Jump to content

Russian invasion of Ukraine


Sonam

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, dorlomin said:

Ukrainians are not fighting because we asked them too. Only Putin arse lickers claim that.

They are fighting because they want too. Its their country. 

We have provided them a small portion of the weapons they needed to even up the material difference to match their moral willingness to fight Russia's huge material superiority. 

They want to fight the Russians. Only a c**t would pretend otherwise. 

They're fighting because they have to, not because they want to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, virginton said:

Because Russia is historically adverse to the principle of trading soldiers' lives for territorial/strategic gains. 🤡 🤡 🤡

That hot take could only emerge from a society whose armies prefer to hide behind the Channel and get others to fight, until they can step in for the victory lap. 

K, m8.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the West are interested too much in Ukraine being liberated. If Russia take it they will have lost loads of equipment and men and trying to control a country the size of Ukraine will be very problematic. I'm sure there is rising opposition to it from home too. NATO will quite happily give obsolete or spare weaponry but not enough for them to threaten Russia's major cities. It's the perfect proxy war for the west. Russia's Vietnam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just some more completely unhinged Russophobic commentary:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/10/putin-compares-himself-to-peter-the-great-in-quest-to-take-back-russian-lands

Quote

 

Peter the Great, an autocratic moderniser admired by liberal and conservative Russians alike, ruled for 43 years and gave his name to a new capital, St Petersburg – Putin’s home town – that he ordered built on land he conquered from Sweden.

It was a project that cost the lives of tens of thousands of serfs, conscripted as forced labourers to build Peter’s “window to Europe” in the swamps of the Baltic Sea coast.

 

I don't recall The Guardian dwelling much on the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha's comparable 18th century record of ethnic cleansing Gaels from its domains - as a prelude to the systematic plunder and conquest of India - in its 'celebration of Britishness' just last week. 

A truly laughable attempt to selectively apply contemporary value judgements to revise the big bad Russians (but not 'The West' - never 'The West'). 

Edited by vikingTON
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, virginton said:

 

A truly laughable attempt to selectively apply contemporary value judgements to revise the big bad Russians (but not 'The West' - never 'The West'). 

The best example of this are the decolonise Russia nutters on Twitter who are arguing that Russia should be broken up into 20 odd different states.

The same people don't have much to say about Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico, French Guyana, Okinawa or Diego Garcia for some reason. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 05/06/2022 at 14:42, welshbairn said:

I'm sure if Germany had succeeded in taking over the UK in 1940 they wouldn't have found it hard to find willing volunteers to do the dirty work of sorting out the Jews. What this has to do with Russia's efforts to restore its Empire in 2022 is beyond me though.

Indeed the man revered in "The Billy Boys" would have been well up for the job being a massive nazi himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Putin's thoughts on Peter The Great's conquests. (He was only taking back what was rightfully his, like what I'm doing)

Quote

We visited the exhibition dedicated to the 350th birth anniversary of Peter the Great. Almost nothing has changed. It is a remarkable thing. You come to this realisation, this understanding.

Peter the Great waged the Great Northern War for 21 years. On the face of it, he was at war with Sweden taking something away from it… He was not taking away anything, he was returning. This is how it was. The areas around Lake Ladoga, where St Petersburg was founded. When he founded the new capital, none of the European countries recognised this territory as part of Russia; everyone recognised it as part of Sweden. However, from time immemorial, the Slavs lived there along with the Finno-Ugric peoples, and this territory was under Russia’s control. The same is true of the western direction, Narva and his first campaigns. Why would he go there? He was returning and reinforcing, that is what he was doing.

Clearly, it fell to our lot to return and reinforce as well. And if we operate on the premise that these basic values constitute the basis of our existence, we will certainly succeed in achieving our goals.

http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/68606

P.S. I assume Narva is mentioned as a chilly wink to Estonia.

Edited by welshbairn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Maybe if Britain had just started bombing Cork and Dublin and invaded from Ulster, tales of its past barbarity would be a popular topic in the global media.

It already is for the country that experienced just that level of barbarity:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_of_Wexford

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Drogheda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Putin's thoughts on Peter The Great's conquests. (He was only taking back what was rightfully his, like what I'm doing)

http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/68606

P.S. I assume Narva is mentioned as a chilly wink to Estonia.

And on the historical point he's correct. Sweden expanded its reach massively during the 17th century at the expense of all its neighbours (there are multiple towns in Czechia, hundreds of miles from the Baltic, that have 'sacked by the Swedes' as a key bookmark in their local history).  Earlier in the 17th century, Poland-Lithuania expanded its reach at the expense of its perennial rival: the Muscovite state - later, the Russian Empire. 

The westward rebound of Russian influence began a couple of generations before Peter the Great, whose role was to complete and consolidate that job. 

The reality is that geopolitics doesn't magically begin or end at a certain point, just because it is in the interest of someone or even a collective of actors for it to do so. 

Edited by vikingTON
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Ukraine losing 600-700 suffering 6-700 casualties a day at the moment. That isn't even taking into account surrenders in occupied villages and town. Surely cannot be sustainable for much longer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they can't win an artillery duel then they could always, erm, disengage from that duel rather than trying to rope in billions more in military equipment now right now to stem casualties caused by a moronic strategy.

Further evidence as to how Ukraine's leadership and Western liberals are dragging each other inexorably into a forever war. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...