Ukraine

[drfchound]

Here's a question.

Why on earth WOULD Ukraine spend time and effort and resources killing Prigozhin?

Media good feeling. They hate him. Much propaganda about him instructing troops not to take prisoners ie shoot them. Some truth in that maybe, but Ukraine milked it, so gonna be good to kill him. Obviously.

Mmm. It all sounds a bit desperate doesn't it BRR?

What is it about the regime of Putin you admire?

It's simple school playground level politics of the Far Left. Putin is against the EU and America. Therefore he shouldn't be strongly criticised.

It's "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" stuff. Allows them to conveniently ignore what a monster Putin is.

Corbyn's lot had a similar approach. When Assad gassed Syrians and Putin flattened Aleppo, the line from Corbyn's advisers was "Don't overplay this because it will take attention off the crimes of the West."

Absolutely idiotic, but the Far Left has been shot through with this stupidity for a century.

BST, this is a genuine question as you have regularly berated Corbyn in recent times.
If he was so bad, why did you campaign for him and vote so that he would become PM had Labour won the GE.

[Bristol Red Rover]

Here's a question.

Why on earth WOULD Ukraine spend time and effort and resources killing Prigozhin?

Media good feeling. They hate him. Much propaganda about him instructing troops not to take prisoners ie shoot them. Some truth in that maybe, but Ukraine milked it, so gonna be good to kill him. Obviously.

Mmm. It all sounds a bit desperate doesn't it BRR?

What is it about the regime of Putin you admire?

Don't admire Putin, except noted he has been a very effective leader/figurehead over a long time. I admire how Russia has in the main not rolled over to the western elites, nor China.

Anyway, explain what you mean by desperate?

[Bristol Red Rover]

Here's a question.

Why on earth WOULD Ukraine spend time and effort and resources killing Prigozhin?

Media good feeling. They hate him. Much propaganda about him instructing troops not to take prisoners ie shoot them. Some truth in that maybe, but Ukraine milked it, so gonna be good to kill him. Obviously.

Mmm. It all sounds a bit desperate doesn't it BRR?

What is it about the regime of Putin you admire?

I've got a sneaky feeling it's when he rides around bare chested and bare back riding a horse

Shhhhh, baby boy.

[Bristol Red Rover]

Here's a question.

Why on earth WOULD Ukraine spend time and effort and resources killing Prigozhin?

Media good feeling. They hate him. Much propaganda about him instructing troops not to take prisoners ie shoot them. Some truth in that maybe, but Ukraine milked it, so gonna be good to kill him. Obviously.

Mmm. It all sounds a bit desperate doesn't it BRR?

What is it about the regime of Putin you admire?

It's simple school playground level politics of the Far Left. Putin is against the EU and America. Therefore he shouldn't be strongly criticised.

It's "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" stuff. Allows them to conveniently ignore what a monster Putin is.

Corbyn's lot had a similar approach. When Assad gassed Syrians and Putin flattened Aleppo, the line from Corbyn's advisers was "Don't overplay this because it will take attention off the crimes of the West."

Absolutely idiotic, but the Far Left has been shot through with this stupidity for a century.

Lots of generalising there from BST, someone who conveniently takes one side of an argument, sticks religiously to it, and ignores anything contrary to his dictate. He even consistently espouses the virtues of one sided, blinkered, "understanding",  shooting down those who have other perspectives, and frequently being insulting, even potty mouthed in the process. He uses cherry picked "evidence" in a fashionable way, again shooting down rather than considering other evidence. He'll also disappear when the going gets tough. I wonder where he'd be on the scale of grounded considered compassion to controlling psychopath? Each to their own I suppose.

[i_ateallthepies]

Quote: "someone who conveniently takes one side of an argument, sticks religiously to it, and ignores anything contrary to his dictate"

Can you think of any other frequent poster on this thread BRR, who does the above?

[Bristol Red Rover]

Quote: "someone who conveniently takes one side of an argument, sticks religiously to it, and ignores anything contrary to his dictate"

Can you think of any other frequent poster on this thread BRR, who does the above?

Are you agreeing with what I said with BST?

I'm always interested in all angles, and have been stating the ones that tend not to be on the side of the one sided western media narrative for balance.

As a very obvious example, many here referred to Russia running out of ammo from the early days, over a year ago, as per the Western media narrative/propaganda - that hasn't happened has it? Indeed Ukraine's lack of ammo is more of an issue. Resupplies for Ukraine are cited, but not the crucial detail of them being mainly in the distant future. One reason why the US has escalated things with supplying from its stocks of cluster shells - there wasn't an alternative.

[River Don]

This is quite a good piece on the state of play regarding ammo. Apparently the rate of fire has been falling off for both sides.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2023/04/05/when-will-ammunition-shortage-silence-russias-artillery/?sh=24aa509d6d95

Obviously as a western media source it can't be trusted.

It is thought Russia has been supplied with additional ammo from Iran and North Korea. And since Russia is a dictatorship, Putin can order manufacturers to go into producing ammo for the state.

All this must be pretty ruinous for the Russian economy though.

[Bristol Red Rover]

This is quite a good piece on the state of play regarding ammo. Apparently the rate of fire has been falling off for both sides.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2023/04/05/when-will-ammunition-shortage-silence-russias-artillery/?sh=24aa509d6d95

Obviously as a western media source it can't be trusted.

It is thought Russia has been supplied with additional ammo from Iran and North Korea. And since Russia is a dictatorship, Putin can order manufacturers to go into producing ammo for the state.

All this must be pretty ruinous for the Russian economy though.

Forbes "5 Leopard 2s detroyed, 10 damaged and being repaired"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/08/28/in-13-weeks-ukraine-has-lost-just-five-of-its-71-leopard-2-tanks/

Here, evidence of 35 damaged/destroyed.
https://twitter.com/GeoTrackDK/status/1695752894107041823

[Sprotyrover]

There are 100k Russian troops massed Near Eastern Ukraine, get ready for the Autumn ‘Meat Grinder’

[silent majority]

This is quite a good piece on the state of play regarding ammo. Apparently the rate of fire has been falling off for both sides.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2023/04/05/when-will-ammunition-shortage-silence-russias-artillery/?sh=24aa509d6d95

Obviously as a western media source it can't be trusted.

It is thought Russia has been supplied with additional ammo from Iran and North Korea. And since Russia is a dictatorship, Putin can order manufacturers to go into producing ammo for the state.

All this must be pretty ruinous for the Russian economy though.

Forbes "5 Leopard 2s detroyed, 10 damaged and being repaired"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/08/28/in-13-weeks-ukraine-has-lost-just-five-of-its-71-leopard-2-tanks/

Here, evidence of 35 damaged/destroyed.
https://twitter.com/GeoTrackDK/status/1695752894107041823

I've looked at that a few times now yet still fail to see how that is evidence of 35 damaged or destroyed.

The Ukrainians admit that 5 have been destroyed and another 10 hit but being repaired.

Can you see something that I can't?

[wilts rover]

Quote: "someone who conveniently takes one side of an argument, sticks religiously to it, and ignores anything contrary to his dictate"

Can you think of any other frequent poster on this thread BRR, who does the above?

Are you agreeing with what I said with BST?

I'm always interested in all angles, and have been stating the ones that tend not to be on the side of the one sided western media narrative for balance.

As a very obvious example, many here referred to Russia running out of ammo from the early days, over a year ago, as per the Western media narrative/propaganda - that hasn't happened has it? Indeed Ukraine's lack of ammo is more of an issue. Resupplies for Ukraine are cited, but not the crucial detail of them being mainly in the distant future. One reason why the US has escalated things with supplying from its stocks of cluster shells - there wasn't an alternative.

For balance I provide one side of an argument.

Hmmmm....

[Not Now Kato]

Are Russia getting short of weapons?
 
https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2023/08/54a2f12d1a6e-russia-has-moved-missiles-off-isles-disputed-with-japan-expert.html

[wilts rover]

Russia buying back arms sent to India & Myanmar

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Ukraine-war/Russia-buying-back-arms-parts-exported-to-Myanmar-and-India

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/06/05/russia-buys-back-military-parts-exported-to-asia-a81399

[BillyStubbsTears]

The madness of Pride eh?

The low grade street corner thug in the Kremlin genuinely thought he could give his neighbour a kicking in a few days. When his neighbour smacked him back, his poor, pathetic ego was so hurt he's incapable of doing the sensible thing. So this grinds on, chewing up and spitting out more lives and money. Because the man-child in the Kremlin cannot face losing face. Whatever the cost to his own people.

[Bristol Red Rover]

Quote: "someone who conveniently takes one side of an argument, sticks religiously to it, and ignores anything contrary to his dictate"

Can you think of any other frequent poster on this thread BRR, who does the above?

Are you agreeing with what I said with BST?

I'm always interested in all angles, and have been stating the ones that tend not to be on the side of the one sided western media narrative for balance.

As a very obvious example, many here referred to Russia running out of ammo from the early days, over a year ago, as per the Western media narrative/propaganda - that hasn't happened has it? Indeed Ukraine's lack of ammo is more of an issue. Resupplies for Ukraine are cited, but not the crucial detail of them being mainly in the distant future. One reason why the US has escalated things with supplying from its stocks of cluster shells - there wasn't an alternative.

For balance I provide one side of an argument.

Hmmmm....

I referred to one sode where it was said Russia would run out of shells, missiles etc a year ago (or so), and the obvious is that they haven't. What point are you making?

See also the post re Forbes - I gave the link to tanks destroyed etc. Make your own conclusion, including whether or not Forbes is promoting a misleading pro western perspective or not.

[Bristol Red Rover]

The madness of Pride eh?

The low grade street corner thug in the Kremlin genuinely thought he could give his neighbour a kicking in a few days. When his neighbour smacked him back, his poor, pathetic ego was so hurt he's incapable of doing the sensible thing. So this grinds on, chewing up and spitting out more lives and money. Because the man-child in the Kremlin cannot face losing face. Whatever the cost to his own people.

Such a pathetic weak tabloid narrative that focuses on the man in this instance, not to mention the western powers that were about to encroach on Russias borders.

[Bristol Red Rover]

This is quite a good piece on the state of play regarding ammo. Apparently the rate of fire has been falling off for both sides.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2023/04/05/when-will-ammunition-shortage-silence-russias-artillery/?sh=24aa509d6d95

Obviously as a western media source it can't be trusted.

It is thought Russia has been supplied with additional ammo from Iran and North Korea. And since Russia is a dictatorship, Putin can order manufacturers to go into producing ammo for the state.

All this must be pretty ruinous for the Russian economy though.

Forbes "5 Leopard 2s detroyed, 10 damaged and being repaired"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/08/28/in-13-weeks-ukraine-has-lost-just-five-of-its-71-leopard-2-tanks/

Here, evidence of 35 damaged/destroyed.
https://twitter.com/GeoTrackDK/status/1695752894107041823

I've looked at that a few times now yet still fail to see how that is evidence of 35 damaged or destroyed.

The Ukrainians admit that 5 have been destroyed and another 10 hit but being repaired.

Can you see something that I can't?

Sorry yes, wrong link. The info is in his posts, see from here, scroll down.
https://twitter.com/GeoTrackDK

[idler]

The madness of Pride eh?

The low grade street corner thug in the Kremlin genuinely thought he could give his neighbour a kicking in a few days. When his neighbour smacked him back, his poor, pathetic ego was so hurt he's incapable of doing the sensible thing. So this grinds on, chewing up and spitting out more lives and money. Because the man-child in the Kremlin cannot face losing face. Whatever the cost to his own people.

Such a pathetic weak tabloid narrative that focuses on the man in this instance, not to mention the western powers that were about to encroach on Russias borders.

Could anybody in their right mind think that NATO would ever invade Russia?
The cost in human lives and materials would be prohibitive and the UN would never have backed it happening.

[glosterred]

The madness of Pride eh?

The low grade street corner thug in the Kremlin genuinely thought he could give his neighbour a kicking in a few days. When his neighbour smacked him back, his poor, pathetic ego was so hurt he's incapable of doing the sensible thing. So this grinds on, chewing up and spitting out more lives and money. Because the man-child in the Kremlin cannot face losing face. Whatever the cost to his own people.

Such a pathetic weak tabloid narrative that focuses on the man in this instance, not to mention the western powers that were about to encroach on Russias borders.

Could anybody in their right mind think that NATO would ever invade Russia?
The cost in human lives and materials would be prohibitive and the UN would never have backed it happening.

I know one person on this thread that does!

[BillyStubbsTears]

In the next 50 or 100 years, NATO forces will not set a toe end in Russia.

Claiming that as a casus belli for Putin's thuggish aggression is simply disgusting. It's the result of a mind scrambled by Kremlin propaganda.

[wilts rover]

Quote: "someone who conveniently takes one side of an argument, sticks religiously to it, and ignores anything contrary to his dictate"

Can you think of any other frequent poster on this thread BRR, who does the above?

Are you agreeing with what I said with BST?

I'm always interested in all angles, and have been stating the ones that tend not to be on the side of the one sided western media narrative for balance.

As a very obvious example, many here referred to Russia running out of ammo from the early days, over a year ago, as per the Western media narrative/propaganda - that hasn't happened has it? Indeed Ukraine's lack of ammo is more of an issue. Resupplies for Ukraine are cited, but not the crucial detail of them being mainly in the distant future. One reason why the US has escalated things with supplying from its stocks of cluster shells - there wasn't an alternative.

For balance I provide one side of an argument.

Hmmmm....

I referred to one sode where it was said Russia would run out of shells, missiles etc a year ago (or so), and the obvious is that they haven't. What point are you making?

See also the post re Forbes - I gave the link to tanks destroyed etc. Make your own conclusion, including whether or not Forbes is promoting a misleading pro western perspective or not.

The point I am making is that you are not providing balance in your posts - despite you saying you are providing balance in your posts.

[Bristol Red Rover]

Quote: "someone who conveniently takes one side of an argument, sticks religiously to it, and ignores anything contrary to his dictate"

Can you think of any other frequent poster on this thread BRR, who does the above?

Are you agreeing with what I said with BST?

I'm always interested in all angles, and have been stating the ones that tend not to be on the side of the one sided western media narrative for balance.

As a very obvious example, many here referred to Russia running out of ammo from the early days, over a year ago, as per the Western media narrative/propaganda - that hasn't happened has it? Indeed Ukraine's lack of ammo is more of an issue. Resupplies for Ukraine are cited, but not the crucial detail of them being mainly in the distant future. One reason why the US has escalated things with supplying from its stocks of cluster shells - there wasn't an alternative.

For balance I provide one side of an argument.

Hmmmm....

I referred to one sode where it was said Russia would run out of shells, missiles etc a year ago (or so), and the obvious is that they haven't. What point are you making?

See also the post re Forbes - I gave the link to tanks destroyed etc. Make your own conclusion, including whether or not Forbes is promoting a misleading pro western perspective or not.

The point I am making is that you are not providing balance in your posts - despite you saying you are providing balance in your posts.

Balance in the discusson here.

[Bristol Red Rover]

In the next 50 or 100 years, NATO forces will not set a toe end in Russia.

Claiming that as a casus belli for Putin's thuggish aggression is simply disgusting. It's the result of a mind scrambled by Kremlin propaganda.

The general agreement was for NATO not to go east, they did, Even if you don't believe that agreement matters, having missiles in Ukraine, closer to key strike points is at the very least a threat. I seem too recall something parallel in Cuba?

As for anyone being crazy enough to go that extra mile, we're hanging around that mark now - from both sides. Some Russian generals reported to have suggested a tactical nuke "to save lives" - sound familiar? And there are many in the US who fancy a shot too, some of whom are in power.

To be believing in the sanity of NATO is naiive. More so when you see that it's merely a front for the US. It would be the US with the missiles in Ukraine.

[River Don]

BRR

Do you actually think Putin is actually in anyway a socialist? I must confess, your stance on all this is incomprehensible to me.

[Bristol Red Rover]

BRR

Do you actually think Putin is actually in anyway a socialist? I must confess, your stance on all this is incomprehensible to me.

Interested to hear what you see my stance as?

Putin is pretty much just another leader, heading a country's mafiosa elite. To be clear, Sunak is blatently the same, and I can't think of a leader who isn't.

He's far from a socialist. He is clearly a league or two above most European leaders in ability, nouse, intellect, including our pathetic offerings of recent. I'm not sure the Yank leaders, well the faces we're given, are even in a league. Zelensky is conference south at best, clearly just a manufactured stooge, by the US.

[River Don]

To be honest with you BRR I can't fathom your stance. So you admire Putin? Is that it?

You acknowledge he's a brute but he's a more succesful brute, or a more intelligent brute. And you admire that?

It's quite an impassioned defence of just another mafia Don isn't it?

[River Don]

I've given this sometime and I have to admit BRR, I don't think you're answer really cuts it.

I think there must be something more but you don't feel able to share it. Without a coherent response it's very difficult to understand your point of view.

[Bristol Red Rover]

To be honest with you BRR I can't fathom your stance. So you admire Putin? Is that it?

You acknowledge he's a brute but he's a more succesful brute, or a more intelligent brute. And you admire that?

It's quite an impassioned defence of just another mafia Don isn't it?

No where did I say I admired him. That's in your head. I acknowledge his intellect etc but as I clearly said, and ignored, he's one more mafiosa boss, along with so so many others. He's less of an obvious shallow figurehead for stringpullers than the likes of Biden, Sunak, and especially Zelensky etc. That doesn't make me "admire" him. There's plenty of in your face bullies in this world, they're all scum.

I think that will still leave you lost? Is your stuckness in the place of "if someone isn't buying the glorious Western freedom" or whatever, they must be supporting the enemies that the tabloids, the mass media tell us about daily. "Putin eats babies".

[Bristol Red Rover]

I've given this sometime and I have to admit BRR, I don't think you're answer really cuts it.

I think there must be something more but you don't feel able to share it. Without a coherent response it's very difficult to understand your point of view.

You have to ask a coherent question. Simple.

[River Don]

To be honest with you BRR I can't fathom your stance. So you admire Putin? Is that it?

You acknowledge he's a brute but he's a more succesful brute, or a more intelligent brute. And you admire that?

It's quite an impassioned defence of just another mafia Don isn't it?

No where did I say I admired him. That's in your head. I acknowledge his intellect etc but as I clearly said, and ignored, he's one more mafiosa boss, along with so so many others. He's less of an obvious shallow figurehead for stringpullers than the likes of Biden, Sunak, and especially Zelensky etc. That doesn't make me "admire" him. There's plenty of in your face bullies in this world, they're all scum.

I think that will still leave you lost? Is your stuckness in the place of "if someone isn't buying the glorious Western freedom" or whatever, they must be supporting the enemies that the tabloids, the mass media tell us about daily. "Putin eats babies".

Yeah right.

I'd still rather live in the UK than Russia.

And if there were free elections in Russia tomorrow, I don't doubt for a millisecond they would chuck Putin out.

Here is a simple coherent question. Why would you prefer to live in Russia than the UK?