each other into active offensive action. The situation is similar to a chess zugzwang, when any move significantly worsens the situation, but it seems that the pressure of external circumstances on Zelensky is stronger than on Putin. He promised to take the Crimea in May, but instead, daily strikes on Kyiv and every night an air raid. Let's see who has stronger nerves.

[Branko]

There is a lot of debate about whether Ukraine should have defended Bakhmut which according to most military analysts is strategically unimportant, but it seems to me that the decision was still correct because it enabled Ukraine to secure the necessary time to additionally arm and train tens of thousands of soldiers who will participate in a counterattack.

It is true that Ukraine lost a lot of soldiers and equipment in that area, but Russia still lost a lot more because of the strategic positions of the Ukrainian army, which was and still is in elevated positions around the city, from which it prevents the further advance of the Russian army. In addition, advancing forward, the Russian army weakened its flanks all the time, and now this is becoming more and more apparent because the Ukrainian forces have all the prerequisites to surround the city and destroy everyone in it.

Bakhmut played a very important role in fully focusing the Russian forces to conquer it, but I have no doubt that the regular Russian troops will face a real challenge to hold it, because the "bloody musicians" who actually conquered the city are leaving the front, and considering the losses, it will take them months to recover.

I consider the decision to keep Bakhmut a strategic mistake by Zelensky and a personal fiasco by Syrsky. Ukraine suffered a crushing defeat in Bakhmut, doubly humiliating, which was not even from the regular army of Russia, but from the private military company Wagner with former convicts as the main assault force. Bakhmut is a broken symbol of Ukrainian resistance, the second after Mariupol, and Zelensky made him a symbol of resistance.

Of course, you can look more broadly and consider Bakhmut a gambit sacrifice in order to gain time to prepare for a counteroffensive, this will depend on the success of the counteroffensive. But for now Bakhmut is a crushing fiasco for Ukraine.

That is funny to say the least,it took the Russian side 1 year exactly and it is not completely taken,just a town of 17.000 persons the "second greatest army in the world" it took them 1 year to take about 80% of this town.Why don't you tell us the number of Russians soldier dead in Ukraine,they are well over 200.000 and this is the biggest number of personnel lost in a war from Russia.This number will grow while Russia is just doing what a terrorist state does best,hitting with ballistic missiles civilian infrastructure in the Kyiv capital.That my friend will not make Russia win anything and it will just prolong this war which in the end will have bad consequences for Russia,they are almost completely isolated as a country now and if they keep going this way,it is a lost war whatever happens next.

You're just parroting western propaganda, there is not a single true fact in your whole post

[paxmao]

The preparations - which consist of blasting depots and command centres in Crimea - is ongoing. The RF is corresponding with equivalent missile strikes, although the effect is somehow limited from both sides. I believe Ukraine is being marginally more effective, because the setup in Crimea was based on Ukraine not having medium range cruise missiles, which they now do, so it is not as prepared as it should have for this. One exception, it seems that the RF managed to damage 4 planes in an attack, which are important to keep sending Stormshadows their way.

All signs seem to point to an Ukrainian offensive in the south direction, but I would not hurry it as they will not get 5 chances to do this. Zelensky said "it has been decided", which does not offer much information on dates - as it should not for obvious reasons.

I think both sides are exchanging harassing blows to force each other into active offensive action. The situation is similar to a chess zugzwang, when any move significantly worsens the situation, but it seems that the pressure of external circumstances on Zelensky is stronger than on Putin. He promised to take the Crimea in May, but instead, daily strikes on Kyiv and every night an air raid. Let's see who has stronger nerves.

Nah, RF is using all it's got in the frontline and getting 50 meters a day more, 200 soldiers less a day less. BTW it seems that Putin cannot keep the mosquitos out  of home? Seriously, this is they guy that will "protect the Russians" (from what I am not sure).

Regarding nerves... well, It think that you think this is about nerves. I think it is more about using mechanised brigades to break the frontlines. Matters little if you shoot missiles to nowhere in particular with zero strategic value and think that somehow this is going to win you the war.

BTW, according to your leader, that is just an "operation" if it happens in Kyiv, but is "terrorism" if it happens in Moscow. This guy should really make up his mind: either is all right to drone the capital of the opponent or is not.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvWRiaXe78M

I will avoid the smiley, this is not funny.

There is a lot of debate about whether Ukraine should have defended Bakhmut which according to most military analysts is strategically unimportant, but it seems to me that the decision was still correct because it enabled Ukraine to secure the necessary time to additionally arm and train tens of thousands of soldiers who will participate in a counterattack.

It is true that Ukraine lost a lot of soldiers and equipment in that area, but Russia still lost a lot more because of the strategic positions of the Ukrainian army, which was and still is in elevated positions around the city, from which it prevents the further advance of the Russian army. In addition, advancing forward, the Russian army weakened its flanks all the time, and now this is becoming more and more apparent because the Ukrainian forces have all the prerequisites to surround the city and destroy everyone in it.

Bakhmut played a very important role in fully focusing the Russian forces to conquer it, but I have no doubt that the regular Russian troops will face a real challenge to hold it, because the "bloody musicians" who actually conquered the city are leaving the front, and considering the losses, it will take them months to recover.

I consider the decision to keep Bakhmut a strategic mistake by Zelensky and a personal fiasco by Syrsky. Ukraine suffered a crushing defeat in Bakhmut, doubly humiliating, which was not even from the regular army of Russia, but from the private military company Wagner with former convicts as the main assault force. Bakhmut is a broken symbol of Ukrainian resistance, the second after Mariupol, and Zelensky made him a symbol of resistance.

Of course, you can look more broadly and consider Bakhmut a gambit sacrifice in order to gain time to prepare for a counteroffensive, this will depend on the success of the counteroffensive. But for now Bakhmut is a crushing fiasco for Ukraine.

That is funny to say the least,it took the Russian side 1 year exactly and it is not completely taken,just a town of 17.000 persons the "second greatest army in the world" it took them 1 year to take about 80% of this town.Why don't you tell us the number of Russians soldier dead in Ukraine,they are well over 200.000 and this is the biggest number of personnel lost in a war from Russia.This number will grow while Russia is just doing what a terrorist state does best,hitting with ballistic missiles civilian infrastructure in the Kyiv capital.That my friend will not make Russia win anything and it will just prolong this war which in the end will have bad consequences for Russia,they are almost completely isolated as a country now and if they keep going this way,it is a lost war whatever happens next.

You're just parroting western propaganda, there is not a single true fact in your whole post

The following facts are correct according to some sources, not particularly western apologist:

- More than 200k KIA or equivalent in the RF army.
- Bakhmut was a city of around 17000 inhabitants.
- It took around 1 year to take it, with advances of 50 m ... 100 m a day.
- Russia is shelling Kyiv with missiles.
- Bakhmut was the place were most losses have happened for the RF for now.
- Bakhmut is hardly a "win".

So, no he is not parroting western propaganda.

[BADecker]

The preparations - which consist of blasting depots and command centres in Crimea - is ongoing. The RF is corresponding with equivalent missile strikes, although the effect is somehow limited from both sides. I believe Ukraine is being marginally more effective, because the setup in Crimea was based on Ukraine not having medium range cruise missiles, which they now do, so it is not as prepared as it should have for this. One exception, it seems that the RF managed to damage 4 planes in an attack, which are important to keep sending Stormshadows their way.

All signs seem to point to an Ukrainian offensive in the south direction, but I would not hurry it as they will not get 5 chances to do this. Zelensky said "it has been decided", which does not offer much information on dates - as it should not for obvious reasons.

I think both sides are exchanging harassing blows to force each other into active offensive action. The situation is similar to a chess zugzwang, when any move significantly worsens the situation, but it seems that the pressure of external circumstances on Zelensky is stronger than on Putin. He promised to take the Crimea in May, but instead, daily strikes on Kyiv and every night an air raid. Let's see who has stronger nerves.

Nah, RF is using all it's got in the frontline and getting 50 meters a day more, 200 soldiers less a day less. BTW it seems that Putin cannot keep the mosquitos out  of home? Seriously, this is they guy that will "protect the Russians" (from what I am not sure).

Regarding nerves... well, It think that you think this is about nerves. I think it is more about using mechanised brigades to break the frontlines. Matters little if you shoot missiles to nowhere in particular with zero strategic value and think that somehow this is going to win you the war.

BTW, according to your leader, that is just an "operation" if it happens in Kyiv, but is "terrorism" if it happens in Moscow. This guy should really make up his mind: either is all right to drone the capital of the opponent or is not.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvWRiaXe78M


~

You tricky guy. You've been visiting Putin, again. Lol.

[Branko]

The following facts are correct according to some sources, not particularly western apologist:

- More than 200k KIA or equivalent in the RF army.
- Bakhmut was a city of around 17000 inhabitants.
- It took around 1 year to take it, with advances of 50 m ... 100 m a day.
- Russia is shelling Kyiv with missiles.
- Bakhmut was the place were most losses have happened for the RF for now.
- Bakhmut is hardly a "win".

So, no he is not parroting western propaganda.

Bakhmut had 70000 inhabitants, which is easy to verify

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakhmut

Rest of your info is just as accurate, parroting it again won't make it any more true

[paxmao]

The preparations - which consist of blasting depots and command centres in Crimea - is ongoing. The RF is corresponding with equivalent missile strikes, although the effect is somehow limited from both sides. I believe Ukraine is being marginally more effective, because the setup in Crimea was based on Ukraine not having medium range cruise missiles, which they now do, so it is not as prepared as it should have for this. One exception, it seems that the RF managed to damage 4 planes in an attack, which are important to keep sending Stormshadows their way.

All signs seem to point to an Ukrainian offensive in the south direction, but I would not hurry it as they will not get 5 chances to do this. Zelensky said "it has been decided", which does not offer much information on dates - as it should not for obvious reasons.

I think both sides are exchanging harassing blows to force each other into active offensive action. The situation is similar to a chess zugzwang, when any move significantly worsens the situation, but it seems that the pressure of external circumstances on Zelensky is stronger than on Putin. He promised to take the Crimea in May, but instead, daily strikes on Kyiv and every night an air raid. Let's see who has stronger nerves.

Nah, RF is using all it's got in the frontline and getting 50 meters a day more, 200 soldiers less a day less. BTW it seems that Putin cannot keep the mosquitos out  of home? Seriously, this is they guy that will "protect the Russians" (from what I am not sure).

Regarding nerves... well, It think that you think this is about nerves. I think it is more about using mechanised brigades to break the frontlines. Matters little if you shoot missiles to nowhere in particular with zero strategic value and think that somehow this is going to win you the war.

BTW, according to your leader, that is just an "operation" if it happens in Kyiv, but is "terrorism" if it happens in Moscow. This guy should really make up his mind: either is all right to drone the capital of the opponent or is not.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvWRiaXe78M


~

You tricky guy. You've been visiting Putin, again. Lol.

I think it was him, I could barely see him from the other side of the table...

The following facts are correct according to some sources, not particularly western apologist:

- More than 200k KIA or equivalent in the RF army.
- Bakhmut was a city of around 17000 inhabitants.
- It took around 1 year to take it, with advances of 50 m ... 100 m a day.
- Russia is shelling Kyiv with missiles.
- Bakhmut was the place were most losses have happened for the RF for now.
- Bakhmut is hardly a "win".

So, no he is not parroting western propaganda.

Bakhmut had 70000 inhabitants, which is easy to verify

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakhmut

Rest of your info is just as accurate, parroting it again won't make it any more true

Do you want me to look in your posting history? You got 1 of every 2 wrong more or less. The rest are not really right either.

Meanwhile... it seems that drones of unknown origin (Ukraine has denied involvement... so it is not Ukraine), have been targeting some areas of Moscow. I am not sure why they have chosen wealthy areas, where plutocrats tend to live... coincidence I guess.

[Branko]

Do you want me to look in your posting history? You got 1 of every 2 wrong more or less. The rest are not really right either.

Meanwhile... it seems that drones of unknown origin (Ukraine has denied involvement... so it is not Ukraine), have been targeting some areas of Moscow. I am not sure why they have chosen wealthy areas, where plutocrats tend to live... coincidence I guess.

meanwhile

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11862777/Russia-nuclear-war-Experts-say-Putins-Poseidon-nuke-kill-millions.html

[tvbcof]

https://9gag.com/gag/avQR67q

Former Ukrainian president Poroshenko in 2014: "our children will go to schools and their children will sit in bomb shelters!"

Poroshenko in 2023:



                  --------------
Loved the | satisfying | tag
                  --------------
---

By the way, about that 'greatest counter-offensive' thing:  was that spring 2023, or 2024?  I may have gotten a little confused.