Russia invades Ukraine

[Pete_uk]

Some good news!


WASHINGTON/KYIV (Reuters) - With the United States expected to send a new longer-range weapon to Ukraine, it has answered President Volodymyr Zelenskiy's plea for rockets that can strike deep behind the front lines of the nearly year-long conflict with Russia.

Now Russian forces will need to adapt or face potentially catastrophic losses.

The new weapon, the Ground Launched Small Diameter Bomb (GLSDB), will allow Ukraine's military to hit targets at twice the distance reachable by the rockets it now fires from the U.S.-supplied High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS). If included as expected in an upcoming weapons-aid package first reported by Reuters, the 151 km (94 mile) GLSDB will put all of Russia's supply lines in the east of the country within reach, as well as part of Russian-occupied Crimea.

 

[Loppylugs]

I see mad Vlad is complaining Russia will face German tanks again 80 years after WW2.

Well Puts, whose fault is that ?

Solution: GET OUT OF UKRAINE !

 

[Annetts key]

I see mad Vlad is complaining Russia will face German tanks again 80 years after WW2.

Well Puts, whose fault is that ?

Solution: GET OUT OF UKRAINE !

Maybe someone should point out that given the choice, the Ukrainians would prefer to kill the Russian tanks with western made artillery and missiles…

Just think, if Russia had never invaded or threatened Ukraine, it would have take decades for them to get to the stage of being allowed to buy western weapons systems.

Now, every week, more and more western weapons and ammunition is being supplied to Ukraine in large numbers…

 

[ainsworth74]

Just think, if Russia had never invaded or threatened Ukraine, it would have take decades for them to get to the stage of being allowed to buy western weapons systems.

Now, every week, more and more western weapons and ammunition is being supplied to Ukraine in large numbers…

Finland and Sweden wouldn't be on the cusp of joining NATO...

 

[brad465]

I see mad Vlad is complaining Russia will face German tanks again 80 years after WW2.

Well Puts, whose fault is that ?

Solution: GET OUT OF UKRAINE !

I know he's done that for propaganda purposes, but he conveniently forgets that the USSR he craves so much had a puppet regime run a good chunk of Germany in the Cold War, while enemies and friends have commonly changed in history, among other flaws in his logic.

 

[Annetts key]

I know he's done that for propaganda purposes, but he conveniently forgets that the USSR he craves so much had a puppet regime run a good chunk of Germany in the Cold War, while enemies and friends have commonly changed in history, among other flaws in his logic.

What Putin also chooses to ignore, is that if the west had not (1) retaken France and started attacking Germany and (2) helped the U.S.S.R. with supplies, Nazi Germany may well have captured and kept a large chunk of the U.S.S.R. including parts of current day Russia…

 

[DustyBin]

This thread has gone quiet, presumably as there hasn’t been much in the way of significant developments. Zelensky’s visit and his specific request for the UK to donate jets is worthy of discussion however. I realise it’s part of a scattergun approach, but I genuinely don’t think we have anything to offer him.

 

[adc82140]

We don't, and Ben Wallace has confirmed this (as an aside, Ben Wallace is the best Prime Minister we never had). Don't get me wrong, this is all Russia's fault, and they are guilty of some terrible war crimes, but Zelenskyy is a showman, and he had parliament yesterday wrapped around his little finger. He knows how to play each country, with Churchillian references here, Martin Luther King references in the US etc. I can fully understand why he does it, and in the same situation I would, but we have to remain level headed and not compromise our own security here. Boris Johnson has suggested sending 100 Typhoons. That would leave the UK without a functioning Air Force, and they would be of little use in Ukraine anyway without the logistical support needed, and by virtue of the fact they are not low altitude fighters. I think after the excitement of yesterday, some cooler heads are prevailing in the cold light of day in Westminster.

 

[HSTEd]

Boris Johnson has suggested sending 100 Typhoons. That would leave the UK without a functioning Air Force, and they would be of little use in Ukraine anyway without the logistical support needed, and by virtue of the fact they are not low altitude fighters. I think after the excitement of yesterday, some cooler heads are prevailing in the cold light of day in Westminster.

Sending the entire Typhoon force would leave the UK with 29 F-35Bs, which is sufficient for Air Policing, which is pretty much all we will need once Russia has been succesfully bled to death in Ukraine.

We can build a new air force for dealing with China et al once Russia lies broken at our feet.

Typhoons would absolutely be extraordinarily useful to Ukraine, given that they are comparatively (compared to the vast majority of the Russian inventory) stealthy and armed with 100 nautical mile plus air to air missiles.
Based on available OSINT (Open Source INTelligence) data the MiG-31BM would be unable to acquire the Typhoon at ranges below about 40nm, by which time the MiG-31 will long be debris in a field.

Typhoons would force the VKS (Russian Aerospace Forces) to remain well away from Ukrainian airspace and essentially end their ability to influence the battle. That would prevent them from using R-77 and R-37M to interfere with ground attack missions by the surviving Ukrainian air force inventory of Su-24, Su-25, Su-27 and MiG-29.
Logistics would require work, yes, but they are potentially war winning weapons, especially given many of those airframes would have access to stand off weapons like Storm Shadow.

EDIT:

F-35s are currently being produced at a rate of about 135 a year, political trading would likely allow us to make up our inventory pretty rapidly. And the F-35B is infinitely more suitable for modern air war than the Eurofighter.

 

[Killingworth]

We don't, and Ben Wallace has confirmed this (as an aside, Ben Wallace is the best Prime Minister we never had). Don't get me wrong, this is all Russia's fault, and they are guilty of some terrible war crimes, but Zelenskyy is a showman, and he had parliament yesterday wrapped around his little finger. He knows how to play each country, with Churchillian references here, Martin Luther King references in the US etc. I can fully understand why he does it, and in the same situation I would, but we have to remain level headed and not compromise our own security here. Boris Johnson has suggested sending 100 Typhoons. That would leave the UK without a functioning Air Force, and they would be of little use in Ukraine anyway without the logistical support needed, and by virtue of the fact they are not low altitude fighters. I think after the excitement of yesterday, some cooler heads are prevailing in the cold light of day in Westminster.

Boris Johnson is a very dangerous man. His command of details is very weak. Remember his enthusiastic support for London Britannia Airport in the Thames - Boris Island? His more recent idea of a bridge or tunnel to Northern Island? His enthusiasm for Brexit? His lack of appreciation that the nation was enduring great pain due to his distancing regulations that he himself totally ignored? Other examples may be available.

He's full of bluster and good intentions, and they've taken in too many, but when confronted with reality he has great difficulty with the practical technicalities necessary to get things done. His enthusiasm for the fight in Ukraine and his friend Zelensky is in danger of going the same way when he comes up against the reality of war. Too many people are already getting killed. Whatever happens Ukraine is going to be a very big problem for decades to come. Zelensky won't necessarily be seen in as good a light as he does just now. I'd be very wary of Boris and his offers of support. Our armed services are spread far too thinly in peacetime and Ben Wallace knows that better than most - as does Putin!

 

[najaB]

Sending the entire Typhoon force would leave the UK with 29 F-35Bs, which is sufficient for Air Policing, which is pretty much all we will need once Russia has been succesfully bled to death in Ukraine.

That assumes that all 29 are available at any one point in time. Given usual availability rates you would be looking more like 15 to 20. Which really isn't much!

More realistic would be each of the primary Eurofighter operators sending 20 to 30 airframes - probably the Tranche 1 models which are nearing retirement.

 

[DustyBin]

Sending the entire Typhoon force would leave the UK with 29 F-35Bs, which is sufficient for Air Policing, which is pretty much all we will need once Russia has been succesfully bled to death in Ukraine.

29 F-35Bs isn't sufficient for air policing and nor is that all we need. We'd be left hopelessly short of aircraft, and there's no guarantee what will happen in Ukraine or elsewhere for that matter. It would, in my opinion, be extraordinarily reckless to leave us so exposed.

We can build a new air force for dealing with China et al once Russia lies broken at our feet.

Just like that?

Typhoons would absolutely be extraordinarily useful to Ukraine, given that they are comparatively (compared to the vast majority of the Russian inventory) stealthy and armed with 100 nautical mile plus air to air missiles.
Based on available OSINT (Open Source INTelligence) data the MiG-31BM would be unable to acquire the Typhoon at ranges below about 40nm, by which time the MiG-31 will long be debris in a field.

The Typhoon is probably the best interceptor and air superiority fighter in existence, with the exception of the F-22. That's exactly why we need them.

Typhoons would force the VKS (Russian Aerospace Forces) to remain well away from Ukrainian airspace and essentially end their ability to influence the battle. That would prevent them from using R-77 and R-37M to interfere with ground attack missions by the surviving Ukrainian air force inventory of Su-24, Su-25, Su-27 and MiG-29.

Ukrainian air defences are already denying Russia the ability to operate to any effect in Ukraine (and vice versa). The problem Ukraine has is Russia's ability to launch standoff weapons from within it's own airspace.

Logistics would require work, yes, but they are potentially war winning weapons, especially given many of those airframes would have access to stand off weapons like Storm Shadow.

There's no doubting the impact they would have, but that doesn't make them the most suitable option (or even an option for the reasons above).

EDIT:

F-35s are currently being produced at a rate of about 135 a year, political trading would likely allow us to make up our inventory pretty rapidly.

"Pretty rapidly" may not be rapidly enough, plus as a country we're a bit pressed for cash right now....

And the F-35B is infinitely more suitable for modern air war than the Eurofighter.

I disagree. You're comparing apples with oranges. The UK requires the ability to intercept, and if needs be destroy, incoming hostile aircraft as far away from our shores as possible. The Typhoon is far more capable in that role than the F-35B.

 

[HSTEd]

29 F-35Bs isn't sufficient for air policing and nor is that all we need.

Well it is, given that the air policing mission only requires a small handful of aircraft to be kept on alert at any given time. And beyond air policing there will be not many other credible threats once a hundred Eurofighters are flying around in Ukraine.....

Just like that?

Yes, the Russian Armed Forces are bleeding to death, we need to give Ukraine whatever it needs to ensure that this continues.

The Typhoon is probably the best interceptor and air superiority fighter in existence, with the exception of the F-22. That's exactly why we need them.

That's extremely doubtful, the only significant advantage the Typhoon has over the F-35 is the Meteor, and when the MoD eventually gets around to paying for Meteor integration on the F-35, that advantage will disappear.

Superior (with Low Probability of Intercept scan modes) radar, superior datalink systems, better radar cross section......

It's also rather telling that we struggle to even bribe people to buy the Eurofighter now, I can't remember the last time it actually won a foreign sales competition.

Ukrainian air defences are already denying Russia the ability to operate to any effect in Ukraine (and vice versa). The problem Ukraine has is Russia's ability to launch standoff weapons from within it's own airspace.

Yes, right now the VKS can stand off just outside ukrainian airspace and lob R-77 and R-37M into Ukraine.
When a Eurofighter can use a high speed missile sling to throw a Meteor to approaching 150nm, they will have to move much further back.

They will not be able to practically engage Ukrainian aircraft operating in the battle area.

"Pretty rapidly" may not be rapidly enough, plus as a country we're a bit pressed for cash right now....

Well scrapping the Typhoon and buying more F-35 would probably save us money in the long run given the much lower life cycle costs that keep winning procurement competitions for everyone who is allowed to buy the F-35.....

 

[357]

but Zelenskyy is a showman, and he had parliament yesterday wrapped around his little finger

And if we were in the same situation, we would need a Prime Minister exactly like him.

 

[Mogster]

That assumes that all 29 are available at any one point in time. Given usual availability rates you would be looking more like 15 to 20. Which really isn't much!

More realistic would be each of the primary Eurofighter operators sending 20 to 30 airframes - probably the Tranche 1 models which are nearing retirement.

That would seem to be a genuine option though wouldn’t it, the T1s have plenty of hours left on the airframes. The RAF has 30 or so Tranche 1 Typhoons that are due for scrapping soon I think. BAe has said upgrades are very possible but the MOD seems to view upgrades as uneconomic preferring to invest in upgrades to T2 and T4 aircraft.

HMG paying to upgrade the T1s then donating them to Ukraine would sting a bit for the RAF though I suspect. How many of the “donations” to Ukraine are gifts and how many are the equivalent of lend lease to be payed for later? Before Putin’s trashing Ukraine wasn’t exactly short of cash.

 

[busestrains]

It has been almost a year now since the war started and still no end in sight. How much money and weapons are we going to keep giving them. Our leaders seem to care more about the Ukraine than about our country that they were elected to serve. The UK and all the other Western countries have given the Ukraine billions and billions of pounds and huge amounts of weapons and yet Zelensky is still demanding even more. Now we have Zelensky demanding fighter jets. There has to be a point where we stop giving them money and weapons and all this equipment. This can not keep going on.

The fact is that the Ukraine can not win the war on their own. Their military is not strong enough. Russia however can not win the war either if the West keeps giving all these weapons and equipment to the Ukraine as they have been. So we have this situation where the two of them keep on fighting and the war keeps going on. For as long as the West keeps giving the Ukraine money and weapons and for as long as the Ukraine refuses to negotiate with Russia the war will just keep going on. It will never end. It is utterly ridiculous.

I think Zelensky has handled this war terribly. He has refused to negotiate and have talks with Russia which could bring a ceasefire or end the war. If he wanted to Zelensky could have talks with Russia and negotiate a peace deal to end the war. But instead he would prefer for thousands and thousands of people to continue getting killed.

I think the solution is negotiating a peace deal where the Ukraine agrees to recognise, Crimea, Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, Zaphorizhzhia, provinces as being part of Russia and also agrees that they will not join NATO and remain a neutral country. In return Russia agrees to end the war. Yes this will result in some parts of the Ukraine being lost to Russia but it is only small parts and surely this is preferable to the war going on and on. When i visited these areas in the past i found that most of the people living in these areas are pro Russia anyway so a lot of the residents would probably be happy with this sort of deal. Giving up some of their land is better than thousands of people continuing to get killed. If no peace deal is agreed this war will just turn in to another, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, where the war goes on and on for years and years and never ends.

 

[357]

It has been almost a year now since the war started and still no end in sight. How much money and weapons are we going to keep giving them. Our leaders seem to care more about the Ukraine than about our country that they were elected to serve. The UK and all the other Western countries have given the Ukraine billions and billions of pounds and huge amounts of weapons and yet Zelensky is still demanding even more. Now we have Zelensky demanding fighter jets. There has to be a point where we stop giving them money and weapons and all this equipment. This can not keep going on.

The fact is that the Ukraine can not win the war on their own. Their military is not strong enough. Russia however can not win the war either if the West keeps giving all these weapons and equipment to the Ukraine as they have been. So we have this situation where the two of them keep on fighting and the war keeps going on. For as long as the West keeps giving the Ukraine money and weapons and for as long as the Ukraine refuses to negotiate with Russia the war will just keep going on. It will never end. It is utterly ridiculous.

I think Zelensky has handled this war terribly. He has refused to negotiate and have talks with Russia which could bring a ceasefire or end the war. If he wanted to Zelensky could have talks with Russia and negotiate a peace deal to end the war. But instead he would prefer for thousands and thousands of people to continue getting killed.

I think the solution is negotiating a peace deal where the Ukraine agrees to recognise, Crimea, Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, Zaphorizhzhia, provinces as being part of Russia and also agrees that they will not join NATO and remain a neutral country. In return Russia agrees to end the war. Yes this will result in some parts of the Ukraine being lost to Russia but it is only small parts and surely this is preferable to the war going on and on. When i visited these areas in the past i found that most of the people living in these areas are pro Russia anyway so a lot of the residents would probably be happy with this sort of deal. Giving up some of their land is better than thousands of people continuing to get killed. If no peace deal is agreed this war will just turn in to another, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, where the war goes on and on for years and years and never ends.

Who would you say our biggest threats are as a nation? Many would say russia and China. I'd say a good use of our defence budget is making sure russia are kept busy elsewhere. This war will make sure they can't attack us for decades.

Others in other threads have pointed out your deliberate use of the incorrect name for the country, the way you continue using the wrong name and along with the rest of your postings, this makes your feelings clear for all to see. What parts of the UK would you give russia in return for not killing us out of interest? Your proposal means Ukraine gives them large parts of land and makes sure ruzzia can attack any time they like in future. FYI when Crimea was taken, people like you said if Ukraine doesn't fight, if the signatories of the Budapest memorandum don't get involved, it will avoid a larger conflict. It didn't.

For your information I've been in Ukraine, in the areas you mention, and I didn't see the same as you. The pro-russian feelings in Ukraine quickly evaporated after the begining of the war.

Ukraine have had talks with russia almost a year ago, and they didn't stick to their side of the negotiations.

I've read your post here a couple of times and to be honest I'm not sure you've even been to Ukraine. I was living there for many years with my wife, and went part time driving in the UK to enable me to spend more time there. I was there when the war started, I've been there in the months since, and while I've stayed out of this thread for a large part your posts come across as absolute nonsense and your supposed knowledge seems to come from russian telegram channels.

If anyone's interested in seeing my photos of this time in Ukraine I can post them sometime, or message people the Google photos link - I won't share them publicly though.

 

[GusB]

I think the solution is negotiating a peace deal where the Ukraine agrees to recognise, Crimea, Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, Zaphorizhzhia, provinces as being part of Russia and also agrees that they will not join NATO and remain a neutral country. In return Russia agrees to end the war. Yes this will result in some parts of the Ukraine being lost to Russia but it is only small parts and surely this is preferable to the war going on and on. When i visited these areas in the past i found that most of the people living in these areas are pro Russia anyway so a lot of the residents would probably be happy with this sort of deal. Giving up some of their land is better than thousands of people continuing to get killed. If no peace deal is agreed this war will just turn in to another, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, where the war goes on and on for years and years and never ends.

So Russia gets what it wants and is allowed to rebuild and prepare for the annexation of the next bit of territory that it decides it wants.

Oh, and it's "Ukraine", not "the Ukraine".

 

[Parjon]

It has been almost a year now since the war started and still no end in sight. How much money and weapons are we going to keep giving them. Our leaders seem to care more about the Ukraine than about our country that they were elected to serve.

Our leaders are rightly concerned that a world in which a cruel dictator gets to drag a country back to medieval times, invades neighbouring countries, and blackmails the world with nuclear annihilation is no world to live in at all.

I couldn't guess what your leaders care about. Not much, from what I can see.

(Also, its just Ukraine, not "the" Ukraine)

 

[Darandio]

It has been almost a year now since the war started and still no end in sight. How much money and weapons are we going to keep giving them. Our leaders seem to care more about the Ukraine than about our country that they were elected to serve. The UK and all the other Western countries have given the Ukraine billions and billions of pounds and huge amounts of weapons and yet Zelensky is still demanding even more. Now we have Zelensky demanding fighter jets. There has to be a point where we stop giving them money and weapons and all this equipment. This can not keep going on.

The fact is that the Ukraine can not win the war on their own. Their military is not strong enough. Russia however can not win the war either if the West keeps giving all these weapons and equipment to the Ukraine as they have been. So we have this situation where the two of them keep on fighting and the war keeps going on. For as long as the West keeps giving the Ukraine money and weapons and for as long as the Ukraine refuses to negotiate with Russia the war will just keep going on. It will never end. It is utterly ridiculous.

I think Zelensky has handled this war terribly. He has refused to negotiate and have talks with Russia which could bring a ceasefire or end the war. If he wanted to Zelensky could have talks with Russia and negotiate a peace deal to end the war. But instead he would prefer for thousands and thousands of people to continue getting killed.

I think the solution is negotiating a peace deal where the Ukraine agrees to recognise, Crimea, Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, Zaphorizhzhia, provinces as being part of Russia and also agrees that they will not join NATO and remain a neutral country. In return Russia agrees to end the war. Yes this will result in some parts of the Ukraine being lost to Russia but it is only small parts and surely this is preferable to the war going on and on. When i visited these areas in the past i found that most of the people living in these areas are pro Russia anyway so a lot of the residents would probably be happy with this sort of deal. Giving up some of their land is better than thousands of people continuing to get killed. If no peace deal is agreed this war will just turn in to another, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, where the war goes on and on for years and years and never ends.

Your location states you are from Salisbury. Russia attacked your city. You are either brainwashed or trolling, hard to tell.

 

[Parjon]

So Russia gets what it wants and is allowed to rebuild and prepare for the annexation of the next bit of territory that it decides it wants.

Oh, and it's "Ukraine", not "the Ukraine".

Exactly. Right up to (and even beyond!) the malicious invasion they were claiming they had no intention of invading.

The only thing the Russian troll farm gangster government does consistently is lie, gaslight and bully. And they're not even any good at that.

No one believes a word they say.

 

[busestrains]

Who would you say our biggest threats are as a nation? Many would say russia and China. I'd say a good use of our defence budget is making sure russia are kept busy elsewhere. This war will make sure they can't attack us for decades.

Others in other threads have pointed out your deliberate use of the incorrect name for the country, the way you continue using the wrong name and along with the rest of your postings, this makes your feelings clear for all to see. What parts of the UK would you give russia in return for not killing us out of interest? Your proposal means Ukraine gives them large parts of land and makes sure ruzzia can attack any time they like in future. FYI when Crimea was taken, people like you said if Ukraine doesn't fight, if the signatories of the Budapest memorandum don't get involved, it will avoid a larger conflict. It didn't.

For your information I've been in Ukraine, in the areas you mention, and I didn't see the same as you. The pro-russian feelings in Ukraine quickly evaporated after the begining of the war.

Ukraine have had talks with russia almost a year ago, and they didn't stick to their side of the negotiations.

I've read your post here a couple of times and to be honest I'm not sure you've even been to Ukraine. I was living there for many years with my wife, and went part time driving in the UK to enable me to spend more time there. I was there when the war started, I've been there in the months since, and while I've stayed out of this thread for a large part your posts come across as absolute nonsense and your supposed knowledge seems to come from russian telegram channels.

If anyone's interested in seeing my photos of this time in Ukraine I can post them sometime, or message people the Google photos link - I won't share them publicly though.

China and Russia are not threats to our country. That is nonsense. I am not sure why everyone seems to think they are threats. Neither of these countries would have any interest in invading the UK.

Russia might have an interest in neighbouring countries that were previously part of the USSR and have high amounts of ethnic Russians living there. China might an interest in Taiwan and border areas of other countries. So maybe the bordering countries could say they are a threat. But neither China or Russia are any threat to the UK.

The last time i visited those parts, Crimea, Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, Zaphorizhzhia, was over ten years ago so maybe things have changed now. But when i was there it did certainly seem to be very pro Russia compared to the rest of the country. The people i had spoked to were mostly pro Russian and some people wanted to join Russia too. Maybe things have changed so i can not comment on recent opinions.

Many countries like "Gambia" and "Netherlands" and "Ukraine" are supposed to always have "the" in front of them to be grammatically correct. You can say it either way. I was always taught to put "the" in front.

So Russia gets what it wants and is allowed to rebuild and prepare for the annexation of the next bit of territory that it decides it wants.

Oh, and it's "Ukraine", not "the Ukraine".

I do not think they would annex much other territory. The rest of the Ukraine is much less pro Russian and much more anti Russian so i think if such a deal was made they would not try to annex more. The areas around Kiev and Lvov have less ethnic Russians and less support towards Russia then other areas. So i think if a deal was made they would not try to take Kiev or Lvov or any other such Western Ukraine areas.

Many countries like "Gambia" and "Netherlands" and "Ukraine" are supposed to always have "the" in front of them to be grammatically correct. You can say it either way. I was always taught to put "the" in front.

Our leaders are rightly concerned that a world in which a cruel dictator gets to drag a country back to medieval times, invades neighbouring countries, and blackmails the world with nuclear annihilation is no world to live in at all.

I couldn't guess what your leaders care about. Not much, from what I can see.

(Also, its just Ukraine, not "the" Ukraine)

That is simply untrue. He has never blackmailed the world with nuclear annihilation. Also i do not think Vladimir Putin is a dictator. I am not saying he is a good person or that i agree with all of his decisions. I disagree with a lot of things he has done. But he is not a dictator. Kim Jong Un or Xi Jinping could be considered dictators but not Vladimir Putin in my view. Vladimir Putin was elected by Russians and has support among many Russians still.

Many countries like "Gambia" and "Netherlands" and "Ukraine" are supposed to always have "the" in front of them to be grammatically correct. You can say it either way. I was always taught to put "the" in front.

Your location states you are from Salisbury. Russia attacked your city. You are either brainwashed or trolling, hard to tell.

Russia never attacked Salisbury! When did Russia attack Salisbury! Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia Skripal were poisoned by a nerve agent by Russians (who were thought to be working for the Russian government) in Salisbury. You can not call that an attack on the city. Poisoning two people is very different to attacking a city! They never attacked Salisbury!

Poisoning someone with a nerve agent and attacking a city are two very different things. You simply can not compare the two to each other and say they are the same thing.

Also having a different opinion is not being a troll. Why is it that whenever someone has a different opinion on any subject then they suddenly get accused of being a troll if that opinion is not liked by someone else.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

It has been almost a year now since the war started and still no end in sight.

And yet the war could end tomorrow! All that would be required is for Russia to do the decent thing and remove its troops back to its own territory, stop firing missiles at Ukraine, and return to Ukraine those Ukrainians that they have kidnapped and forcibly taken to Russia. How about it?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Our leaders are rightly concerned that a world in which a cruel dictator gets to drag a country back to medieval times, invades neighbouring countries, and blackmails the world with nuclear annihilation is no world to live in at all.

I couldn't guess what your leaders care about. Not much, from what I can see.

(Also, its just Ukraine, not "the" Ukraine)

To be fair I do think giving up Crimea, which is a bit like Alsace-Lorraine in having been part of France and Germany at various points in time, is almost certain to be the base of any peace.

I don't think giving up the other bits, which definitely are part of sovereign Ukraine, is going to happen nor should it.

 

[Parjon]

That is simply untrue. He has never blackmailed the world with nuclear annihilation.

Gaslighting ignited and blown out your backside. We do have ears.

Russia never attacked Salisbury! When did Russia attack Salisbury! Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia Skripal were poisoned by a nerve agent by Russians (who were thought to be working for the Russian government) in Salisbury. You can not call that an attack on the city. Poisoning two people is very different to attacking a city! They never attacked Salisbury!

Touchy much?...

Some might interpret sending armed operatives into ones territory to commit acts of violence as a somewhat hostile act by a hostile power. Strange you seem enthralled to them... They weren't "thought" to be working for them, their identities were exposed.

Oh, and as far as your Russia under Putin is concerned, it's "elected" not elected.

Alexei Navalhny would likely back me up on that one, including that Putin is a dictator.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Feb 2023 ==

And yet the war could end tomorrow! All that would be required is for Russia to do the decent thing and remove its troops back to its own territory, stop firing missiles at Ukraine, and return to Ukraine those Ukrainians that they have kidnapped and forcibly taken to Russia. How about it?

The simple solutions are often the best!

 

[Sorcerer]

I think Zelensky has handled this war terribly. He has refused to negotiate and have talks with Russia which could bring a ceasefire or end the war. If he wanted to Zelensky could have talks with Russia and negotiate a peace deal to end the war. But instead he would prefer for thousands and thousands of people to continue getting killed.

If Putin wanted he could simply call off his invasion and end the war immediately, but instead it seems he would prefer for thousands and thousands of people to continue getting killed.

I think the solution is negotiating a peace deal where the Ukraine agrees to recognise, Crimea, Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, Zaphorizhzhia, provinces as being part of Russia and also agrees that they will not join NATO and remain a neutral country. In return Russia agrees to end the war. Yes this will result in some parts of the Ukraine being lost to Russia but it is only small parts and surely this is preferable to the war going on and on. When i visited these areas in the past i found that most of the people living in these areas are pro Russia anyway so a lot of the residents would probably be happy with this sort of deal. Giving up some of their land is better than thousands of people continuing to get killed. If no peace deal is agreed this war will just turn in to another, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, where the war goes on and on for years and years and never ends.

Are you genuinely so naïve to think that is the least bit achievable? Metaphorically speaking do you genuinely believe that giving away your lunch money means the school bully will leave you alone?

 

[357]

Many countries like "Gambia" and "Netherlands" and "Ukraine" are supposed to always have "the" in front of them to be grammatically correct. You can say it either way. I was always taught to put "the" in front

Sorry, are you now telling a country what their own name is?

The change of name is clearly documented, and your continued use of the ruzzian names for Ukraine, Kyiv, etc, clearly speaks volumes.

 

[gingerheid]

The pro Russia trolls are back? Even almost a year later they're still immediately identifiable by their helpless attempts to defend the indefensible.

 

[najaB]

Many countries like "Gambia" and "Netherlands" and "Ukraine" are supposed to always have "the" in front of them to be grammatically correct. You can say it either way. I was always taught to put "the" in front.

And you have been corrected, repeatedly. The fact that you refuse to change means that it isn't ignorance but a willful act.

 

[brad465]

Russia never attacked Salisbury! When did Russia attack Salisbury! Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia Skripal were poisoned by a nerve agent by Russians (who were thought to be working for the Russian government) in Salisbury. You can not call that an attack on the city. Poisoning two people is very different to attacking a city! They never attacked Salisbury!

Poisoning someone with a nerve agent and attacking a city are two very different things. You simply can not compare the two to each other and say they are the same thing.

You seem to have forgotten that the discarded remnants of the nerve agent killed Dawn Sturgess and almost did so for Charlie Rowley in Amesbury a few months later. If it could affect them it could have affected anyone.