Russia has officially invaded Ukraine

[Twinblade★ 3,990]

4 hours ago, jehurey said:

No it clearly isn't, if Russia was threatening multiple countries to NOT join them.

That's where you're argument comes to a dead stop.............by merely looking at what WAS RANKLING Putin to begin with: losing buffer countries to NATO.

 

That, alone, makes NATO worth its existence.

 

We're seeing the benefits right now...........America isn't have to shoulder everything, we have so many other countries coming in to help Ukraine out with weapons and money.

 

That single-handedly demonstrates why having NATO helps the United States.

 

Thats not exactly true. The U.S. has given more than every EU country combined. If not for them coming in to save the day, the war would look very different than it looks today. Years of not meeting NATO standards and letting their militaries decay definitely put European countries in a bad spot and they've been unable to support Ukraine to the extent that they should have been.

[jehurey 3,299]

1 hour ago, Ramza said:

You mean ex USSR states joining NATO such as Ukraine? That's different. 

 

What you think the only reasons why NATO countries are supporting this conflict with loans and weapons is because they are part of NATO? How?

 

 

 

 

Because the country that is right beside them is getting shelled by Russia.

 

I mean, are you stupid or something?

 

If your neighbors house is getting vandalized and attacked all day long these past week.........do you want to threat to STAY NEAR YOU.........or would you work with your neighbor to help repel it back further and further AWAY FROM YOU?

 

In this case, if it were "every country for themselves" AKA NATO does not exist........then it would be easier for Russia to pick apart every country individually, step by step.

 

With NATO, all countries can chip in, and immediately be able to supply one country with everything they need to repel Russia back.

 

This would not happen if it were just Poland and Turkey helping them out.

 

if the US didn't have NATO, and all the things in place (that COST MONEY YEAR ROUND TO HAVE IN PLACE), they couldn't have activated and coordinated a unified response from multiple countries this quickly. Thus giving Russia a much bigger window to overthrow Kyiv.

[jehurey 3,299]

7 minutes ago, Twinblade said:

 

Thats not exactly true. The U.S. has given more than every EU country combined. If not for them coming in to save the day, the war would look very different than it looks today. Years of not meeting NATO standards and letting their militaries decay definitely put European countries in a bad spot and they've been unable to support Ukraine to the extent that they should have been.

We have air force bases in other countries that we can immediately drop off planes and materials to.

 

Why do you have that?

 

because we have a NATO alliance...........its ALREADY IN PLACE.

 

We don't need to waste the precious first few days of the war, or few weeks, with having to set that up.

 

Paying for 50% of it is cheaper than paying for 100% of the cost if there's no NATO.

 

We paying so that we have our own military sitting on military bases that we set up so that we can be close to be able to respond, in many different parts of the world.

 

That obviously means we need to coax those countries with money so that we can do that.

 

You pay money for a Brinks Home Security System for 365 days out of the year, even though it does absolutely nothing for you for 364 out of the 365 days. But you know why you pay anyways.

Edited June 25, 2023 by jehurey

[jehurey 3,299]

1 hour ago, Ramza said:

 

Keep in mind the west only started sending serious aid once they realized the Ukrainians had a fighting chance and were kicking serious asses.

 

 

No sweetheart.

 

August 2021

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2729743/usaf-ukraine-armed-forces-strengthen-partnership/

 

Movember 2018

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2018/11/13/nato-ambitions-ukraine-looks-west-with-air-exercises-and-high-level-discussions/

 

And i know somebody who is with Marine Corps who was deployed on an undisclosed training mission back in November of 2021 through the winter.  We later learned that it was in Ukraine.

 

The US military and intelligence community has been planning for this since the Crimea invasion happened.

[Mr. House 3,371]

1 hour ago, jehurey said:

No sweetheart.

 

August 2021

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2729743/usaf-ukraine-armed-forces-strengthen-partnership/

 

Movember 2018

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2018/11/13/nato-ambitions-ukraine-looks-west-with-air-exercises-and-high-level-discussions/

 

And i know somebody who is with Marine Corps who was deployed on an undisclosed training mission back in November of 2021 through the winter.  We later learned that it was in Ukraine.

 

The US military and intelligence community has been planning for this since the Crimea invasion happened.

NATO war support as a whole as only increased after the initial news of the invasion. The US isn't alone here. 

 

But yeah, no surprises here. 

[jehurey 3,299]

1 hour ago, Ramza said:

NATO war support as a whole as only increased after the initial news of the invasion. The US isn't alone here. 

 

But yeah, no surprises here. 

No sweetheart.

 

They had already made preparations and had clearly seen Russia move their resources in preparation.

 

Ignoring the articles that clearly contradict your narrative isn't going to work.

 

And think about it...........you narrative ALSO PROVES that having NATO establish all around Ukraine was able to give them a RESPONSE TIME that was quick enough.

 

You clearly don't realize that you're making my argument for me.

[lynux3 2,165]

Prigozhin’s mutiny case apparently never got dropped. He should have went all in on Moscow. Russians

Edited June 26, 2023 by lynux3

[Twinblade★ 3,990]

15 hours ago, jehurey said:

We have air force bases in other countries that we can immediately drop off planes and materials to.

 

Why do you have that?

 

because we have a NATO alliance...........its ALREADY IN PLACE.

 

We don't need to waste the precious first few days of the war, or few weeks, with having to set that up.

 

Paying for 50% of it is cheaper than paying for 100% of the cost if there's no NATO.

 

We paying so that we have our own military sitting on military bases that we set up so that we can be close to be able to respond, in many different parts of the world.

 

That obviously means we need to coax those countries with money so that we can do that.

 

You pay money for a Brinks Home Security System for 365 days out of the year, even though it does absolutely nothing for you for 364 out of the 365 days. But you know why you pay anyways.

  
im not sure what you’re trying to prove here. Europe and NATO need to be able to uphold security in Europe themselves and not be just reliant on the U.S for everything. The fact that it took the largest war on the continent since WW2 for them to open their eyes and realize their militaries have fallen apart is pretty ridiculous. Russia was always a threat long before this invasion, but instead Europe continued to not only ignore them but also buy up Russian oil and gas in significant quantities. 
  
If not for the U.S, the larger military powers in Europe like Germany and France would have actually thrown Ukraine to the Russian wolves. Let’s not forget about the laughable aid they promised at the onset of the invasion. Germany and their commitment to send 5000 helmets was actually laughable.

 

[Goukosan 2,283]

2 hours ago, Twinblade said:

  
im not sure what you’re trying to prove here. Europe and NATO need to be able to uphold security in Europe themselves and not be just reliant on the U.S for everything. The fact that it took the largest war on the continent since WW2 for them to open their eyes and realize their militaries have fallen apart is pretty ridiculous. Russia was always a threat long before this invasion, but instead Europe continued to not only ignore them but also buy up Russian oil and gas in significant quantities. 
  
If not for the U.S, the larger military powers in Europe like Germany and France would have actually thrown Ukraine to the Russian wolves. Let’s not forget about the laughable aid they promised at the onset of the invasion. Germany and their commitment to send 5000 helmets was actually laughable.

 

 

What do you mean and NATO needs to uphold security in Europe themselves?   The US is included in NATO.   The US is a part of that equation because its serves our interest. 

 

Edited June 26, 2023 by Goukosan

[jehurey 3,299]

5 hours ago, Twinblade said:

  
im not sure what you’re trying to prove here. Europe and NATO need to be able to uphold security in Europe themselves and not be just reliant on the U.S for everything. The fact that it took the largest war on the continent since WW2 for them to open their eyes and realize their militaries have fallen apart is pretty ridiculous. Russia was always a threat long before this invasion, but instead Europe continued to not only ignore them but also buy up Russian oil and gas in significant quantities. 
  
If not for the U.S, the larger military powers in Europe like Germany and France would have actually thrown Ukraine to the Russian wolves. Let’s not forget about the laughable aid they promised at the onset of the invasion. Germany and their commitment to send 5000 helmets was actually laughable.

 

Dude all I need is to ask you a simple question:

 

WHO has their military bases and military presence is WHO'S country?

 

Do you see a fucking German or French military base in Alabama? Or Texas? Or California?

 

I mean can we cut the bullshit and realize why NATO exists? And who is clearly designed around?

 

You want to call the shots, it's because your probably paying for the dinner. Sure we want everybody to chip in.

[Mr. House 3,371]

Well, I think it's safe to say at this point that the ''counter offensive'' is a flop. Thanks, Twinblade. 

[Twinblade★ 3,990]

1 hour ago, Ramza said:

Well, I think it's safe to say at this point that the ''counter offensive'' is a flop. Thanks, Twinblade. 

 

Based on what? Putin's and the Russians' claims? Lol.

[Mr. House 3,371]

28 minutes ago, Twinblade said:

 

Based on what? Putin's and the Russians' claims? Lol.

No idea what you are talking about.

 

Just the general lack of advance/gains from the Ukrainians and the losses of equipment and lives piling up.

 

Told you this was overhyped and the Russians were well dug in. It's just a meat grinder that probably favors the Russian heavily for the first time. Use of reconnaissance/kamikaze drones and air superiority has been brutal for the Ukrainians.  

 

Retake Crimea? Yeah, right. 

[Twinblade★ 3,990]

1 minute ago, Ramza said:

No idea what you are talking about.

 

Just the general lack of advance/gains from the Ukrainians and the losses of equipment and lives piling up.

 

Told you this was overhyped and the Russians were well dug in. It's just a meat grinder that probably favors the Russian heavily for the first time. Use of reconnaissance/kamikaze drones and air superiority has been brutal for the Ukrainians.  

 

Retake Crimea? Yeah, right. 

 

Everyone's aware the Russians are dug in. Mine fields and KA-52 choppers (which Russia is quickly running out of) are real threats.

 

This is why the counter offensive has been slow, but its also been methodical. Ukraine is picking and choosing its battles to minimize their own losses while maximizing Russian losses. Seriously, even though there's not much territory changing hands right now, the numbers paint a very vivid picture:

 

Visually confirmed Ukranian losses for 6/27 - 29 pieces of equipment

Visually confirmed Russian losses for 6/27 - 70 piece of equipment

 

Despite having the defender advantage Russians are losing more vital equipment and more soldiers

 

Their logistics are also being crippled. Im still seeing daily videos of burning Russian bases or ammo dumps on occupied territory.

 

Ukraine is also still holding back most of their reserves. They're clearly waiting for the right moment to unleash potentially tens of thousands of NATO trained and equipped soldiers.

 

Lets not forget that Russia's offensive capability has been completely exhausted. They literally have 0 chance of seizing any more territory anytime soon. All they can do is lose it.

 

Ukraine has been patient so we need to respect that and be patient as well. They shouldn't be forced to rush their operations just because us over here in the west want to see a frontline on a map move to justify our tax dollars.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mr. House 3,371]

3 minutes ago, Twinblade said:

 

Everyone's aware the Russians are dug in. Mine fields and KA-52 choppers (which Russia is quickly running out of) are real threats.

 

This is why the counter offensive has been slow, but its also been methodical. Ukraine is picking and choosing its battles to minimize their own losses while maximizing Russian losses. Seriously, even though there's not much territory changing hands right now, the numbers paint a very vivid picture:

 

Visually confirmed Ukranian losses for 6/27 - 29 pieces of equipment

Visually confirmed Russian losses for 6/27 - 70 piece of equipment

 

Despite having the defender advantage Russians are losing more vital equipment and more soldiers

 

Their logistics are also being crippled. Im still seeing daily videos of burning Russian bases or ammo dumps on occupied territory.

 

Ukraine is also still holding back most of their reserves. They're clearly waiting for the right moment to unleash potentially tens of thousands of NATO trained and equipped soldiers.

 

Lets not forget that Russia's offensive capability has been completely exhausted. They literally have 0 chance of seizing any more territory anytime soon. All they can do is lose it.

 

Ukraine has been patient so we need to respect that and be patient as well. They shouldn't be forced to rush their operations just because us over here in the west want to see a frontline on a map move to justify our tax dollars.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Russia has conducted small scale offensives, retook some lost grounds but I agree you won't see any major offensive push coming from Russians anytime soon. Very unlikely. Maybe if wagner was still operative on the grounds... lol

 

I don't know what the Ukrainians reserve is like at this point but it'll take some serious firepower to get through like they are trying to. You saw what happened to bugged down tanks and apcs. Small scales infantry operations that the Ukrainians have been doing for a while now doesn't seem to be working well at all. Drones recon/howitzer and tanks automated heavy machine guns are chewing them up. I think US intelligence and Ukrainians vastly underestimated the will of Russians to keep fighting. 

 

I don't know about equipment losses on the Russian sides other than the ammo depots getting blown up. I think that's probably Ukraine best course of action, if they can hit the vitals infrastructures, roads, warehouses, bases, in the back they should focus on that, probably. Russia clearly has had supply issues since the beginning of the war from both a logistical and manufacturing standpoint. 

[Mr. House 3,371]

Interesting development. Possible push incoming on both flanks of Bahkmut. HIMARS destroyed important artillery. And there's major depot destroyed that you probably already heard about. 

 

Though what this channel doesn't say is in the past few days, Ukraine lost more armored vehicles and a few tanks in failed offensive operations. I was trying to find video evidence which I saw like yesterday but youtube is a bitch that underpromotes non Ukrainian partisan channels. That's the problem when you only watch partisans channels, you only get one side of the story. 

 

 

 

 

@Twinblade

[Twinblade★ 3,990]

49 minutes ago, Ramza said:

Interesting development. Possible push incoming on both flanks of Bahkmut. HIMARS destroyed important artillery. And there's major depot destroyed that you probably already heard about. 

 

Though what this channel doesn't say is in the past few days, Ukraine lost more armored vehicles and a few tanks in failed offensive operations. I was trying to find video evidence which I saw like yesterday but youtube is a bitch that underpromotes non Ukrainian partisan channels. That's the problem when you only watch partisans channels, you only get one side of the story. 

 

 

 

 

@Twinblade

 

There is good success in the east. BTW the Russians stored a major ammo depot in the middle of donetsk right next to a hospital. Then they make up bullshit excuses about how Ukraine is attacking civilians

 

https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1676512131125063680

 

 

[Mr. House 3,371]

12 minutes ago, Twinblade said:

 

There is good success in the east. BTW the Russians stored a major ammo depot in the middle of donetsk right next to a hospital. Then they make up bullshit excuses about how Ukraine is attacking civilians

 

https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1676512131125063680

 

 

It's hard to take the side of Russians seriously on these accusations when they've been bombing and shelling residential areas for more than a year. Didn't they destroy a pizzeria like last-week that was a meeting place for mercenaries? 

 

Anyway, that's still doesn't entirely excuse Ukrainians actions but unfortunately, they don't really have any other choices. Desperate times calls for desperate measures. 

 

Like I told you a while back, we'll see ''war crimes'' on both sides until this conflict ends. 

[Twinblade★ 3,990]

2 hours ago, Ramza said:

It's hard to take the side of Russians seriously on these accusations when they've been bombing and shelling residential areas for more than a year. Didn't they destroy a pizzeria like last-week that was a meeting place for mercenaries? 

 

Anyway, that's still doesn't entirely excuse Ukrainians actions but unfortunately, they don't really have any other choices. Desperate times calls for desperate measures. 

 

Like I told you a while back, we'll see ''war crimes'' on both sides until this conflict ends. 

 
The both sides argument still doesn’t work. Russia indiscriminately targets civilians and has since the war began. Ukraine hits military targets the vast majority of the time. If there’s collateral damage because the Russians decided to store military hardware in Civilain areas, then that’s very unfortunate but it’s still their fault.

[Mr. House 3,371]

18 minutes ago, Twinblade said:

 
The both sides argument still doesn’t work. Russia indiscriminately targets civilians and has since the war began. Ukraine hits military targets the vast majority of the time. If there’s collateral damage because the Russians decided to store military hardware in Civilain areas, then that’s very unfortunate but it’s still their fault.

Ukraine has depot and intelligence centers in resident areas as well. It's not uncommon. 

 

I don't think it justify bombing those areas in terms of international war crime laws. Same thing for bombing bridges because they're used by military personnel from time to time. At least I don't think so. 

 

And I didn't talk about the drones attack in Moscow but I'm starting to think that's Russian false flag operations at this point and this is coming from me. lol