Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

[TheReligion]

Forgive me if it's been mentioned already, but that massive convoy heading to Kiev, why has it not been bombed already? Drones, ground missiles, surely all those are options? If they're not, why aren't NATO countries sending over those weapons? Surely it's far better to destroy it on route than to allow it to reach Kyiv and cause mayhem there.

Yes, why not please?

I imagine because Ukraine has no air superiority and are using its weapons elsewhere, potentially strengthening the west of the country

 

[Needham]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[pratyush_utd]

Your post literally excused Putin's actions and placed the blame for the conflict at NATO's door.

To my mind 'not caring less' about a country does not imply objectivity either so I'm not really sure where you're going there.

How should NATO back off and how would it end the conflict peacefully while ensuring Ukrainian sovereignty remains intact?

No it didn't. It was just my assessment of why Russia invaded Ukraine. It placed the blame on both Russia and NATO. NATO eastward expansion is always going to be met with strong Russian resistance. So NATO is partly responsible for Ukraine current predicament. Flirting with Ukraine and then letting it hang dry. Putin is a maniac and ruthless dictator, who reacted in the way everyone thought he would. Russia security concern are not figment of imagination either.

When US bombed Iraq and Afghanistan, did NATO really cared about their sovereign status? Or when Obama was using drones to target "terrorist" inside other countries? Western countries are in no position to lecture anyone on sovereign issues. Point is there is no side which is blameless in this conflict. Only victims who are innocent Ukrainian civilians.

 

[Massive Spanner]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

The damage will cost billions to repair. I'm sure the US and EU will help but hopefully after all this is over Russia will have to fork up.

 

[Buster15]

Forgive me if it's been mentioned already, but that massive convoy heading to Kiev, why has it not been bombed already? Drones, ground missiles, surely all those are options? If they're not, why aren't NATO countries sending over those weapons? Surely it's far better to destroy it on route than to allow it to reach Kyiv and cause mayhem there.

And I have been mentioning that very thing.
I can only assume that if they could, then they would have done. Because it is an obvious target.

 

[Rightnr]

No it didn't. It was just my assessment of why Russia invaded Ukraine. It placed the blame on both Russia and NATO. NATO eastward expansion is always going to be met with strong Russian resistance. So NATO is partly responsible for Ukraine current predicament. Flirting with Ukraine and then letting it hang dry. Putin is a maniac and ruthless dictator, who reacted in the way everyone thought he would. Russia security concern are not figment of imagination either.

When US bombed Iraq and Afghanistan, did NATO really cared about their sovereign status? Or when Obama was using drones to target "terrorist" inside other countries? Western countries are in no position to lecture anyone on sovereign issues. Point is there is no side which is blameless in this conflict. Only victims who are innocent Ukrainian civilians.

There we go again.

The reason the US can 'pull' countries towards it is the despicable crook in the Kremlin. You and other foreign policy experts on here talking about Putin spitting his dummy just want to retain the status quo because Putin sells weapons to India or some nonsense like that.

Which might be fair enough if you don't care for the consequences of your tacit approval of Russia's actions but let's not fecking pretend. A similar case can also be made for Israel and the US but that's for another day.

 

[Beachryan]

No it didn't. It was just my assessment of why Russia invaded Ukraine. It placed the blame on both Russia and NATO. NATO eastward expansion is always going to be met with strong Russian resistance. So NATO is partly responsible for Ukraine current predicament. Flirting with Ukraine and then letting it hang dry. Putin is a maniac and ruthless dictator, who reacted in the way everyone thought he would. Russia security concern are not figment of imagination either.

When US bombed Iraq and Afghanistan, did NATO really cared about their sovereign status? Or when Obama was using drones to target "terrorist" inside other countries? Western countries are in no position to lecture anyone on sovereign issues. Point is there is no side which is blameless in this conflict. Only victims who are innocent Ukrainian civilians.

Strong both sidesing here, good internet point scoring.

This probably the easiest historical blame game in, erm, history. One man is at fault. A single, aging egomaniac.

Your argument is like a rape apologist saying she shouldn't have worn a short skirt.

 

[spiriticon]

No it didn't. It was just my assessment of why Russia invaded Ukraine. It placed the blame on both Russia and NATO. NATO eastward expansion is always going to be met with strong Russian resistance. So NATO is partly responsible for Ukraine current predicament. Flirting with Ukraine and then letting it hang dry. Putin is a maniac and ruthless dictator, who reacted in the way everyone thought he would. Russia security concern are not figment of imagination either.

When US bombed Iraq and Afghanistan, did NATO really cared about their sovereign status? Or when Obama was using drones to target "terrorist" inside other countries? Western countries are in no position to lecture anyone on sovereign issues. Point is there is no side which is blameless in this conflict. Only victims who are innocent Ukrainian civilians.

The first one to get violent gets the blame.

It was the US/UK in 2003, it is Russia now.

 

[Buster15]

Probably several reasons for it. The convoy is protected by anti-air weapons, the Ukrainians don't have the capability to destroy it, the Ukrainians might think it's a waste of their capabilities to attack the convoy and they're reserving it for other locations.

May be protected by AA weapons. But not from ground attacks during the night by guerilla type methods.

 

[Kostov]

The damage will cost billions to repair. I'm sure the US and EU will help but hopefully after all this is over Russia will have to fork up.

Roads and buildings will be repaired, but those are people homes, whole lifetimes, savings and memories. And that kind of destruction I can't even imagine the human losses and trauma for those who get through it.

 

[Water Melon]

Probably several reasons for it. The convoy is protected by anti-air weapons, the Ukrainians don't have the capability to destroy it, the Ukrainians might think it's a waste of their capabilities to attack the convoy and they're reserving it for other locations.

Yep the convoy is protected. What is the range of Bayraktars?

 

[11101]

Forgive me if it's been mentioned already, but that massive convoy heading to Kiev, why has it not been bombed already? Drones, ground missiles, surely all those are options? If they're not, why aren't NATO countries sending over those weapons? Surely it's far better to destroy it on route than to allow it to reach Kyiv and cause mayhem there.

Most likely it's not an immediate threat. They're too tied up trying to keep Russians out of their cities to go on a tangent like that.

 

[BlackShark_80]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Withnail]

No it didn't. It was just my assessment of why Russia invaded Ukraine. It placed the blame on both Russia and NATO. NATO eastward expansion is always going to be met with strong Russian resistance. So NATO is partly responsible for Ukraine current predicament. Flirting with Ukraine and then letting it hang dry. Putin is a maniac and ruthless dictator, who reacted in the way everyone thought he would. Russia security concern are not figment of imagination either.

When US bombed Iraq and Afghanistan, did NATO really cared about their sovereign status? Or when Obama was using drones to target "terrorist" inside other countries? Western countries are in no position to lecture anyone on sovereign issues. Point is there is no side which is blameless in this conflict. Only victims who are innocent Ukrainian civilians.

Well, I blame the country that invaded another. I have very little time for invasions, indiscriminate bombing or drone strikes so you can leave the whataboutery there. The use of the term flirting in this context is also quite ridiculous. Countries are allowed to ally themselves any way they wish and have free will to enter agreements with others and shouldn't have to worry about being invaded over it.

Are you trying to say that Ukraine pursuing its autonomous goals by holding talks with NATO is just as culpable as Russia in this conflict? If I had Putin on my doorstep I'd join NATO in a second.

 

[The Corinthian]

I been a pos to assholes in this thread. Anyone I have assaulted has deserved it. I don't give a shit anymore. Redcafe is a terrible place nowadays. The fact that you were best newbie promoted is a testament to it. The mods let anyone spread any lies and anti-vax bs and conspiracy theories as much as possible. They let hansifickmich troll the United forum. They let Russian trolls spread their bs, heck one of the mods is a russian troll pos.

There is nothing good about redcafe anymore after SteveJ and Olly have left and Hectic taking a break, mockney or brwned not writing much. I don't give a shit if I am banned. If I see an asshole in this thread I will call them out if I want to.

Honestly, I don’t give a shit.

If you’re this upset about it, can I suggest you log off and do something else with your time.

 

[Ananke]

Your argument is like a rape apologist saying she shouldn't have worn a short skirt.

"She was pointing at me saying I was going to rape her, she even called the police. Pretty much forced me to act"

 

[BarstoolProphet]

Who’s still left there? Some fast food franchises?

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Wow, that would never had happened if Ingvar Kamprad was still in charge.

 

[stevoc]

No it didn't. It was just my assessment of why Russia invaded Ukraine. It placed the blame on both Russia and NATO. NATO eastward expansion is always going to be met with strong Russian resistance. So NATO is partly responsible for Ukraine current predicament. Flirting with Ukraine and then letting it hang dry. Putin is a maniac and ruthless dictator, who reacted in the way everyone thought he would. Russia security concern are not figment of imagination either.

When US bombed Iraq and Afghanistan, did NATO really cared about their sovereign status? Or when Obama was using drones to target "terrorist" inside other countries? Western countries are in no position to lecture anyone on sovereign issues. Point is there is no side which is blameless in this conflict. Only victims who are innocent Ukrainian civilians.

You realize countries ask to join NATO, no one is forced to join?

NATO only expands as a result of countries wanting to join because they are wary of Russian aggression. What is NATO supposed to tell countries close to Russia asking to join: ''No you can't join our mutual defence alliance to counter Russian aggression and deter invasion, it might upset and offend the Russians.'' ?

 

[sglowrider]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Water Melon]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

With all the assests that oligarchs have in UK and intelligence data at the disposal of the government, they still can not build up cases against them? Maybe they do not really want to?

 

[tomaldinho1]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

The insane thing about this is let’s just assume there is an entire neo-Nazi brigade in Azov and 100% believe the arussian propaganda (ignoring the fact the ‘evidence’ seems to be of a small group of right wing soldiers rather than an entire battalion). How in any way does that support a full scale invasion of Ukraine??

 

[Withnail]

Honestly, I don’t give a shit.

If you’re this upset about it, can I suggest you log off and do something else with your time.

Looks like they got themselves banned anyway.

 

[Wibble]

Looks like they got themselves banned anyway.

Temporarily to cool off.

 

[Ayoba]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

As unlikey as it is, I hope to god there is some sort of movement for any peace settlement! please god!

 

[FireballXL5]

With all the assests that oligarchs have in UK and intelligence data at the disposal of the government, they still can not build up cases against them? Maybe they do not really want to?

Kom-pro-mat.

 

[Rightnr]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This is why when I said laws and controls in the UK apply to normal people only, it was no joke. For anyone paying attention, you know what I'm talking about.

Separately, I just listened to Lavrov talking about Western partners coming to their senses. Is it a change of tone or is it just the typical abuser dichotomy of abusing and then saying, we should compromise.

 

[tomaldinho1]

No it didn't. It was just my assessment of why Russia invaded Ukraine. It placed the blame on both Russia and NATO. NATO eastward expansion is always going to be met with strong Russian resistance. So NATO is partly responsible for Ukraine current predicament. Flirting with Ukraine and then letting it hang dry. Putin is a maniac and ruthless dictator, who reacted in the way everyone thought he would. Russia security concern are not figment of imagination either.

When US bombed Iraq and Afghanistan, did NATO really cared about their sovereign status? Or when Obama was using drones to target "terrorist" inside other countries? Western countries are in no position to lecture anyone on sovereign issues. Point is there is no side which is blameless in this conflict. Only victims who are innocent Ukrainian civilians.

I’ve seen people say this but why should it? It’s just a line that’s been pedalled and no one questions.

If you are a former Soviet country and grew up knowing the history you’d had under Russian rule and another country offers you an option that you think is better, you’re essentially saying they shouldn’t get to decide as it might anger Russia? This goes for anywhere in the world and is part of being a free society.

We all know what happened in Iraq was wrong, if anything it makes it that much more obvious that what is happening in Ukraine is wrong. It’s 2022, we should all know better as a species by now.

 

[BluesJr]

I’ve seen people say this but why should it? It’s just a line that’s been pedalled and no one questions.

If you are a former Soviet country and grew up knowing the history you’d had under Russian rule and another country offers you an option that you think is better, you’re essentially saying they shouldn’t get to decide as it might anger Russia? This goes for anywhere in the world and is part of being a free society.

We all know what happened in Iraq was wrong, if anything it makes it that much more obvious that what is happening in Ukraine is wrong. It’s 2022, we should all know better as a species by now.

From Russia’s perspective they don’t want that eastward expansion as future peace can never be guaranteed. The political landscape 50/100 years from now is impossible to imagine.

 

[Frosty]

This is it - our resistance is labelled as terrorists.

The other day the Sky News was doing a bit showing how Ukrainian resistance is making molotov cocktails, they were sharing the whole recipe and the process. Meanwhile when i was at Uni, i heard about a foreign student who was doing a PhD related to terrorism who was deported for downloading a manual freely available from the fBI website as part of his research.

A Ukrainian suicide bomber the other day was described as valiant. What he did, was indeed valiant, but its very odd to hear it described as such on TV.

Sorry for the late reply.

I think you are referring to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nottingham_Two

The student didn't get deported in the end, thanks to some tireless campaigning, but the Wiki description shows how other people suffered from the UK state's inability to distinguish terrorist material from an FBI manual.

 

[Frosty]

FOR UK VOTERS ONLY:

Please consider signing this petition: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/609530

Waive visa requirement for Ukrainian refugees

 

[choccy77]

I imagine because Ukraine has no air superiority and are using its weapons elsewhere, potentially strengthening the west of the country

Yes and they have no military drones left at present.

Currently waiting for new ones to arrive from Turkey.

 

[choccy77]

FOR UK VOTERS ONLY:

Please consider signing this petition: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/609530

Waive visa requirement for Ukrainian refugees

Signed other day already.

I'd be surprised if its not already reached 100k sigs

 

[Siorac]

If you are a former Soviet country and grew up knowing the history you’d had under Russian rule and another country offers you an option that you think is better, you’re essentially saying they shouldn’t get to decide as it might anger Russia?

That is exactly what they are saying, yes.

 

[sun_tzu]

I’ve seen people say this but why should it? It’s just a line that’s been pedalled and no one questions.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/exposing-the-myth-of-western-betrayal-of-russia/

Contentious but both sides seem to have a different interpretation of the treaty and regardless of the facts that's been the narrative for about 30 years now

 

[Mihai]

Signed other day already.

I'd be surprised if its not already reached 100k sigs

107k now

 

[Frosty]

Signed other day already.

I'd be surprised if its not already reached 100k sigs

107k and counting. Thank you!

 

[tomaldinho1]

From Russia’s perspective they don’t want that eastward expansion as future peace can never be guaranteed. The political landscape 50/100 years from now is impossible to imagine.

That’s not my question, I understand the political side but, again, why are people using it as fact as if it somehow justifies Russia’s actions. (See the post I replied). It’d be like if Europe bombed the UK after Brexit and people were like ‘oh but there’s actually two sides to this…’

Ukriane should be free to join whatever it wants, BRIC, NATO, Russia or just do it’s own thing without the threat of a bloody invasion.

 

[fergieisold]

FOR UK VOTERS ONLY:

Please consider signing this petition: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/609530

Waive visa requirement for Ukrainian refugees

What's the deal with visas? Shouldn't we very quickly just be issuing them to Ukranians?

 

[tomaldinho1]

That is exactly what they are saying, yes.

Therefore Russia is justified and we should let them crack on!

 

[Rightnr]

Therefore Russia is justified and we should let them crack on!

But Putin might be annoyed, you don't understand.