Ukraine Watch...

[PS_RalphW]

>> Can you provide a reason for Russia invading an independent country

Ukraine has been at (undeclared) war with Russia for some 8 years.

Russia annexed Crimea 8 years ago. It has also been funding, training and providing weapons to the separatists for 8 years that have been trying to set up "independent" regions next to the Russian border. Remember it was a Russian SAM that took down a Dutch airline.

I am not saying that the separatists didn't have legitimate complaints about their treatment under the Ukrainian government at that time, but they would not have lasted a month without Putin.

Russia has been at (undeclared) war with Ukraine for some 8 years.

[kenneal - lagger]

Putin announces a change in the law whereby foreign registered airliners are to be nationalised, requisitioned, or some would would say simply stolen. in order to evade sanctions. .......................

I am surprised!! He and his billionaire friends don't usually bother with the law when they're stealing things, oil and mining companies and the like, although they're now stealing from other nations rather than just from the Russian people. I suppose they need a bit of justification to steal from foreigners because they might have to fight it out in foreign courts.

[PS_RalphW]

A theatre in Mariupol has taken a direct hit from a Russian shell whilst being used as an air raid shelter, reportedly by up to 1000 people.

[adam2]

Reports state that the USA are sending more military aid, including anti tank weapons, anti aircraft missiles, machine guns, 20 million rounds of ammunition, and shotguns.

Shotguns are not often used for military purposes, but have the great merits of simplicity and ease of use. More applicable to civilian volunteers than for trained troops. Reports via my Polish neighbours suggest that pistols and shotguns are mainly for use by older children, with automatic weapons reserved for trained troops.
Shotguns and WW2 type revolvers are arguably the best weapons for persons without formal training.

[Catweazle]

Shotguns proved so effective in trench warfare that the Germans protested about them. They were also used extensively in Vietnam.

The shotgun’s effectiveness did not go unnoticed by the German government, which viewed the use of shotguns as a serious breach of international rules of warfare and lodged an official protest on September 14, 1918.

Maybe the issue of such weapons indicates that close range fighting is expected soon.

[Vortex2]

FWIW shotguns firing 00 size buckshot (multiple .32" size lead balls) are definitely a military capable weapon out to about 70 or 80 yards.

Shotguns can also fire single solid 'bullets' accurately out to 200 yards.

Combat ranges in Europe are typically 130 yards ... but in cities probably a fair bit less.

Muskets in the US civil war were as lethal as modern rifles if the range was under 100 yards.

A semi-automatic shotgun firing say 5 rounds in a row can put 45 or more nasty bullet-size projectiles down range in a second or two.

The downside? Bulky ammunition ... and rather nasty recoil ('kick').

[Default0ptions]

According to Zerohedge and the Mail “US to send armed drones to Ukraine”

Flying from where? The Poles neatly dodged ‘supplying aircraft’ to Ukraine by offering to fly them to a US airbase in Germany instead.

Germany and the US declined the offer.

Controlled from where? Unless they’re controlled from within Ukraine this risks escalation beyond Ukraine’s borders.

[Default0ptions]

I think it was Mark who said:

“ Think you'll find that Russia (by proxy through ethnic Russians) started the war in Ukraine 8yrs ago by annexing Crimea and eastern Donbas ?”

Or go back a step further and maybe the US role in the Maidan Square events and their active selection of ‘Yats’ and Nuland’s infamous leaked “fcuk the EU” phone calls precipitated that?

If you’re going to take as gospel truth our media’s slant on all events and refute all other points of view you’re not actually open to any discussion.

I could briefly point to Colin Powell’s speech to the UN, which he described afterwards as the ‘act he most regretted’ - because it turned out to be total tosh. Along with the claim that Saddam could send chemical wmds into Europe at 45 mins notice.

Or the James Bond style descriptions of Bin Laden’s cave hideout in Tora Bora in Afghanistan.

The only point I wanted to raise is that it is foolish to take stand based entirely on ‘the truth’ when you only count the current offerings of one side in a conflict as ‘the truth’.

[PS_RalphW]

A bloodless coup (if that is what it was) is not the same moral sphere as bombing a country into submission.

End of story.

[kenneal - lagger]

Ukraine has had free elections to choose their own government and they are now putting up almost united opposition to the brutal Russian invasion so I think there is no doubt about the thoughts and desires of the Ukrainian population. It is that which is uppermost in any any consideration of the rights and wrongs in this situation.

Putin's deliberate self isolation, sitting ten or twenty feet away from even his own generals, shows his increasing paranoia and mental instability. We can only hope that someone has the ability to take him out before he orders a nuclear attack as his empire falls apart around him.

[invalid]

Can you provide a reason for Russia invading an independent country that was no military threat ?
Can you provide a reason for Russia bombing hospitals, schools and residential blocks ?
Can you provide a reason for Russia mining 'safe' escape routes for civilians ?
Can you provide a reason for Russia kidnapping mayors ?
Can you provide a reason for Russia attacking nuclear power plants ?

Ukrainian's response shows that the vast majority of their people don't want to be 'liberated' by Russia.

None of it makes any sense to me at all, but I'm more than happy for you to explain.
This forum is a space to discuss different viewpoints...
Over to you....

1) I would believe that Russia determined it was a military threat.. Undoubtedly they have their own geopolitical, economic, and military interests at heart, just like the West.
2) These things happen in war, I'm not saying it's right. How many weddings did we take out in Afghan/Iraq?
3) No, but we'll need to wait until after the conflict for clear and reliable evidence of this to emerge. At the moment all we're getting is a massive amount of one-sided reporting courtesy of the Western MSM media.
4) How many mayors? I'd guess it's to do with their political and military objectives.
5) Was a nuclear plant attacked? All I saw, on closer examination, was that an outbuilding in the plant complex was hit - something that is very liable to happen in a military conflict.

[dustiswhatweare]

Can you provide a reason for Russia invading an independent country that was no military threat ?
Can you provide a reason for Russia bombing hospitals, schools and residential blocks ?
Can you provide a reason for Russia mining 'safe' escape routes for civilians ?
Can you provide a reason for Russia kidnapping mayors ?
Can you provide a reason for Russia attacking nuclear power plants ?

Ukrainian's response shows that the vast majority of their people don't want to be 'liberated' by Russia.

None of it makes any sense to me at all, but I'm more than happy for you to explain.
This forum is a space to discuss different viewpoints...
Over to you....

1) I would believe that Russia determined it was a military threat.. Undoubtedly they have their own geopolitical, economic, and military interests at heart, just like the West.
2) These things happen in war, I'm not saying it's right. How many weddings did we take out in Afghan/Iraq?
3) No, but we'll need to wait until after the conflict for clear and reliable evidence of this to emerge. At the moment all we're getting is a massive amount of one-sided reporting courtesy of the Western MSM media.
4) How many mayors? I'd guess it's to do with their political and military objectives.
5) Was a nuclear plant attacked? All I saw, on closer examination, was that an outbuilding in the plant complex was hit - something that is very liable to happen in a military conflict.

Quit now, you're embarrassing yourself. There's no point in arguing with a stooge so go ask your supervisor for another site to 'propogandize'. No one here is missing cognitive function, move on to the Sun or something.

[Stumuz2]

Quit now, you're embarrassing yourself. There's no point in arguing with a stooge so go ask your supervisor for another site to 'propogandize'. No one here is missing cognitive function, move on to the Sun or something.

You have resorted to abuse rather than defend your propositions. You have no argument, no counterpoint, no evidence, just abuse. Engage in logical debate, if you are able.

[Stumuz2]

1) I would believe that Russia determined it was a military threat.. Undoubtedly they have their own geopolitical, economic, and military interests at heart, just like the West.

So, if we believe that France was a military threat.. Then undoubtedly we have own geopolitical, economic, and military interests at heart, and are justified in invading France?

[dustiswhatweare]

Quit now, you're embarrassing yourself. There's no point in arguing with a stooge so go ask your supervisor for another site to 'propogandize'. No one here is missing cognitive function, move on to the Sun or something.

You have resorted to abuse rather than defend your propositions. You have no argument, no counterpoint, no evidence, just abuse. Engage in logical debate, if you are able.

There's no point in arguing with a stooge