Russia unleashes missile barrage on cities across Ukraine

Interesting article here about Russia running out of precision guided missiles.

Apart from having to use S300s they also have resorted to using anti shipping missiles in their attacked on civilians:

www.reuters.com...

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
Interesting article here about Russia running out of precision guided missiles.

Apart from having to use S300s they also have resorted to using anti shipping missiles in their attacked on civilians:

www.reuters.com...

Along with a lot of iranian suicide drones, that russia pretended were 'missiles'.

I've reached my reuters limit, but looks like a good article.

a reply to: Nexttimemaybe



Pro tip: Never ask for evidence when you are spreading russian propaganda.

It will nearly always backfire.

Cuz russian propaganda is rarely based on any kind of evidence, which is why asking russian propagandists for evidence works better than Kryptonite.

originally posted by: MidnightWatcher
a reply to: Vroomfondel


"Ukrainian separatists"?


Ukraine was not part of russia at the time, making them Ukrainian Patriots, not separatists.


More word twisting russian propaganda.

There were two parties in Ukraine at the time. One was the separatist who wanted to re-open relations with Moscow. The other were the progressives who wanted to go with the EU. Both were made up of Ukrainian citizens. Your are calling the ones who were loyal to Russia Patriots. Now we know who is spewing the Russian propaganda.

a reply to: Vroomfondel


"Your are calling the ones who were loyal to Russia Patriots"


I said no such thing.

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
Thats not entirely true. It was Russian loyalists, Ukrainian citizens, who revolted when Yanukovich was removed from office after saying he would cut ties with EU and re-open economic ties with Moscow. Progressives wanted to stay with the EU and revolted but it was Ukrainian separatists who seized parliament and raised the Russian flag in Crimea in 2014, not Russian military.

Not sure why you think what I said was "not entirely true".

The events around the Ukrainian revolution in 2014 are well known and examined. Even the role of the Russian military in the annexation of Crimea is well understood, as they executed an invasion. Whether, or not, it was separatists who took over the Parliament in Crimea is a moot point, because backing them up were Russian military personnel.

Since 2014 the Russians have been conducting ethnic cleansing in Crimea. What is it with Russians and their exceptionalism? They destroy so many lives.

Separatists taking over Parliament and raising the Russian flag is hardly a moot point. It was the actual declaration of Donbas as a Russian territory. That declaration came entirely from within Ukraine with no military aid from Russia. Russia did not provide military aid until after the separatists had claimed Donbas as their own. As such, it is difficult to characterize Russian actions as an invasion. It would be like saying the US invaded North Korea in the Korean war when in reality we were providing aid to the South. The continued fighting in the Donbas region could not occur without the division of the Ukrainian people along the loyalist/separatist line.

I believe the other examples you cited were correct.

a reply to: Vroomfondel


With the help of russia's 'little green men'.

Making your argument completely moot.

originally posted by: MidnightWatcher
a reply to: Vroomfondel


"Your are calling the ones who were loyal to Russia Patriots"


I said no such thing.

Ukraine was not part of russia at the time, making them Ukrainian Patriots, not separatists.

Right. People who want to rejoin Russia (the ones who want to separate from Ukraine and EU) are Patriots. Got it.

There were two parties in Ukraine. One was loyal to Ukraine and the EU. The other were the separatists who wanted to rejoin with Moscow and Russia. The people you are referring to are the separatists who wanted to re-open ties with Moscow and cut ties with the EU. Its not my fault you don't know which is which.

I have noticed that across several threads you consistently call any information you disagree with or simply don't understand propaganda. Its a lame tactic and gets you nowhere. Making a direct statement like the one above then denying it is word twisting at its best.

originally posted by: MidnightWatcher
a reply to: Vroomfondel


With the help of russia's 'little green men'.

Making your argument completely moot.

Are those little green men in the room with you now?

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: MidnightWatcher

Completely irrelevant. It was a legitimate pre-emptive operation against a violently mad government who has been murdering its own people since well before 2014 and increasingly so afterwards.

Was that 'violently mad' government attacking or threatening russia?


Have any evidence that Zelinsky is 'violently mad' in the first place?



Or that any violence was taking place prior to russia's 2014 land grabbing invasion?

Cuz Ukraine is allowed to defend itself from foreign invasions.



Also - the instant russia tried to 'annex' Ukrainian territory, any fake 'justification' went out the window anyway.

a reply to: Vroomfondel


Funny.

Are you unaware that putin already admitted (bragged about) his little green men?

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: MidnightWatcher
a reply to: Vroomfondel


"Your are calling the ones who were loyal to Russia Patriots"


I said no such thing.

Ukraine was not part of russia at the time, making them Ukrainian Patriots, not separatists.

I have noticed that across several threads you consistently call any information you disagree with or simply don't understand propaganda.

I call it russian propaganda when it's lies pushed by the russian government for political purposes.

The definition of propaganda.




Here, have some moar russian propaganda:

youtu.be...

originally posted by: MidnightWatcher
Got anything more recent than 70 years ago?

Is this a trick question? Er, Russia three times. Land grabbed from Georgia (2008), Moldova (1992?), and Ukraine (2014 and 2022). Think this was covered up above somewhere.

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: MidnightWatcher
Got anything more recent than 70 years ago?

Is this a trick question? Er, Russia three times. Land grabbed from Georgia (2008), Moldova (1992?), and Ukraine (2014 and 2022). Think this was covered up above somewhere.

I think the accusation was someone other than russia, russia has done it quite a bit, your list is far from complete.

a reply to: MidnightWatcher

I know you like going in circles, but let us try this one more time. Zelensky is a mad man whos government as a matter of state policy imprisons journalists and political opponents. Saddam did the same. Supports a publicly available and published assassination target list of various civilians for their speech.

Russia claims Ukraine and Zelensky are a threat to their national security. America did the same with Iraq and used the existing propoganda machine to knowingly spread 2 big lies to justify this threat to national security. Two members of the security council decided to take unilateral pre-emptive action to invade a country on the other side of the Earth in the name of national security. A precedent another security council member followed 19 years later to invade a stated national security threat on their border, much closer to home than halfway across the Earth.

Turkey and Iran will both soon be following this same precedent with Iraq. It seems like a legitamate precedent for the 21st century set by the very governments now supporting Ukraine.

If there is a threat to national security in the 21st century, states are pretty much obligated to follow in the path established by the other members of the security council.

His words demanding a preemptive niluclear first strike on Russia is a good start as to his state of mind. Calling his own soldiers cowards for surrendering in Marioupol when completely surrounded and outgunned instead of fighting to the death. Maybe some words of encouragement like "hey, dont worry we will get you back!" None of that though.

a reply to: worldstarcountry


Did that Zelinsky 'madman' invade another country and demand it give it's territory to russia?

Or threaten russia in any way?

a reply to: MidnightWatcher

a reply to: MidnightWatcher
It does not matter because when the precedent was set in 2003 Iraq had neither threatened America or the UK, nor invaded anyone. Again, i shed no tears for Saddam Hussein, but when his country was attacked and invaded by the 2 members of the security council, his military was worthless, out of practice, and barely loyal enough to fight any invader.

As a result, a similar excuse was used 19 years later by a different Security council member with the same result.

I better copy pasta this because it is clear the algorithms will have you repeating this at least 200 more times before the end of the week. I will do my best to repost the same reply each time. Maybe i can overload the program by forcing the account to repeat itselt so many times and cause a glitch lol.

a reply to: worldstarcountry


Iraq was violating a cease fire agreement every day, and offered sanctuary to those that had just attacked the US in a massive way.

Were there UN resolutions that specified what would happen if iraq didn't submit to previous resolutions?

Was Ukraine offering sanctuary to any groups that attacked russia in a massive way?

Did the US make demands for Iraqi territory?

Did the US make nuke threats when things got difficult?

Did iraq give us their 1600 nukes in exchange for a promise to protect them from foreign invasion?

Is a coalition of countries helping russia invade Ukraine?

Some pretty significant differences, and there are more.




Note: I thought the Iraq war was stupid and reckless, and said so at the time, because there were other options still available short of war.

Russian thinking:

Russians are so impotent to stop the Ukrainian army that they have changed the tune, completely. Their new big thing is now to destroy the energy grid. Without going into details to this topic, it reveals how weak and desperate the Russian army truly is.