Someone is trying to start a war in the Ukraine, It's NOT Russia (edit: yes it is)

BREAKING FLASHED NEWS

Talks between Russia & Ukraine are not happening today/tonight but both sides agreed in principle for them to go ahead over the weekend
according to my contacts. This comes with a caveat that the situation is very fluid indeed and anything can happen.

END
 
Sponsored Links
The Humanitarian said:
BREAKING FLASHED NEWS

Talks between Russia & Ukraine are not happening today/tonight but both sides agreed in principle for them to go ahead over the weekend
according to my contacts. This comes with a caveat that the situation is very fluid indeed and anything can happen.

END
Click to expand...


Just read this went online about 28 mins ago

Contains what Putin wants and the "Kremlin want people to show their support to Putin" A sure sign of growing opposition in Russia IMO

https://www.reuters.com/world/moscow-awaits-ukraines-response-after-talks-kremlin-says-2022-03-04/

https://www.reuters.com/world/moscow-awaits-ukraines-response-after-talks-kremlin-says-2022-03-04/

Good afternoon
 
Russia have no where near enough troops to occupy the Ukraine if that is there intent ?
 
I would love to know what % of Russians still have access to outside media and aren't just getting their updates from Russian state media. I think I'm right in saying many (most?) Russians still use state media as their main information source, however you would assume a significant number of younger Russians have been used to using non Russian media sources and will continue to do so assuming they find a way to connect from a technical perspective.

One thing that is surely frustrating for Putin and his cronies is the fact the world now has access to what's actually going on, usually in real time.
 
Sponsored Links
Report from
John Simpson on the Russian Finnish border

russians leaving Russia ???
 
transam said:
are always referred to as “defensive “

never offensive ??

anti tank missiles
Anti air craft missiles
Click to expand...

I believe the idea is that if you're sitting in your garden in your own country, and an invader from a foreign couyntry drives his tank over your lawn, threatening you with his cannon, you are defending yourself.

If however you drive your own tank, and invade some other foreign country, and blow up their homes, that is offensive.
 
transam said:
Question ?
Click to expand...
Words really and mostly tanks have been mentioned. Rather strange really as they don't figure that much in modern wars. Russia used them extensively in WWII. To shield troops and get over trenches. Also damaging building - better ways of doing that if needed these days.

Stingers can be used against things that fly but anti aircraft missiles are better for those. BBC found one that had been neatly decapitated by the Russians along with it's convoy.

Helicopters can fire all sorts and get from A to B pretty quickly but are easier to shoot down but can domineer in a number of situations.

Shells and missiles can be used from far away.

Achieving air domination. I doubt if that is any different now than it was in WWII when aircraft are available. There will be losses so out produce the enemy. These days missiles probably figure as well. They need somewhere to take off and land. Generally they can't operate for all that long a period especially in action. Weapon loads go pretty quickly too. Long range bombers etc are different and drop tanks can be used to extend fighter ranges. They can only carry so much load. So forget NATO complications the basic idea still sounds implausible to me. Ukraine would need fuel and support kit or they would have to fly out of NATO bases and losses could be pretty horrific.
 
One of my contacts told me something very similar to this a few days ago when we were having a chat on the phone but others hvave different ideas but it is possible - so as one snake is beheaded another takes its place :( :(

Quote from link below
Ex-FSB chief Patrushev - the security council's main puppet master – is thought to have convinced Putin, 69, that Ukraine is awash with Nazis, many believe. He is also angling for his son Anton Patrushev, 44, now Agriculture Minister, to be Putin's eventual successor, it is claimed.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...utin-invasion-plans-unprepared-sanctions.html
 
Would Putin use chemical weapons ?

blame it on the Ukrainians ?

and use it as an excuse to ratchet up the offensive to say air bombs ?

Syria tactic ???
 
transam said:
Would Putin use chemical weapons ?

blame it on the Ukrainians ?

and use it as an excuse to ratchet up the offensive to say air bombs ?

Syria tactic ???
Click to expand...

Equally applies to the other side.

This is why I worry about the easily led in the west as well - EG, WMD, most of the UK fell for it inc me.


What Israel did to the Americans in order to get them to help them

https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/but-sir-its-an-american-ship-never-mind-hit-her-1.5492908

FYI, I'm 100% behind the IDF's "self-defence " attacks in recent years

Thanks
 
ajohn said:
Stingers can be used against things that fly but anti aircraft missiles are better for those.
Click to expand...

Stingers are anti aircraft missiles, and very effective too. In this kind of war (more or less an insurgent defence) they are far more flexible than fixed-base or heavy mobile batteries. The latter two have an active radar detection and aquisition setup, and can be easily jammed. Stinger is highly mobile and man-portable, and requires literally, an hour's training. Half that if a soldier is LAWS trained.
 
transam said:
Syria tactic ???
Click to expand...

Syria turned into a right old mess. The west backed the opposition. All great until they found that the opposition contained more than one group including IS types and said whoops so just backed the group they liked. That resulted in that group having to fight Assad and IS. No chance. Net effect various forms of bombing all over the country and a right mess in need of a lot of reconstruction that so far isn't happening. No money.

Trump sent some cruisers in following the 2nd use of chemicals and then stopped. There is some conjecture about if that attack was real or not. Actually some C4 footage made me wonder. It seemed to be a gas attack.

The early use was what caused the west to go in.

Curiously following some AlJ news today there was a long discussion about Syria that featured many of the countries that were involved and what they tried to do at various stages even before chemicals.
 
The Humanitarian said:
Skim through the rubbish we've been fed and then the last two short paragraphs - thanks to the Guardian for posting the true facts.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/03/ukraine-russia-fake-attack-video-us-claims

See below the three short paragraphs I am referring to, just what I have been thinking for a while.

On Thursday, Maliar told the Guardian she had checked that claim with Ukrainian intelligence agencies, which had their own sources.

“It simply wasn’t true. We found no information to back this up, we did not see any blood supplies moved to the front or even in the civilian hospitals around the front,” she said, in an interview at a military airfield at Boryspil, outside Kyiv.

“It’s really important to look at the sources. These sources were anonymous, and I don’t think it’s right to use anonymous sources that cannot be checked,” she said.


============
There you have it - for weeks the west/usa chatting about false flag attacks are "imminent" and went as far as removing some people from the USA ad uk embassies

Click to expand...

from your Russian source may be :idea:
 
The Humanitarian said:
As expected, our MP's and ministers went on their long weekend break from noon today and many as from last night. I, therefore, anticipate better outcomes via negotiations.

I've told Boris to send that Truss on hols to sone small island where there is no internet/phone connections as we will all be the better for it.
Click to expand...
maybe you could join her .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top