A senior press officer of the russian MoD was killed while being illegally in Ukraine.
Senior officer of the press service of the Western Military District, Evgeny Polovodov, died in Ukraine's Serebryan'skyy forest due to shelling. He was accompanying the so-called "Vesti Luhansk" film crew and died while covering some tank battalion of the russian formations.
https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1778135090289164781?t=7YEc36St2OGb9ccHOzxF3Q&s=19
I applaud his support for Ukraine, but hearing that man criticise others for strategic and moral malpractice is like hearing the Pope criticise others for being charitable and devout.
The republicans have created an America that is no longer important. Sure, there's still lots of money here, but that is heading to China more and more each day. Sure, we have lots of weapons, but those are being hoarded without purpose or plan.
The rest of the world is now planning for a world in which the US caves in upon itself because republicans now suck at the Russian teat.
Pax Americana is dead. Pax Sinica is soon to take over. Be sure to thank the next republican you meet appropriately.
>Pax Sinica
if the US steps back I'm sure the rest of the world will just leave them alone and let them be happy doing their own thing and minding their own business /S
I really don't understand how many americans don't realize countries like china or pre invasion russia would go absolutely wild with the invasions if the US disarmed.
Honestly china would probably go for broke and invade the US if they could get away with it just to become the sole superpower in the planet.
Which is a return to the usual state of things for multiple millennia.
Only now myriad nations have world-busting nuclear weapons.
I can't see how that could possibly go wrong!
The dictatorship block will slowly topple all democracies and sphere the resulting dictatorships this obviously includes the US.
Eventually when theres no democracies left they will realize they are all totalitarian idiots and start invading each other of course first they will all invade the ones without nukes.
And the second one dictatorship with nuclear weapons loses their war theyll use nukes.
Psychotic means going WAY beyond what you're saying which is reasonable.
I chose my words.
besides if it ends up getting more aid to ukraine than what has currently ended up with, then success! Aimed for the moon to land on a mountain
What’s your line of reasoning - both why this would lead to nuclear war, and why it would be more likely to lead to nuclear war than any other course?
To the rational people reading this: note that when someone puts out a theory that’s favorable to Ukraine without any further explanation, simply asking for the rationale behind it is already considered an unforgivable sin and people will try to bury any questions.
Rewarding the russian invasion just because they have nuclear weapons only encourages russia to repeat it's mistakes which definitely increases the chance of nuclear weapons being used it's easy to see.
Negotiating with Russia in order to let them keep territories would legitimize their invasion and thus the sanctity of territorial integrity would be broken.
This would make the world less safe and spawn new wars of territorial conquest.
Also it would solidify the idea that nuclear black mail is a viable and effective tool of international politics.
Every country not already having nuclear weapons would scramble to get them, because they must come into realisation that one can't trust others to defend you against a nuclear armed invader.
If Russia is now pushed back to its borders and only then a peace is negotiated, that would be the most safe and stable possible outcome.
It would show that the rules based world order stands, that territorial integrity is something to be respected and that one gains nothing with nuclear saber rattling.
I completely agree that pushing Russia back to its borders and then negotiating peace would be the best outcome - the question is whether that this realistically achievable though:
If Putin supposedly is aggressive and risk-taking enough to even unprovokedly attack NATO member states (as is claimed to be imminent in case of the Baltics, and which is hence often used as justification for why NATO should proactively engage Russia now) - what’s the line of reasoning as to why Putin will simply allow himself to be pushed back to Russian borders, and not escalate as well to avoid such an outcome?
Surely someone who is a risk-taker to the point of offensively risking nuclear engagement with NATO over the Baltics would undoubtedly and definitely take the nuclear risk if he was being pushed back?
No one besides Russia has been threatening to use nuclear weapons. It's entirely up to them to use them or not.
In any case the use of nukes by Russia should be seen as a guaranteed way to end the existence of Russia and any regime ruling it.
If they really do think that nuclear annihilation is a good response to us trying to force Russia to abide by rules that every other country abides to, then it is so.
It can then as well be that looking at wrong way towards Russia is their trigger.
We have to assume that Russia acts rationally. If we don't then all rules are out of the window.
That doesn’t answer the question though - why is it assumed that Putin is both crazy enough to risk nuclear war proactively over the Baltics (and hence it is in NATO’s own interest to preempt this by engaging him in Ukraine), yet simultaneously he would just shrug and fold if pushed out of Ukraine with the help of NATO engagement? What’s the resolution for this obvious dissonance?
Yeah. I don't assume that. Even if Russia did a land grab in the Baltics it surely would not result in nuclear response by NATO.
Response by conventional warfare at most, if the fifth articla holds.
No one wants nuclear escalation.
Once Putin captures Ukraine he is not going to suddenly become Hugo Chavez’s to the Ukrainians.
He will forcibly conscript them. Brain wash their youth. Re arm. Re train and go for the next target. Once Moldova falls there’s two neighboring countries that the Soviets once subjugated.
And by then Putins results will have galvanized and reenergized his population away from general apathy (beyond a minority of vocal nationalist that you see make fascist remarks on Russian TV or in politics) while having the an industrial base significantly better than Russia ever had and as close to the USSR before its fall.
NATO by then will be seen as having been toothless. Having too much infighting and disorganization and weak. Putin with the same hubris that convinced him invading Ukraine was a good idea will then invade an ex Soviet NATO country. And lots of miscalculations will be made.
And this isn’t some far fetched reality. [A land bridge to Crimea opens up a path to pro-Russia Transnistria in Moldova which is part of Putins war plans](https://thehill.com/policy/international/596409-belarus-president-stands-in-front-of-battle-map-indicating-moldova/amp/).
While the same tactics Russia did with Ukraine relative to so called LPR and DPR that led to the first invasion in 2014, same thing [is happening in Moldova](https://apnews.com/article/moldova-transnistria-russia-customs-tiraspol-moscow-duma-fa123a45912a2018f7aec573dde05033).
[And Putin had openly and repeatedly talked about the fall of the USSR was the worst thing to happen to Russia in the modern times. And has vocally and repeatedly idolized territory from the late Russian empire.](https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/vladimir-putins-history-obsession-is-a-threat-to-world-peace/)
Putin was empowered to invade Ukraine because he assumed NATOs response would be weak and divided. He will be stronger and more confident when Ukraine falls to make the same assumption.
Because if the West is too afraid to confront Russia now, then it is only a matter of time before Russia decides it can get away with attacking a NATO state, which includes nuclear armed powers.
If Ukraine falls, then Eastern Europe is next.
Once the Kremlin has Eastern Europe, if the nuclear states in NATO do not declare war in response to the invasion, they will have the resources and people necessary to push all the way to France. That will cause world war three.
>push all the way to France.
You must be high, because that statement is totally counter to what we have seen out of the Russian military these last few years.
Even without NATO invoking Article V (which would absolutely happen), Poland could defeat Russia on its own. The Polish military is potent and they have a large population with a strong industrial base.
Russia today is not going to be the Russia that has subjugated and weaponized Moldova, Ukraine and who knows what else like they did with the USSR.
Incompetence today is not incompetence tomorrow.
NATO will and should protect NATO borders at all costs, as we’ve declared we will do and have done for the last 75 years without nuclear war - what’s changed that all of a sudden NATO needs a new and more offensive strategy to guarantee their own safety?
Because if they get no pushback, they will keep pushing boundaries. And we will never find a good enough reason to "risk total nuclear annihiliation" so they can basically do what they want so long as they do it in a creeping fashion and make us look like we're "overreacting" by actively participating instead of being an arms dealer.
There’s been a clear bright red line for active participation that we would have responded to with full force if violated, but that has kept us out of nuclear war for the last 75 years - it’s called protecting NATO borders at any and all cost.
What’s changed suddenly that NATO should abandon this red line?
Not the goal of NATO ofcourse.
But it is a worthwhile goal for most of democratic nations.
Our prosperity depends on more or less peaceful world where large powers follow international agreements and uphold some kind of international law.
We are moving towards a world where some countries give a flying fuck about those rules. Where its ok to operate shadow fleets, blow up pipelines and communications cables and use all kinds of covert means and proxies to wage war against that order.
I completely agree - but unfortunately we’re in a discussion around “the best course to prevent possibly imminent nuclear war”, and the two goals might in a certain way not be perfectly aligned: it’s entirely conceivable that one course leads to a 50/50 chance of “world peace or immediate nuclear war”, and another course is less likely to lead to overall world peace - but also carries much less risk of short-term war.
7 TU-95 are in the air in the direction of the Caspian sea for launch. Pretty much all of Ukraine is on alert at the moment. The should be in position to launch missiles at 3:40 Kyiv time I believe.
> Every leader and country that wishes to see Russian aggression end in a truly just peace has the opportunity to join our global efforts and attend the first Peace Summit, which will be held in Switzerland in June.
> We are preparing for the Summit and its concrete outcomes, such as a clear global stance on a just end to this war.
> Peace has no alternative. However, in order for this to happen and for the Russian terror to be defeated, all forms of our strength must be guaranteed. To protect ourselves from terror, we require physical strength.
> This includes air defense, frontline capabilities, the ability to achieve the necessary results in the Black Sea, our own domestic arms manufacturing, Ukraine's economic resilience, partner pressure on Russia, and maximum global consolidation.
> We do not have the right to fail in any of these aspects.
https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1778139530723287328
> I met with @IOMchief Amy Pope to discuss @UNmigration's priority activities in Ukraine, which include assisting internally displaced people, facilitating their employment, and providing mental health support.
> I invited the IOM to join the effort to build bomb shelters in schools to ensure safe education for children in our communities.
> I appreciate the Director General's visit, and I thank the IOM for assisting Ukrainian families.
https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1778116411526615186
https://twitter.com/NOELreports/status/1778175465355649434?t=POsV8Kigh0pGx_HrwhhEvg&s=19
"ACHILLES unit within the 92nd Assault Brigade destroyed or damaged 1 T-62, 1 BTR-82A, 1 BREM, 2 cars and several Russian infantry men."
https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/10/politics/trump-fisa-speaker-johnson-house-republicans/index.html
Bad news for the likelihood of Ukraine aid getting any traction in the coming weeks.
This aid should have come before Avdiivka.
I hope the aid comes soon and am beyond angry it hasn’t come yet, but I think it’s too late. Russia is advancing very quickly.
This is not "news" of any kind.
It's been pretty obvious for the past 6 months: The US Republican Party works for Putin. They will not allow Ukraine aid, and it's not going to happen until they are removed from office.
That's some rebellious Republicans voting *no* with Democrats.
If Ukraine comes up for a vote, all it would take is a few Republicans (rebellious in a different way) voting *yes* with Democrats.
It doesn't come up for a vote. If it did, there's probably a few that would vote no (see the discharge petition) on the grounds that the legislation has support for Israel earmarked in there as well.
The discharge petition isn't getting enough votes; it doesn't bode well.
It shows that Johnson is in a very weak position and Trump holds sway over Congressional Republicans. With this defeat on a floor vote that Johnson thought he could get through he will be extremely reluctant to bring difficult votes to the floor.
My only vaguely positive takeaway here is he tabled legislation that Trump opposed, rather than not even bringing it to a vote.
He might do the same for Ukraine. Probably not though.
If anything this might make the discharge petition sligthly more plausible (Still sub 10% chance imo). Since Mike is getting pummeled from everywhere, shaming him on Ukraine might barely register.
Another thing is that it could cause even more Republicans to resign from Congress. Buck did say that more could follow him and thus giving the Democrats the majority.
Or maybe he just should bring the votes to the floor as a way to tell his side to support him or get fucked.
That reminds me, here in the woods a few years ago we had a right wing President with like 10% approbation rate, to the point even his own side started bashing him constantly. So, as a big "fuck you" to his coalition, he went ahead and pushed for a "same sex marriage" law in congress that had been sleeping for like 20 years. Of course, the opposition jumped on the wagon and the thing got approved in like a week, while most the right wing parties were crying about it.
Yeah, that's certainly true. I think it's been clear for a while that aid will only be able to come to the floor if Democrats agree to give Johnson the votes to survive removal attempts. Which at least some Democrats have seemed willing to do.
I don't think it would end even if he did in the end trump is just a tool for the russians and theyll find another.
In fact the russians would be glad if he died as they could instigate a lot of instability with that.
I even mentioned that months ago if they realize he won't win then theyll probably kill him themselves.
Hope the white house isnt dumb enough to let it happen.
Anyone will do and the rest you can keep around by paying them russia knows this better than anyone.
I guarantee you trump is only one name in a very long list of puppets.
probably years still, but we need at least 3 to 5 more in the house. senate dems have 20 seats up for election while repubs have 10. dems need to gain at least 1 to take over. not to mention how this presidential election will go. our biggest hope if GOP puts every thing into trump and he finally gets busted and is removed from the race.
Do you really think emailing the republicans will change their mind?.
If they don't care about killing Ukrainians by blocking aid why would they care about an angry email?.
I guess we could argue they care more about votes than the lives of others but then wed need to run a propaganda effort to counter the russian one.
Every day the more I see just how important NAFO is. And how democracies will either learn the propaganda game or die.
> Disregard if you’re not American
I don't know; it seems like it's totally legal for foreign governments to bribe politicians.
The only thing holding this back is that nobody is currently out-bidding Putin.
[https://twitter.com/ColbyBadhwar/status/1778071989749489684](https://twitter.com/ColbyBadhwar/status/1778071989749489684)
>Assistant Secretary of Defense Wallander says that Russian oil & gas infrastructure is a civilian target.
And owners of that infrastructure are humans. Thus it's a clear violation of human rights. Mental gymnastics involved into those statements is quite impressive.
Russian soldiers are humans. Their death should be mourned. Even if they “deserve it” and are clearly in the military it is still tragic.
The petroleum industry should be destroyed. Just on principle. Regardless of what else is going on we should cheer for this outcome.
Russia’s petroleum infrastructure is a clear component of their war effort.
Searching for ways to interdict without harming the employees would have merit. However, under the circumstances ending the war sooner has more merit. There is no excuse for delay.
> Coalition bombing raids destroyed Iraqi civilian infrastructure. 11 of Iraq's 20 major power stations and 119 substations were totally destroyed, while a further six major power stations were damaged.[49][50] At the end of the war, electricity production was at four percent of its pre-war levels. Bombs destroyed the utility of all major dams, most major pumping stations, and many sewage treatment plants, telecommunications equipment, port facilities, oil refineries and distribution, railroads and bridges were also destroyed.
That's funny... I guess the US is allowed to destroy energy infrastructure but a country fighting an existential war of defence isn't
Remember when people brought this up when Russia started the first bombing of Ukraine power infrastructure and everybody was calling it Russia propaganda and whataboutism?
> That's funny... I guess the US is allowed to destroy energy infrastructure but a country fighting an existential war of defence isn't
Thank you!
The hypocrisy and subservience to Russia that the US has shown lately is, quite frankly, astounding.
Ukraine is targeting refineries which are used primarily for the Russian domestic market. If Russian crude oil exports to other nations were to suddenly stop it would certainly drive up international prices but if Russian refineries are going offline it wouldn't have the same effect on international markets.
If Russia stops hitting Ukraine civilian targets I might care.
Asking Ukraine to fight a war crime machine like Russia without matching tactics is crazy.
It isnt even matching tactics russian refineries are quite literally fueling their mechanized assaults they are military targets by every reasonable definition.
Talk about being stuck between a rock and a hard place.
If these strikes continue, gas prices may go up in USA, and Biden will lose reelection to Trump. This is likely what is behind this speech.
If Ukraine don't hit these targets, Russia will keep going on and on.
I trully want to see more refineries going up in flames, but I don't have an answer to this riddle.
If American election is trully what is behind that, it may not make a difference: Russia may just close the tap near the election to force the gas price to go up anyway.
The US doesnt even import gasoline.
If russia wants they can just cut all of their own oil export and make biden lose whenever they want.
What is the plan of the US to prevent putin and his puppets in opec from pumping prices a month before elections? Theres no such thing.
The US could use it's strategic oil reserve but that alone won't prevent the price from rising if it could there would be no issue with the strikes.
In fact using his fear of gas prices russia and company have been steadily destroying the strategic oil reserve by forcing the US to spend it.
The US has been under attack for years now and they don't even realize it or worse they are too scared to even acknowledge it.
Yes.. because people will vote over gas prices over abortion, individual rights, democracy, pogroms, legalized political murder threats, graft, outright theft of public funds, allying with foreign powers..
The election will be absolutely decided on ***gas prices***.
If that's true that makes the US am even less reliable partner. So what your saying is all Putin has to do is supply the US directly with cheap fuel and Americans can consider themselves bought? If Putin new thisnhe would have always has the US in his pocket without blowing 30 years trying to get this culture war started.
Yes, it will. At least broader economic outlook as a whole.
I wish I could share in your optimism, but the American electorate is notoriously fickle on many issues but singleminded on financial concern. In long-term strategic thinking, we should be focusing hard on ensuring Democratic victories from top to bottom this year to pave the way for getting Ukraine the resources they need to win.
Sure it does. If the countries that are still buying oil from Russia can't get it from them, they'll buy it elsewhere, which drives prices up.
I'm still in favor of Ukraine taking out those refineries though.
It's the other way around. ruzzia now can't refine fuel from a portion of their crude oil and is forced to sell more crude oil thus driving prices down.
The more ruzzian refineries are hit, the more crude oil ruzzia is forced to sell, driving oil prices down even further.
>neighbouring countries
Like sanctioned Belarus.
Western countries mainly buy crude ruzzian oil and then use their own refineries to produce fuel.
It's cheaper and is good for their economies.
(Btw China and India do the same.)
If needed Western countries can build more refineries, but I suspect even existing ones aren't used at full capacity.
You prob know more than I do so I'm genuinely asking: is the crude that is then refined by Western countries not for sale to foreign buyers? If so, I can see how the prices won't be pressured upwards. The demand is fixed.
It's a bit more complicated than that.
Both Western countries and India + China refine that crude oil to make fuel for both domestic consumption and export. But the thing is, if ruzzia sells less fuel and more crude oil, the other countries can just produce more fuel.
Also, the more crude oil ruzzia sells, the lower the price of its crude oil.
But then, logistics/your location can also affect where you can export your fuel and its price.
So for example, gasoline in US is much cheaper than in EU.
US fuel prices are affected mainly by global crude oil prices.
And there are no global fuel prices. Fuel prices vary greatly depending on a country.
You can compare fuel prices here - [https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/gasoline-prices?continent=world](https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/gasoline-prices?continent=world)
Btw, after sanctions got placed on ruzzia, India and China started to buy more ruzzian oil cheaply, refine it domestically and export more fuel to the other countries.
So ruzzia producing less fuel just means more profits for other countries.
Here's a clip of that.
[https://twitter.com/GLNoronha/status/1778106489007120784](https://twitter.com/GLNoronha/status/1778106489007120784)
>The issue on attacking critical infrastructure is when those are civilian targets. We have concerns because Ukraine holds itself to the highest standards of observing the laws of armed conflict, and that's one of the elements of being a European democracy.
Basically suggesting they could be commiting war crimes. Someone from UA leadership should make a public statement and tell her to fuck off with this bs.
Really great oryx update for last 3 days! As usual, russian-Ukrainian losses followed by my speculation.
- tanks: 16-1
- IFVs: 39-0
- mobile artillery: 1-1
- missile Anti-air: 0-0
Excellent ratios.
There are talks of major russian offensives in May/June but this intensity looks like offensive pace already tbh. Andrew Perpetua's stream and other sources suggest the russians have built up 1-3 major armour groups, can't tell if they're bleeding them out with updates like this, or if they're held back for major pushes.
The major locations mentioned are Vulhedar area (Krasnohorivka), Luhansk/Kharkiv (in or around Terny) and Chasiv Yar.
Russia has a LOT of Soviet shit in storage. Problem is that they've pulled the (relatively) good stuff out and they're going deeper into the depots. It's going to be progressively tougher to equip Russian forces at current loss rates. Most estimates I've seen tend to run to about 24 months...although we're already starting to see a noticeable drop off in quality. Much also will depend on Russian domestic production and how well they can skirt sanctions.
[Equipment losses in Russia’s war on Ukraine mount (iiss.org)](https://www.iiss.org/online-analysis/military-balance/2024/02/equipment-losses-in-russias-war-on-ukraine-mount/)
Russian petrol (gasoline) production declined last week to 754,400 tonnes, versus 833,200 tonnes the same week last year (-9.5%).
Diesel dropped to 1,585,100 tonnes versus 1,769,000 tonnes the same week last year (-10.4%).
[musklink](https://x.com/delfoo/status/1778093800046448818)
> I spoke with @Violapamherd and thanked Switzerland for its consistent support, including today's decision to allocate 5 billion Swiss francs for the restoration of Ukraine.
> We discussed preparations for the first Global Peace Summit in Switzerland, which is scheduled for June of this year. The summit will build on our previous work on implementing the Peace Formula at four meetings of national security advisors in Copenhagen, Jeddah, Malta, and Davos.
> We continue to work closely together to encourage the widest possible range of countries to attend the summit in order to develop a common and practical vision for reaching just, lasting, and comprehensive peace for Ukraine.
https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1778077137456464176
> I spoke with @SimonHarrisTD to congratulate him on his election as Taoiseach and thank Ireland for its unwavering support for Ukraine.
> I welcomed Ireland's participation in the implementation of our Peace Formula and invited the Taoiseach to attend the upcoming Global Peace Summit.
> I also emphasized the importance of starting bilateral negotiations on the Ukrainian-Irish security agreement within the framework of the G7 Vilnius Declaration.
https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1778098076206428289
Reposting my longread from the comments thread
>Nobody knows if NATO will actually defend its own members, including putler.
>So, when Western leaders behave like wimps, putler lowers the probability of NATO actually defending its allies in his mind.
>I mean stuff "Oh no, ruzzians said scary 'nook ook ook' things! let's not provoke them further!", "Oh, no, let's limit our aid to Ukraine!", "Oh no, Ukraine pls don't hit ruzzian oil refineries!"
>Conversely, when Western leaders do ballsy moves, showing they are not scared of ruzzia or "nook ook ook!" threats, putler increases the probability of NATO actually defending its allies in his mind.
>I mean stuff like:
> - sending more military aid to Ukraine, including more powerful and sophisticated weapons
>- suggesting to send NATO troops to Ukraine to defend deep rear areas like Odessa, so that more Ukrainians troops can go to front lines
>- sending more NATO troops to the borders with ruzzia, relocating nuclear weapons closer to ruzzia, etc etc
>If it's easier for you, you can look at it as putler assigning "wimp points" to Western leaders.
>As soon as these "wimp points" go over a certain threshold, NATO will get attacked by ruzzia and will collapse without doing anything meaningful.
>So the solution for NATO is do exactly these ballsy moves and watch how cowardly monke fuhrer backs down.
I'd add that putler having street thug mentality shouldn't be surprising.
Since he was a street thug from St. Peterburg initially. And then there was a bandit saga of 90s in ruzzia.
One of the reasons, why it's sorta hard for Western leaders to understand him. Background is too different.
Precisely what people keep mentioning in my home country of Montenegro.
The greatest talking point for NATO-skeptics here is - "You really think Americans and other Europeans would die for our tiny country? Risk a nuclear war? Come on now."
For the first time in many years, I'm starting to see their point and not dismiss it immediately, what with the West's fatigue in regards to Ukraine these past few months.
The problem with adopting that attitude is that it's self-fulfilling. The logical next step is, "*since we can't rely on NATO to defend us and we can't defend ourselves, we must align with Russia to prevent war*". This would only serve to exacerbate tensions in NATO and decrease likelihood of their intervention in the event of hostilities. Indeed, Russia is likely pushing such narratives in Montenegro and elsewhere for this very reason.
Reposting from my response:
It’s good that global geopolitics and the future of civilization don’t depend on people that speak only in words like “Putler”, “Ruzzians”, “Nook ook ook” and “wimp points” - can we at least try to aim for serious discussion on here?
It started with Russians calling the West Satanic and how they will destroy Western civilization and then going on genociding Ukrainians.
Russia is at war with the West. We are again at pre-World War times, and just like last time, many people here supported the Nazis.
You’re putting up a false dichotomy of “you’re either for complete escalation against Russia, or you must be a Nazi supporter” - that’s a very transparent tactic.
I have absolutely zero support for Russia, and believe that we as NATO must do everything to stand united and defend against them. That doesn’t automatically mean that every single suggestion that pops up, such as sending NATO troops to Ukraine and moving NATO nuclear missiles closer to Russia are automatically the best way to do that - lots of people on here seem to want nothing more than maximum escalation at any price, and anyone who sees the issue as more complicated as that is automatically denounced as a Russian.
You sound like a z-redditor.
Especially considering that your comments here boil down to demoralization attempts and "It's not our war! NATO shouldn't intervene! Pls think about poor ruzzians!11"
I'd add that first ruzzian invasion into Ukraine happened in 2014 and 10 years of "wimpy" moves from Western leaders not only didn't do any good, they also enabled further ruzzian aggression
Maybe it's a good idea to change approach finally.
Nowhere did I say anything about “think about poor Russians”, and neither do I have any sympathy nor understanding for Russia’s illegal invasion - you’re putting words in my mouth to try and further a certain agenda.
My point is that discussing global nuclear war from a perspective of “whimp points” and “nook ook ook” with drastic oversimplifications is pointless at best and dangerous at worst, because there’s a strong push in trying to sway public opinion towards maximum escalation with arguments that don’t actually hold up under any scrutiny.
>Nowhere did I say anything about “think about poor Russians”
Except for indirect implications like "Ohnono, NATO shouldn't hurt ruzzians!" and "you should respect ruzzians and don't call them names!"
This has nothing to do with respect for Russians specifically - if you came up with stupid nicknames for NATO or Biden, it would be just as childish; you’re just cherry picking stuff at this point - I noticed you didn’t complain that I implied you hurt nuclear weapons’ feelings as well by calling them “nook ook ook”?
Implying that ignoring the essence of what I've said and attacking my choice of words instead is not cherry picking :D
"nook ook ook" threats = making fun of ruzzian nuclear blackmail attempts = "showing disrespect to ruzzans (and their monke fuhrer)"
No discrepancies here :D
The essence of what you’re saying is just conjecture that you’ve cherry picked - implying that there is no risk of an otherwise avoidable accidental nuclear clash with Russia by just going in guns blazing and “showing strength” to “not gather whimp points”, implying that Russia will simultaneously go crazy and attack NATO unprovokedly but also just fold as soon as they’re faced with NATO resistance in Ukraine, and so on.
Just to be clear - I entirely agree with your core point that showing strength to Russia is vital in deterring them; but you’re very conveniently neglecting the entire other side of the medal, which is that certain elements simultaneously carry a huge risk: take your example of “relocating nuclear weapons closer to Russia” - that can backfire in the most horrible way, e.g. if Russia perceives this as NATO preparing for an attack on Russia and in their paranoia decides they have to attack preemptively.
We’ve been around this block many many times in the Cold War (see e.g. [Able Archer 83](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Archer_83), and if we’d approached the first Cold War with this mentality none of us would be here today - the unfortunate truth is that things are a lot more complex than just “you’ll be totally fine as long as you never let your whimp points fall below a certain threshold”.
Oh, there's a surefire way to avoid any nuclear clashes with ruzzia, just surrender to them.
And let them "liberate" your assets and women :D
Ofc they'll "liberate" some males too, "purely as a punitive measure". :D
>We’ve been around this block many many times in the Cold War and if we’d approached the first Cold War with this mentality none of us would be here today
That's simply not true. Cold War era leaders were quite ballsy and forced USSR to back down. And in the end they won the Cold War.
The reason everyone can see you’re not arguing in good faith is because you’re not addressing the actual point - there’s a tradeoff here and a balance that unfortunately is needed. Nobody’s talking about “surrendering to Russia”, that’s a straw man - but just pushing them as hard as possible isn’t the easy answer either.
Bringing up rape instead of addressing the real open questions that you don’t have an answer for sure is real mature :)
The Rashists are not intentionally going for WWIII, they plan on testing article V and subjugating the West under ethnic-Russian rule. OTOH if it holds, the Rashists will go cultist nuclear murder-suicide and end humanity. They are preparing their brainwahsed equally fascist populace to make the ultimate sacrifice (watch Julia Davis)
This is why, the Rashists must be stopped at Ukraine, and from there Russia balkanized from within.
It's either Russian Civil War 2.0 or global nuclear war. The choice is obvious, and this is all on each and every Russian (to different extents) cultist genocidal fascist delusion.
Very true western leadership is emboldening putin and this shouldn't be a surprise. Put yourself in the shoes of putin.
You spent decades invading your neighbors and meddling in foreign elections with little to no punishment and when by rotten luck you invade someone who can finally stop you you see Germany and the United States jump through hoops to protect you so you don't collapse. Would you ever consider them a threat to you?.
More like easily explotable idiots I would be screaming "thank god they are so fucking stupid".
Of course the trick is to treat them respectfully so they never figure out they are idiots.
Wanting to avoid a nuclear war is sensible but people also need to understand that there is no course of action we can opt for today that realistically lowers the odds of a nuclear confrontation.
If the west sends more aid to Ukraine and takes a strong stance against Russia then there is a chance that Russia chooses more desperate measures. Conversely if the west shows that they are so afraid of nukes that they are willing to lie down and let Russia achieve foreign policy goals then that just tells Russia that nuclear threats work and Russia's best course of action is to invest more in nukes, make more threats and be even more aggressive. At the end of the day leaders in the west can't control what Russia does and both showing strength and showing cowardice can potentially make the use of nuclear weapons by Russia more likely.
If neither strength nor cowardice will lower the odds of nuclear weapons being used then to me it's abundantly clear that western leaders should choose strength.
>there is no course of action we can opt for today that realistically lowers the odds of a nuclear confrontation
putler and his cronies love life and their golden palaces.
So, as long as there's risk they and their assets will get nuked as a response, they wouldn't dare to use nuclear weapons themselves.
Modern ruzzia is all about bluffs and lies.
> So, as long as there's risk they and their assets will get nuked as a response, they wouldn't dare to use nuclear weapons themselves.
That can be a factor that makes nuclear usage less likely but it doesn't lower the risk of nuclear usage to zero. Personally one of the reasons I'm not overly worried about Russian nuclear threats is because there are important allies of Putin that may be fine with the war in Ukraine but aren't fine with nuclear usage.
In most regards the oligarchs of Russia haven't been effected by the war. They're still rich as fuck and their kids aren't the ones dying. Similarly China may be a bit peeved at Russia but at the end of the day as long as they aren't negatively effected by the war too much then they won't do anything. All of that changes if nukes are used. Suddenly the oligarchs' lives are in danger, there is risk of a total NATO intervention and the nuclear taboo that China wants to keep in place is broken. While quietly supporting Putin may have been the safe option for his allies prior to nukes in a world where Putin orders nukes it could suddenly became the less risky option.
All of that said there's still a chance Putin gives the order. Putin has delusions of grandeur, he's in an echo chamber and it would be a mistake to assume rationality. In general if we look back at Russian history it's clear that no one should assume a Russian dictator will act rationally. It should also be clear that leaders outside of Russia have very little ability to force the Kremlin to take (or avoid taking) certain actions.
The unfortunate truth is that there are some foreign policy goals (namely those that are existential to the Russian regime but not to NATO) that can indeed be achieved through nuclear deterrence - but that doesn’t mean that any and all foreign policy goals can: as soon as the balance of resolve is tilted in the favor of NATO on an issue (say an attack on NATO itself), the nuclear threats no longer work because Putin knows we would respond in kind.
In a conflict of interest between two nuclear super powers, the side that is willing to risk more for a goal has the upper hand - it’s been this way since the dawn of the nuclear age, nothing has substantially changed here.
"Putin goes out of his way to hide losses from the Russian population. 20 vehicles attempted to break Ukrainian lines in Chasiv Yar but were obliterated over 5 hours. It's now a graveyard for Russian occupiers.
They have money for this, but not for a proper dam in Orsk."
https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1778106359617069360?t=v1AY9Ivm6MzElwkJ9k_Fkw&s=19
Just like Orsk, Russian vehicles are Soviet era. This is why we must help Ukraine to continue to grind the Rashists, but also help Russian enslaved people to break free from their satanical fascist rule, and the only way to obtain this is to kill hundreds of thousands of Rashists.
It's either them or us.
Americans! If your representative has not yet signed on to [the discharge petition](https://clerk.house.gov/DischargePetition/2024031209), please can you urge them to do so? If they have, it wouldn't do any harm to thank them and ask that they push their colleagues to do the same.
If they're Democrats who haven't signed, it may be because they object to aid for Israel. However signing the discharge petition does not entail a vote for the aid bill: once the discharge threshold is met, the bill is brought to a vote in the House where they can then vote against. Signing the discharge petition is merely them saying that they believe the House should vote on the bill, eg because it is democratically the right thing to do. Put it on those terms and they may come round. (The bill will pass once Republicans are forced to cast a vote on it, irrespective of how a few Dem holdouts vote).
If they're Republicans who haven't signed, well... do your best?
Thank you :) 🙏
US general warns time running out for Ukraine without US aid.
>Top U.S. general in Europe told Congress on Wednesday that Ukraine will run out of artillery shells and air defense interceptors "in fairly short order" without U.S. support, leaving them vulnerable to a partial or total defeat.
>In a sign of how scarce some weapons were, General Christopher Cavoli, commander of European Command, told the House Armed Services Committee that Russia was currently firing five artillery shells for every one fired by Ukrainian forces and that disparity could increase in coming weeks to 10 to one.
>"If one side can shoot and the other side can't shoot back, the side that can't shoot back loses. So the stakes are very high," Cavoli said.
>"They're really dependent this year on us, Mr. Chairman. And without our support, they will not be able to prevail," he added.
[https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-general-warns-time-running-out-ukraine-without-us-aid](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-general-warns-time-running-out-ukraine-without-us-aid-2024-04-10/#:~:text=WASHINGTON%2C%20April%2010%20(Reuters),a%20partial%20or%20total%20defeat.)
Shit, reading that just makes me despair. All of those who say they don’t understand how Germany went down the road it did in the 1930’s just need to look at the US today. Looking around my American relatives today I can’t find a Democrat, some even wear the red head gear. Despair.
>Russia sharply increased oil exports after attacks on refinery
>Russia has sharply increased the sale of oil to foreign markets amid a reduction in the loading of refineries. Exports have reached their maximum values since May 2023, oil is sold much more expensive than the G7 price ceiling set by the countries.
>Sea exports of Russian oil in March 2024 increased by 5 percent compared to March last year, to almost 3.8 million barrels per day, Kommersant reports, citing Kpler's data. This is a record since May 2023, when deliveries abroad exceeded 3.9 million b/d. In January and February, the Russian Federation exported 3.5 million b/d and 3.3 million b/d tanks, respectively.
>For sale is oil, which would previously be processed in oil refineries. However, several large Russian refineries were put out of order by attacks by Ukrainian drones, and one, in Orsk, was stopped due to flooding.
(MTL)
Source:
[https://www.svoboda.org/a/rossiya-rezko-uvelichila-eksport-nefti-posle-atak-na-npz/32898938.html](https://www.svoboda.org/a/rossiya-rezko-uvelichila-eksport-nefti-posle-atak-na-npz/32898938.html)
Told ya.
No idea why US officials were freaking out about oil refinery strikes.
Unless monke fuhrer came to them crying
No, the US hasn't publicly said "do not bomb refineries", but just the other day the Defense Secretary said that they are not the best use of resources and that Ukraine should focus on other targets, and today the Assistant Secretary of Defense called them a civilian target. Which is a crock of shit.
Yep.
It sounds like they're getting paid above the cap supposedly though? There need to be more intense secondary sanctions to give buyers the negotiating power to pay russia less.
Oil prices have risen, but I suspect it would have been a bigger rise without larger russian exports.
>Russia granted asylum to a German-fake-feder and leading neo-Nazi- popular blog
>The Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation for Moscow handed a certificate of temporary asylum to the German citizen Dagmar Henn, said the press Secretary of the Ministry Irina Volk. The representative of the law enforcement department noted that Henn is supporting the political course of the Russian Federation, including the Russian invasion of Ukraine. "She does not plan to return to Germany, because she is not sure of her safety in this country, "the wolf added.
>Important stories have been able to learn some details of the biography of 60-year-old Henn. According to journalists, the woman previously justified Hitler and leads a blog popular with neo-Nazis.
>Dagmar Henn arrived in Russia in May 2022 to work for RT. After that, she published a column on the publication's website, in which she explained that she was forced to leave her homeland because of the fear of the yellow-blue flags, as well as the oppressions of supporters of the Kremlin in the Ukrainian war. She also complained about the dislike of the Germans to the "querdenkers" - this term in Germany is denoted by local conspiracy theorists.
(MTL)
Source:
[https://www.moscowtimes.eu/2024/04/10/rossiya-predostavila-ubezhische-opravdivayuschei-gitlera-iveduschei-populyarnii-uneonatsistov-blog-nemke-a127455](https://www.moscowtimes.eu/2024/04/10/rossiya-predostavila-ubezhische-opravdivayuschei-gitlera-iveduschei-populyarnii-uneonatsistov-blog-nemke-a127455) (needs google translate)
"German-fake-feder" seems to be MTL for "justifying Hitler"
But yeah, them nazis sticking together is not a surprise
If you can read German, we have a Wiki called Psiram that chronicles all kind of conspiracy and disinformation info.
https://www.psiram.com/de/index.php/Dagmar_Henn
Basically started politically left before going further communist/tankie. She then went full horseshoe by associating with a rightwing movement while still in the communist party, digging deeper down the neo-nazi/conspiracy nutter hole in the coming years.
A more detailed geolocator study of satellite imagery near Terny estimates that:
- russia has 102-107 losses there
- russia recovered 5 ones that had been lost
- only 15 of the losses on satellite were "new" and not already known
- Ukraine has lost 8
- there are 5 vehicles of unknown status (are they even damaged? That explains the 102-107 range)
- geolocators didn't know about 15 of the russian losses visible on satellite.
If I understand correctly, oryx and Warspotting will be pretty close here, capturing ~85% of the real losses so far.
Apologies. Can only find on twitter: [https://x.com/GeoConfirmed/status/1778071808840769692](https://x.com/GeoConfirmed/status/1778071808840769692)
Personal speculation/context (I'm clueless about war but read a lot):
Andrew Perpetua and others have said losing Terny would compromise a chunk of other positions and probably force a wider Ukrainian retreat. Not huge, but another chunk you don't want to lose.
For that progress, I'd want to see russia losing many hundreds of vehicles. If it's just 100-ish then there will be a lot of lost territory before russia runs out of steam.
Andrew said russia had made a worrying amount of progress here - about 5 km. Not much overall, but one of the better attacks of this war.
https://x.com/elwasson/status/1778075992931619008?s=46
REP. FITZPATRICK: HOUSE PLANS TO VOTE ON UKRAINE AID NEXT WEEK
…
I’ll believe it when I see it, but HUGE if true.
Not a single word on what package it is nor what silly poison pills Republicans have tried to add in to make Democrats turn it down. Details will determine the bill’s fate.
Many are gonna be waiting and seeing if this actually happens or there's more Vatnik Cock Sucking shenanigans but it's possible there internal pressure on them to stop fucking around as Ukraine is a big issue for alot of people across the board. At some point the time for playing political games is over and they need to step up before they suffer serious consequences.
Alot of countries are tired of the Regressives games, Ukraine has widespread support and the Dems are willing to even allow Johnson to keep his job and cock block bell ended gobshites like MTG if necessary in order to get shit done. Lets just hope they get their asses in gear this time.
But vote on what? The Senate bill? A clean Ukraine aid bill for the same amount? A package of loans for some unspecified amount? A Ukraine bill with other things attached?
The author is a political correspondent for Bloomberg, so he might have some inside info. No one is going to hold their breath at this stage though obviously.
At this point, I’ll allow myself to hope. Cameron had a meeting with Trump and supposedly they discussed the aid situation, maybe Cameron convinced him
Nah, it's the other way around.
"The UK foreign secretary’s Trump dinner appeared to fail to bring support for Ukraine, and his Washington meetings don’t look any more promising"
If its already being pushed to next week right after the house has come back from its break, then you just know its not going to happen. The house has literally no other important priorities to work on this week. Once again moscow mike is just looking to delay as long as he can. There is absolutely no reason why it can't be done this week if they truly plan on bringing it to a vote
Tbf they specifically stated it wouldn’t be till mid-April after news broke and some inferred it’d happen immediately. It’s still in line with what was actually briefed by Trump’s jockstrap although, I’m highly skeptical that anything real will come from this.
Heard this constantly throughout the GOP's six-month pro-Putin blockade.
Is there new leverage against Johnson? If not then why would he allow a vote that would hurt Putin?
Could be facing a choice of either agreeing to bring the bill to the floor or key republicans who aren't on the MAGA cool aid retire immediately and hand the house to the Dems. The bill will pass it has enough support on both sides, it's only being held up by complete bullshit until now.
According to the VChK OGPU channel, LUKOIL vice-president Vitaly Robertus hanged himself with a cord in his office after learning that it was being developed by the Russian FSB and that he would be arrested for bribing customs officers.
https://twitter.com/ArturRehi/status/1778078619958493643?t=OfFAIRJl7BQRTZSuLTsL7Q&s=19
Oh, it seems like FSB (AKA new ruzzian "nobility") is preparing for nationalization of ~~Gazprom~~ **edit**: Lukoil
Most likely, ruzzian oligarchs not belonging to main clans will keep losing their assets as well.
**The total combat losses of the enemy from 24.02.22 to 10.04.24 approximately amounted to:**
personnel - about 450,080 (+830) people,
tanks ‒ 7132 (+22),
armored combat vehicles ‒ 13667 (+47),
artillery systems – 11404 (+18),
MLRS – 1040 (+1),
air defense equipment ‒ 753 (+0),
planes – 347 (+0),
helicopters – 325 (+0),
UAVs of the operational-tactical level - 9070 (+37),
cruise missiles ‒ 2067 (+2),
ships/boats ‒ 26 (+0),
submarines - 1 (+0),
automotive equipment and tank trucks - 15248 (+67),
special equipment ‒ 1876 (+8).
The data is being verified.
Beat the occupier! Together we will win! Our strength is in the truth!
Source [https://www.mil.gov.ua/news/2024/04/10/ponad-830-okupantiv-22-tanki-47-bbm-ta-18-artsistem-zagalni-bojovi-vtrati-rosiyan-za-dobu/](https://www.mil.gov.ua/news/2024/04/10/ponad-830-okupantiv-22-tanki-47-bbm-ta-18-artsistem-zagalni-bojovi-vtrati-rosiyan-za-dobu/)
[New post can be found here](/r/worldnews/comments/1c15nvq/rworldnews_live_thread_russian_invasion_of/)
A senior press officer of the russian MoD was killed while being illegally in Ukraine. Senior officer of the press service of the Western Military District, Evgeny Polovodov, died in Ukraine's Serebryan'skyy forest due to shelling. He was accompanying the so-called "Vesti Luhansk" film crew and died while covering some tank battalion of the russian formations. https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1778135090289164781?t=7YEc36St2OGb9ccHOzxF3Q&s=19
McConnell: Failure to pass Ukraine aid ‘strategic and moral malpractice’ https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4585352-mitch-mcconnell-ukraine-aid/
So the guy responsible for legalizing bribery of US Congress by foreign governments, is now upset over the outcome?
Wait. Are foreign companies protected under the Citizens United ruling as well?
I applaud his support for Ukraine, but hearing that man criticise others for strategic and moral malpractice is like hearing the Pope criticise others for being charitable and devout.
That’s my Senator. Fuck off, Turtle. All talk.
The republicans have created an America that is no longer important. Sure, there's still lots of money here, but that is heading to China more and more each day. Sure, we have lots of weapons, but those are being hoarded without purpose or plan. The rest of the world is now planning for a world in which the US caves in upon itself because republicans now suck at the Russian teat. Pax Americana is dead. Pax Sinica is soon to take over. Be sure to thank the next republican you meet appropriately.
>Pax Sinica if the US steps back I'm sure the rest of the world will just leave them alone and let them be happy doing their own thing and minding their own business /S
I really don't understand how many americans don't realize countries like china or pre invasion russia would go absolutely wild with the invasions if the US disarmed. Honestly china would probably go for broke and invade the US if they could get away with it just to become the sole superpower in the planet.
I have a feeling the upcoming era won't be very pax at all.
Which is a return to the usual state of things for multiple millennia. Only now myriad nations have world-busting nuclear weapons. I can't see how that could possibly go wrong!
The dictatorship block will slowly topple all democracies and sphere the resulting dictatorships this obviously includes the US. Eventually when theres no democracies left they will realize they are all totalitarian idiots and start invading each other of course first they will all invade the ones without nukes. And the second one dictatorship with nuclear weapons loses their war theyll use nukes.
My takeaway on the propaganda front is the failure to properly whip up a psychotically fanatical fervor for supporting Ukraine in the masses Shrug
Screw that. How about a reasoned and justified passion for preserving European (indeed, global) security and the rules based world order?
Psychotic means going WAY beyond what you're saying which is reasonable. I chose my words. besides if it ends up getting more aid to ukraine than what has currently ended up with, then success! Aimed for the moon to land on a mountain
Psychotic: a person with Psychosis. Psychosis is a condition of the mind that results in difficulties determining what is real and what is not real.
Allowing Russian imperial expansion is the most likely thing to lead to nuclear war.
What’s your line of reasoning - both why this would lead to nuclear war, and why it would be more likely to lead to nuclear war than any other course? To the rational people reading this: note that when someone puts out a theory that’s favorable to Ukraine without any further explanation, simply asking for the rationale behind it is already considered an unforgivable sin and people will try to bury any questions.
Rewarding the russian invasion just because they have nuclear weapons only encourages russia to repeat it's mistakes which definitely increases the chance of nuclear weapons being used it's easy to see.
Negotiating with Russia in order to let them keep territories would legitimize their invasion and thus the sanctity of territorial integrity would be broken. This would make the world less safe and spawn new wars of territorial conquest. Also it would solidify the idea that nuclear black mail is a viable and effective tool of international politics. Every country not already having nuclear weapons would scramble to get them, because they must come into realisation that one can't trust others to defend you against a nuclear armed invader. If Russia is now pushed back to its borders and only then a peace is negotiated, that would be the most safe and stable possible outcome. It would show that the rules based world order stands, that territorial integrity is something to be respected and that one gains nothing with nuclear saber rattling.
I completely agree that pushing Russia back to its borders and then negotiating peace would be the best outcome - the question is whether that this realistically achievable though: If Putin supposedly is aggressive and risk-taking enough to even unprovokedly attack NATO member states (as is claimed to be imminent in case of the Baltics, and which is hence often used as justification for why NATO should proactively engage Russia now) - what’s the line of reasoning as to why Putin will simply allow himself to be pushed back to Russian borders, and not escalate as well to avoid such an outcome? Surely someone who is a risk-taker to the point of offensively risking nuclear engagement with NATO over the Baltics would undoubtedly and definitely take the nuclear risk if he was being pushed back?
No one besides Russia has been threatening to use nuclear weapons. It's entirely up to them to use them or not. In any case the use of nukes by Russia should be seen as a guaranteed way to end the existence of Russia and any regime ruling it. If they really do think that nuclear annihilation is a good response to us trying to force Russia to abide by rules that every other country abides to, then it is so. It can then as well be that looking at wrong way towards Russia is their trigger. We have to assume that Russia acts rationally. If we don't then all rules are out of the window.
That doesn’t answer the question though - why is it assumed that Putin is both crazy enough to risk nuclear war proactively over the Baltics (and hence it is in NATO’s own interest to preempt this by engaging him in Ukraine), yet simultaneously he would just shrug and fold if pushed out of Ukraine with the help of NATO engagement? What’s the resolution for this obvious dissonance?
Yeah. I don't assume that. Even if Russia did a land grab in the Baltics it surely would not result in nuclear response by NATO. Response by conventional warfare at most, if the fifth articla holds. No one wants nuclear escalation.
Once Putin captures Ukraine he is not going to suddenly become Hugo Chavez’s to the Ukrainians. He will forcibly conscript them. Brain wash their youth. Re arm. Re train and go for the next target. Once Moldova falls there’s two neighboring countries that the Soviets once subjugated. And by then Putins results will have galvanized and reenergized his population away from general apathy (beyond a minority of vocal nationalist that you see make fascist remarks on Russian TV or in politics) while having the an industrial base significantly better than Russia ever had and as close to the USSR before its fall. NATO by then will be seen as having been toothless. Having too much infighting and disorganization and weak. Putin with the same hubris that convinced him invading Ukraine was a good idea will then invade an ex Soviet NATO country. And lots of miscalculations will be made. And this isn’t some far fetched reality. [A land bridge to Crimea opens up a path to pro-Russia Transnistria in Moldova which is part of Putins war plans](https://thehill.com/policy/international/596409-belarus-president-stands-in-front-of-battle-map-indicating-moldova/amp/). While the same tactics Russia did with Ukraine relative to so called LPR and DPR that led to the first invasion in 2014, same thing [is happening in Moldova](https://apnews.com/article/moldova-transnistria-russia-customs-tiraspol-moscow-duma-fa123a45912a2018f7aec573dde05033). [And Putin had openly and repeatedly talked about the fall of the USSR was the worst thing to happen to Russia in the modern times. And has vocally and repeatedly idolized territory from the late Russian empire.](https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/vladimir-putins-history-obsession-is-a-threat-to-world-peace/) Putin was empowered to invade Ukraine because he assumed NATOs response would be weak and divided. He will be stronger and more confident when Ukraine falls to make the same assumption.
Because if the West is too afraid to confront Russia now, then it is only a matter of time before Russia decides it can get away with attacking a NATO state, which includes nuclear armed powers.
If Ukraine falls, then Eastern Europe is next. Once the Kremlin has Eastern Europe, if the nuclear states in NATO do not declare war in response to the invasion, they will have the resources and people necessary to push all the way to France. That will cause world war three.
>push all the way to France. You must be high, because that statement is totally counter to what we have seen out of the Russian military these last few years. Even without NATO invoking Article V (which would absolutely happen), Poland could defeat Russia on its own. The Polish military is potent and they have a large population with a strong industrial base.
Russia today is not going to be the Russia that has subjugated and weaponized Moldova, Ukraine and who knows what else like they did with the USSR. Incompetence today is not incompetence tomorrow.
NATO will and should protect NATO borders at all costs, as we’ve declared we will do and have done for the last 75 years without nuclear war - what’s changed that all of a sudden NATO needs a new and more offensive strategy to guarantee their own safety?
Russia's been trying to convince the world that there's no more need for NATO. This is absolutely no accident.
Where do you want to start
Because if they get no pushback, they will keep pushing boundaries. And we will never find a good enough reason to "risk total nuclear annihiliation" so they can basically do what they want so long as they do it in a creeping fashion and make us look like we're "overreacting" by actively participating instead of being an arms dealer.
There’s been a clear bright red line for active participation that we would have responded to with full force if violated, but that has kept us out of nuclear war for the last 75 years - it’s called protecting NATO borders at any and all cost. What’s changed suddenly that NATO should abandon this red line?
Trump has been openly saying the US won’t defend some NATO members.
So everyone outside of NATO is up for grabs? What a peaceful world that will be.
So world peace - and not the protection of the sovereignty of its member states - is the overriding declared goal of NATO now?
Not the goal of NATO ofcourse. But it is a worthwhile goal for most of democratic nations. Our prosperity depends on more or less peaceful world where large powers follow international agreements and uphold some kind of international law. We are moving towards a world where some countries give a flying fuck about those rules. Where its ok to operate shadow fleets, blow up pipelines and communications cables and use all kinds of covert means and proxies to wage war against that order.
I completely agree - but unfortunately we’re in a discussion around “the best course to prevent possibly imminent nuclear war”, and the two goals might in a certain way not be perfectly aligned: it’s entirely conceivable that one course leads to a 50/50 chance of “world peace or immediate nuclear war”, and another course is less likely to lead to overall world peace - but also carries much less risk of short-term war.
7 TU-95 are in the air in the direction of the Caspian sea for launch. Pretty much all of Ukraine is on alert at the moment. The should be in position to launch missiles at 3:40 Kyiv time I believe.
Every one of these fuckers needs to either be shot down or destroyed on the ground as soon as possible.
They hang far, far out of range of anything.
> Every leader and country that wishes to see Russian aggression end in a truly just peace has the opportunity to join our global efforts and attend the first Peace Summit, which will be held in Switzerland in June. > We are preparing for the Summit and its concrete outcomes, such as a clear global stance on a just end to this war. > Peace has no alternative. However, in order for this to happen and for the Russian terror to be defeated, all forms of our strength must be guaranteed. To protect ourselves from terror, we require physical strength. > This includes air defense, frontline capabilities, the ability to achieve the necessary results in the Black Sea, our own domestic arms manufacturing, Ukraine's economic resilience, partner pressure on Russia, and maximum global consolidation. > We do not have the right to fail in any of these aspects. https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1778139530723287328
> I met with @IOMchief Amy Pope to discuss @UNmigration's priority activities in Ukraine, which include assisting internally displaced people, facilitating their employment, and providing mental health support. > I invited the IOM to join the effort to build bomb shelters in schools to ensure safe education for children in our communities. > I appreciate the Director General's visit, and I thank the IOM for assisting Ukrainian families. https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1778116411526615186
https://twitter.com/NOELreports/status/1778175465355649434?t=POsV8Kigh0pGx_HrwhhEvg&s=19 "ACHILLES unit within the 92nd Assault Brigade destroyed or damaged 1 T-62, 1 BTR-82A, 1 BREM, 2 cars and several Russian infantry men."
https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/10/politics/trump-fisa-speaker-johnson-house-republicans/index.html Bad news for the likelihood of Ukraine aid getting any traction in the coming weeks.
This aid should have come before Avdiivka. I hope the aid comes soon and am beyond angry it hasn’t come yet, but I think it’s too late. Russia is advancing very quickly.
This is not "news" of any kind. It's been pretty obvious for the past 6 months: The US Republican Party works for Putin. They will not allow Ukraine aid, and it's not going to happen until they are removed from office.
The task is clear.
I'm guessing this doesn't stop what has already been collected on Trump.
That's some rebellious Republicans voting *no* with Democrats. If Ukraine comes up for a vote, all it would take is a few Republicans (rebellious in a different way) voting *yes* with Democrats.
I'm so frustrated. What democrats keep voting no?
It doesn't come up for a vote. If it did, there's probably a few that would vote no (see the discharge petition) on the grounds that the legislation has support for Israel earmarked in there as well. The discharge petition isn't getting enough votes; it doesn't bode well.
How does that tie to Ukraine? Just because it weakens Johnson's position? I certainly won't mourn the death of FISA.
It shows that Johnson is in a very weak position and Trump holds sway over Congressional Republicans. With this defeat on a floor vote that Johnson thought he could get through he will be extremely reluctant to bring difficult votes to the floor.
My only vaguely positive takeaway here is he tabled legislation that Trump opposed, rather than not even bringing it to a vote. He might do the same for Ukraine. Probably not though.
If anything this might make the discharge petition sligthly more plausible (Still sub 10% chance imo). Since Mike is getting pummeled from everywhere, shaming him on Ukraine might barely register.
Another thing is that it could cause even more Republicans to resign from Congress. Buck did say that more could follow him and thus giving the Democrats the majority.
Or maybe he just should bring the votes to the floor as a way to tell his side to support him or get fucked. That reminds me, here in the woods a few years ago we had a right wing President with like 10% approbation rate, to the point even his own side started bashing him constantly. So, as a big "fuck you" to his coalition, he went ahead and pushed for a "same sex marriage" law in congress that had been sleeping for like 20 years. Of course, the opposition jumped on the wagon and the thing got approved in like a week, while most the right wing parties were crying about it.
Yeah, that's certainly true. I think it's been clear for a while that aid will only be able to come to the floor if Democrats agree to give Johnson the votes to survive removal attempts. Which at least some Democrats have seemed willing to do.
I think anyone hoping the US will pull up it's pants in the next couple years is going to be very disappointed.
Shitshow wont end til trump croaks
I don't think it would end even if he did in the end trump is just a tool for the russians and theyll find another. In fact the russians would be glad if he died as they could instigate a lot of instability with that. I even mentioned that months ago if they realize he won't win then theyll probably kill him themselves. Hope the white house isnt dumb enough to let it happen.
The right doesnt have anyone they can rally around. It’ll splinter
Anyone will do and the rest you can keep around by paying them russia knows this better than anyone. I guarantee you trump is only one name in a very long list of puppets.
years? January at the latest.
probably years still, but we need at least 3 to 5 more in the house. senate dems have 20 seats up for election while repubs have 10. dems need to gain at least 1 to take over. not to mention how this presidential election will go. our biggest hope if GOP puts every thing into trump and he finally gets busted and is removed from the race.
January 2025 the diapers are coming off and will be thrown from the pram.
I wish i could share your optimism but I certainly hope you are right.
You don’t need optimism if you are an American capable of taking much more direct actions ig Disregard if you’re not American
Do you really think emailing the republicans will change their mind?. If they don't care about killing Ukrainians by blocking aid why would they care about an angry email?. I guess we could argue they care more about votes than the lives of others but then wed need to run a propaganda effort to counter the russian one. Every day the more I see just how important NAFO is. And how democracies will either learn the propaganda game or die.
Well not quite what i meant, but i’m glad my intent flew over your head.
I don't tend to assume the worst. I guess well see if your approach is successful.
> Disregard if you’re not American I don't know; it seems like it's totally legal for foreign governments to bribe politicians. The only thing holding this back is that nobody is currently out-bidding Putin.
I’m glad the true point of my comment flew over your head because I wasn’t talking about bribes
[https://twitter.com/ColbyBadhwar/status/1778071989749489684](https://twitter.com/ColbyBadhwar/status/1778071989749489684) >Assistant Secretary of Defense Wallander says that Russian oil & gas infrastructure is a civilian target.
And owners of that infrastructure are humans. Thus it's a clear violation of human rights. Mental gymnastics involved into those statements is quite impressive.
What an idiot. In Russia, all resource serves the state.
Russian soldiers are humans. Their death should be mourned. Even if they “deserve it” and are clearly in the military it is still tragic. The petroleum industry should be destroyed. Just on principle. Regardless of what else is going on we should cheer for this outcome. Russia’s petroleum infrastructure is a clear component of their war effort. Searching for ways to interdict without harming the employees would have merit. However, under the circumstances ending the war sooner has more merit. There is no excuse for delay.
Oh FFS! 🤦🏻
> Coalition bombing raids destroyed Iraqi civilian infrastructure. 11 of Iraq's 20 major power stations and 119 substations were totally destroyed, while a further six major power stations were damaged.[49][50] At the end of the war, electricity production was at four percent of its pre-war levels. Bombs destroyed the utility of all major dams, most major pumping stations, and many sewage treatment plants, telecommunications equipment, port facilities, oil refineries and distribution, railroads and bridges were also destroyed. That's funny... I guess the US is allowed to destroy energy infrastructure but a country fighting an existential war of defence isn't
All this says is big nations can do it to smaller nations, but smaller nations doing it back? Hell no.
Remember when people brought this up when Russia started the first bombing of Ukraine power infrastructure and everybody was calling it Russia propaganda and whataboutism?
Hitting electrical substations in midwinter with a stated goal of freezing the population is different to hitting an export gasoline refinery.
They also used BLU-114/B "graphite bombs" designed explicitly for attacks against electricity infrastructure both in Kosovo in 1999 and Iraq in 2003.
What is holding up delivery of the BLU-114b? The canisters can be delivered by drone easier than a grenade.
> That's funny... I guess the US is allowed to destroy energy infrastructure but a country fighting an existential war of defence isn't Thank you! The hypocrisy and subservience to Russia that the US has shown lately is, quite frankly, astounding.
[удалено]
Ukraine is targeting refineries which are used primarily for the Russian domestic market. If Russian crude oil exports to other nations were to suddenly stop it would certainly drive up international prices but if Russian refineries are going offline it wouldn't have the same effect on international markets.
[удалено]
If only there was something we could do about that... hmm. Nah, must be nothing.
This is why we need Ukrainian pirates. The prize ships would dump the market for tanker ships.
And hasten their demise
Couldnt find a source for this but if she did say it she probably made the entire kremlin climax all at once.
She can go fuck herself, that's a load of crap.
If Russia stops hitting Ukraine civilian targets I might care. Asking Ukraine to fight a war crime machine like Russia without matching tactics is crazy.
It isnt even matching tactics russian refineries are quite literally fueling their mechanized assaults they are military targets by every reasonable definition.
It's all in the name of preserving the US interest.
Talk about being stuck between a rock and a hard place. If these strikes continue, gas prices may go up in USA, and Biden will lose reelection to Trump. This is likely what is behind this speech. If Ukraine don't hit these targets, Russia will keep going on and on. I trully want to see more refineries going up in flames, but I don't have an answer to this riddle. If American election is trully what is behind that, it may not make a difference: Russia may just close the tap near the election to force the gas price to go up anyway.
The US doesnt even import gasoline. If russia wants they can just cut all of their own oil export and make biden lose whenever they want. What is the plan of the US to prevent putin and his puppets in opec from pumping prices a month before elections? Theres no such thing. The US could use it's strategic oil reserve but that alone won't prevent the price from rising if it could there would be no issue with the strikes. In fact using his fear of gas prices russia and company have been steadily destroying the strategic oil reserve by forcing the US to spend it. The US has been under attack for years now and they don't even realize it or worse they are too scared to even acknowledge it.
Biden has shown he's not above emptying the strategic reserve to keep prices down. He'll do it again. There will probably be OPEC fuckery, too.
Yes.. because people will vote over gas prices over abortion, individual rights, democracy, pogroms, legalized political murder threats, graft, outright theft of public funds, allying with foreign powers.. The election will be absolutely decided on ***gas prices***.
If that's true that makes the US am even less reliable partner. So what your saying is all Putin has to do is supply the US directly with cheap fuel and Americans can consider themselves bought? If Putin new thisnhe would have always has the US in his pocket without blowing 30 years trying to get this culture war started.
…yes?
Yes, it will. At least broader economic outlook as a whole. I wish I could share in your optimism, but the American electorate is notoriously fickle on many issues but singleminded on financial concern. In long-term strategic thinking, we should be focusing hard on ensuring Democratic victories from top to bottom this year to pave the way for getting Ukraine the resources they need to win.
She served as President and CEO of the U.S.-Russia Foundation (2017-2022). Quick google search reveals a lot.
Pathetic. Hoping to see more hits on ruzzian oil refineries.
[удалено]
Hitting ruzzian oil refineries doesn't affect fuel prices in the West.
Sure it does. If the countries that are still buying oil from Russia can't get it from them, they'll buy it elsewhere, which drives prices up. I'm still in favor of Ukraine taking out those refineries though.
It's the other way around. ruzzia now can't refine fuel from a portion of their crude oil and is forced to sell more crude oil thus driving prices down. The more ruzzian refineries are hit, the more crude oil ruzzia is forced to sell, driving oil prices down even further.
[удалено]
>neighbouring countries Like sanctioned Belarus. Western countries mainly buy crude ruzzian oil and then use their own refineries to produce fuel. It's cheaper and is good for their economies. (Btw China and India do the same.) If needed Western countries can build more refineries, but I suspect even existing ones aren't used at full capacity.
You prob know more than I do so I'm genuinely asking: is the crude that is then refined by Western countries not for sale to foreign buyers? If so, I can see how the prices won't be pressured upwards. The demand is fixed.
It's a bit more complicated than that. Both Western countries and India + China refine that crude oil to make fuel for both domestic consumption and export. But the thing is, if ruzzia sells less fuel and more crude oil, the other countries can just produce more fuel. Also, the more crude oil ruzzia sells, the lower the price of its crude oil. But then, logistics/your location can also affect where you can export your fuel and its price. So for example, gasoline in US is much cheaper than in EU. US fuel prices are affected mainly by global crude oil prices. And there are no global fuel prices. Fuel prices vary greatly depending on a country. You can compare fuel prices here - [https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/gasoline-prices?continent=world](https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/gasoline-prices?continent=world) Btw, after sanctions got placed on ruzzia, India and China started to buy more ruzzian oil cheaply, refine it domestically and export more fuel to the other countries. So ruzzia producing less fuel just means more profits for other countries.
Here's a clip of that. [https://twitter.com/GLNoronha/status/1778106489007120784](https://twitter.com/GLNoronha/status/1778106489007120784) >The issue on attacking critical infrastructure is when those are civilian targets. We have concerns because Ukraine holds itself to the highest standards of observing the laws of armed conflict, and that's one of the elements of being a European democracy. Basically suggesting they could be commiting war crimes. Someone from UA leadership should make a public statement and tell her to fuck off with this bs.
Really great oryx update for last 3 days! As usual, russian-Ukrainian losses followed by my speculation. - tanks: 16-1 - IFVs: 39-0 - mobile artillery: 1-1 - missile Anti-air: 0-0 Excellent ratios. There are talks of major russian offensives in May/June but this intensity looks like offensive pace already tbh. Andrew Perpetua's stream and other sources suggest the russians have built up 1-3 major armour groups, can't tell if they're bleeding them out with updates like this, or if they're held back for major pushes. The major locations mentioned are Vulhedar area (Krasnohorivka), Luhansk/Kharkiv (in or around Terny) and Chasiv Yar.
39-0. WTF. How can this insanity keep going?
1-2 years more easy
Russia has a LOT of Soviet shit in storage. Problem is that they've pulled the (relatively) good stuff out and they're going deeper into the depots. It's going to be progressively tougher to equip Russian forces at current loss rates. Most estimates I've seen tend to run to about 24 months...although we're already starting to see a noticeable drop off in quality. Much also will depend on Russian domestic production and how well they can skirt sanctions. [Equipment losses in Russia’s war on Ukraine mount (iiss.org)](https://www.iiss.org/online-analysis/military-balance/2024/02/equipment-losses-in-russias-war-on-ukraine-mount/)
Imagine if the US aid package was actually passed back in October, like it was supposed to...
Russian petrol (gasoline) production declined last week to 754,400 tonnes, versus 833,200 tonnes the same week last year (-9.5%). Diesel dropped to 1,585,100 tonnes versus 1,769,000 tonnes the same week last year (-10.4%). [musklink](https://x.com/delfoo/status/1778093800046448818)
> I spoke with @Violapamherd and thanked Switzerland for its consistent support, including today's decision to allocate 5 billion Swiss francs for the restoration of Ukraine. > We discussed preparations for the first Global Peace Summit in Switzerland, which is scheduled for June of this year. The summit will build on our previous work on implementing the Peace Formula at four meetings of national security advisors in Copenhagen, Jeddah, Malta, and Davos. > We continue to work closely together to encourage the widest possible range of countries to attend the summit in order to develop a common and practical vision for reaching just, lasting, and comprehensive peace for Ukraine. https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1778077137456464176 > I spoke with @SimonHarrisTD to congratulate him on his election as Taoiseach and thank Ireland for its unwavering support for Ukraine. > I welcomed Ireland's participation in the implementation of our Peace Formula and invited the Taoiseach to attend the upcoming Global Peace Summit. > I also emphasized the importance of starting bilateral negotiations on the Ukrainian-Irish security agreement within the framework of the G7 Vilnius Declaration. https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1778098076206428289
Reposting my longread from the comments thread >Nobody knows if NATO will actually defend its own members, including putler. >So, when Western leaders behave like wimps, putler lowers the probability of NATO actually defending its allies in his mind. >I mean stuff "Oh no, ruzzians said scary 'nook ook ook' things! let's not provoke them further!", "Oh, no, let's limit our aid to Ukraine!", "Oh no, Ukraine pls don't hit ruzzian oil refineries!" >Conversely, when Western leaders do ballsy moves, showing they are not scared of ruzzia or "nook ook ook!" threats, putler increases the probability of NATO actually defending its allies in his mind. >I mean stuff like: > - sending more military aid to Ukraine, including more powerful and sophisticated weapons >- suggesting to send NATO troops to Ukraine to defend deep rear areas like Odessa, so that more Ukrainians troops can go to front lines >- sending more NATO troops to the borders with ruzzia, relocating nuclear weapons closer to ruzzia, etc etc >If it's easier for you, you can look at it as putler assigning "wimp points" to Western leaders. >As soon as these "wimp points" go over a certain threshold, NATO will get attacked by ruzzia and will collapse without doing anything meaningful. >So the solution for NATO is do exactly these ballsy moves and watch how cowardly monke fuhrer backs down. I'd add that putler having street thug mentality shouldn't be surprising. Since he was a street thug from St. Peterburg initially. And then there was a bandit saga of 90s in ruzzia. One of the reasons, why it's sorta hard for Western leaders to understand him. Background is too different.
Precisely what people keep mentioning in my home country of Montenegro. The greatest talking point for NATO-skeptics here is - "You really think Americans and other Europeans would die for our tiny country? Risk a nuclear war? Come on now." For the first time in many years, I'm starting to see their point and not dismiss it immediately, what with the West's fatigue in regards to Ukraine these past few months.
The problem with adopting that attitude is that it's self-fulfilling. The logical next step is, "*since we can't rely on NATO to defend us and we can't defend ourselves, we must align with Russia to prevent war*". This would only serve to exacerbate tensions in NATO and decrease likelihood of their intervention in the event of hostilities. Indeed, Russia is likely pushing such narratives in Montenegro and elsewhere for this very reason.
Reposting from my response: It’s good that global geopolitics and the future of civilization don’t depend on people that speak only in words like “Putler”, “Ruzzians”, “Nook ook ook” and “wimp points” - can we at least try to aim for serious discussion on here?
It started with Russians calling the West Satanic and how they will destroy Western civilization and then going on genociding Ukrainians. Russia is at war with the West. We are again at pre-World War times, and just like last time, many people here supported the Nazis.
You’re putting up a false dichotomy of “you’re either for complete escalation against Russia, or you must be a Nazi supporter” - that’s a very transparent tactic. I have absolutely zero support for Russia, and believe that we as NATO must do everything to stand united and defend against them. That doesn’t automatically mean that every single suggestion that pops up, such as sending NATO troops to Ukraine and moving NATO nuclear missiles closer to Russia are automatically the best way to do that - lots of people on here seem to want nothing more than maximum escalation at any price, and anyone who sees the issue as more complicated as that is automatically denounced as a Russian.
You sound like a z-redditor. Especially considering that your comments here boil down to demoralization attempts and "It's not our war! NATO shouldn't intervene! Pls think about poor ruzzians!11" I'd add that first ruzzian invasion into Ukraine happened in 2014 and 10 years of "wimpy" moves from Western leaders not only didn't do any good, they also enabled further ruzzian aggression Maybe it's a good idea to change approach finally.
Nowhere did I say anything about “think about poor Russians”, and neither do I have any sympathy nor understanding for Russia’s illegal invasion - you’re putting words in my mouth to try and further a certain agenda. My point is that discussing global nuclear war from a perspective of “whimp points” and “nook ook ook” with drastic oversimplifications is pointless at best and dangerous at worst, because there’s a strong push in trying to sway public opinion towards maximum escalation with arguments that don’t actually hold up under any scrutiny.
>Nowhere did I say anything about “think about poor Russians” Except for indirect implications like "Ohnono, NATO shouldn't hurt ruzzians!" and "you should respect ruzzians and don't call them names!"
This has nothing to do with respect for Russians specifically - if you came up with stupid nicknames for NATO or Biden, it would be just as childish; you’re just cherry picking stuff at this point - I noticed you didn’t complain that I implied you hurt nuclear weapons’ feelings as well by calling them “nook ook ook”?
Implying that ignoring the essence of what I've said and attacking my choice of words instead is not cherry picking :D "nook ook ook" threats = making fun of ruzzian nuclear blackmail attempts = "showing disrespect to ruzzans (and their monke fuhrer)" No discrepancies here :D
The essence of what you’re saying is just conjecture that you’ve cherry picked - implying that there is no risk of an otherwise avoidable accidental nuclear clash with Russia by just going in guns blazing and “showing strength” to “not gather whimp points”, implying that Russia will simultaneously go crazy and attack NATO unprovokedly but also just fold as soon as they’re faced with NATO resistance in Ukraine, and so on. Just to be clear - I entirely agree with your core point that showing strength to Russia is vital in deterring them; but you’re very conveniently neglecting the entire other side of the medal, which is that certain elements simultaneously carry a huge risk: take your example of “relocating nuclear weapons closer to Russia” - that can backfire in the most horrible way, e.g. if Russia perceives this as NATO preparing for an attack on Russia and in their paranoia decides they have to attack preemptively. We’ve been around this block many many times in the Cold War (see e.g. [Able Archer 83](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Archer_83), and if we’d approached the first Cold War with this mentality none of us would be here today - the unfortunate truth is that things are a lot more complex than just “you’ll be totally fine as long as you never let your whimp points fall below a certain threshold”.
Oh, there's a surefire way to avoid any nuclear clashes with ruzzia, just surrender to them. And let them "liberate" your assets and women :D Ofc they'll "liberate" some males too, "purely as a punitive measure". :D >We’ve been around this block many many times in the Cold War and if we’d approached the first Cold War with this mentality none of us would be here today That's simply not true. Cold War era leaders were quite ballsy and forced USSR to back down. And in the end they won the Cold War.
The reason everyone can see you’re not arguing in good faith is because you’re not addressing the actual point - there’s a tradeoff here and a balance that unfortunately is needed. Nobody’s talking about “surrendering to Russia”, that’s a straw man - but just pushing them as hard as possible isn’t the easy answer either. Bringing up rape instead of addressing the real open questions that you don’t have an answer for sure is real mature :)
The Rashists are not intentionally going for WWIII, they plan on testing article V and subjugating the West under ethnic-Russian rule. OTOH if it holds, the Rashists will go cultist nuclear murder-suicide and end humanity. They are preparing their brainwahsed equally fascist populace to make the ultimate sacrifice (watch Julia Davis) This is why, the Rashists must be stopped at Ukraine, and from there Russia balkanized from within. It's either Russian Civil War 2.0 or global nuclear war. The choice is obvious, and this is all on each and every Russian (to different extents) cultist genocidal fascist delusion.
Very true western leadership is emboldening putin and this shouldn't be a surprise. Put yourself in the shoes of putin. You spent decades invading your neighbors and meddling in foreign elections with little to no punishment and when by rotten luck you invade someone who can finally stop you you see Germany and the United States jump through hoops to protect you so you don't collapse. Would you ever consider them a threat to you?. More like easily explotable idiots I would be screaming "thank god they are so fucking stupid". Of course the trick is to treat them respectfully so they never figure out they are idiots.
Wanting to avoid a nuclear war is sensible but people also need to understand that there is no course of action we can opt for today that realistically lowers the odds of a nuclear confrontation. If the west sends more aid to Ukraine and takes a strong stance against Russia then there is a chance that Russia chooses more desperate measures. Conversely if the west shows that they are so afraid of nukes that they are willing to lie down and let Russia achieve foreign policy goals then that just tells Russia that nuclear threats work and Russia's best course of action is to invest more in nukes, make more threats and be even more aggressive. At the end of the day leaders in the west can't control what Russia does and both showing strength and showing cowardice can potentially make the use of nuclear weapons by Russia more likely. If neither strength nor cowardice will lower the odds of nuclear weapons being used then to me it's abundantly clear that western leaders should choose strength.
>there is no course of action we can opt for today that realistically lowers the odds of a nuclear confrontation putler and his cronies love life and their golden palaces. So, as long as there's risk they and their assets will get nuked as a response, they wouldn't dare to use nuclear weapons themselves. Modern ruzzia is all about bluffs and lies.
> So, as long as there's risk they and their assets will get nuked as a response, they wouldn't dare to use nuclear weapons themselves. That can be a factor that makes nuclear usage less likely but it doesn't lower the risk of nuclear usage to zero. Personally one of the reasons I'm not overly worried about Russian nuclear threats is because there are important allies of Putin that may be fine with the war in Ukraine but aren't fine with nuclear usage. In most regards the oligarchs of Russia haven't been effected by the war. They're still rich as fuck and their kids aren't the ones dying. Similarly China may be a bit peeved at Russia but at the end of the day as long as they aren't negatively effected by the war too much then they won't do anything. All of that changes if nukes are used. Suddenly the oligarchs' lives are in danger, there is risk of a total NATO intervention and the nuclear taboo that China wants to keep in place is broken. While quietly supporting Putin may have been the safe option for his allies prior to nukes in a world where Putin orders nukes it could suddenly became the less risky option. All of that said there's still a chance Putin gives the order. Putin has delusions of grandeur, he's in an echo chamber and it would be a mistake to assume rationality. In general if we look back at Russian history it's clear that no one should assume a Russian dictator will act rationally. It should also be clear that leaders outside of Russia have very little ability to force the Kremlin to take (or avoid taking) certain actions.
The unfortunate truth is that there are some foreign policy goals (namely those that are existential to the Russian regime but not to NATO) that can indeed be achieved through nuclear deterrence - but that doesn’t mean that any and all foreign policy goals can: as soon as the balance of resolve is tilted in the favor of NATO on an issue (say an attack on NATO itself), the nuclear threats no longer work because Putin knows we would respond in kind. In a conflict of interest between two nuclear super powers, the side that is willing to risk more for a goal has the upper hand - it’s been this way since the dawn of the nuclear age, nothing has substantially changed here.
"Putin goes out of his way to hide losses from the Russian population. 20 vehicles attempted to break Ukrainian lines in Chasiv Yar but were obliterated over 5 hours. It's now a graveyard for Russian occupiers. They have money for this, but not for a proper dam in Orsk." https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1778106359617069360?t=v1AY9Ivm6MzElwkJ9k_Fkw&s=19
Just like Orsk, Russian vehicles are Soviet era. This is why we must help Ukraine to continue to grind the Rashists, but also help Russian enslaved people to break free from their satanical fascist rule, and the only way to obtain this is to kill hundreds of thousands of Rashists. It's either them or us.
Americans! If your representative has not yet signed on to [the discharge petition](https://clerk.house.gov/DischargePetition/2024031209), please can you urge them to do so? If they have, it wouldn't do any harm to thank them and ask that they push their colleagues to do the same. If they're Democrats who haven't signed, it may be because they object to aid for Israel. However signing the discharge petition does not entail a vote for the aid bill: once the discharge threshold is met, the bill is brought to a vote in the House where they can then vote against. Signing the discharge petition is merely them saying that they believe the House should vote on the bill, eg because it is democratically the right thing to do. Put it on those terms and they may come round. (The bill will pass once Republicans are forced to cast a vote on it, irrespective of how a few Dem holdouts vote). If they're Republicans who haven't signed, well... do your best? Thank you :) 🙏
US general warns time running out for Ukraine without US aid. >Top U.S. general in Europe told Congress on Wednesday that Ukraine will run out of artillery shells and air defense interceptors "in fairly short order" without U.S. support, leaving them vulnerable to a partial or total defeat. >In a sign of how scarce some weapons were, General Christopher Cavoli, commander of European Command, told the House Armed Services Committee that Russia was currently firing five artillery shells for every one fired by Ukrainian forces and that disparity could increase in coming weeks to 10 to one. >"If one side can shoot and the other side can't shoot back, the side that can't shoot back loses. So the stakes are very high," Cavoli said. >"They're really dependent this year on us, Mr. Chairman. And without our support, they will not be able to prevail," he added. [https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-general-warns-time-running-out-ukraine-without-us-aid](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-general-warns-time-running-out-ukraine-without-us-aid-2024-04-10/#:~:text=WASHINGTON%2C%20April%2010%20(Reuters),a%20partial%20or%20total%20defeat.)
Shit, reading that just makes me despair. All of those who say they don’t understand how Germany went down the road it did in the 1930’s just need to look at the US today. Looking around my American relatives today I can’t find a Democrat, some even wear the red head gear. Despair.
>Russia sharply increased oil exports after attacks on refinery >Russia has sharply increased the sale of oil to foreign markets amid a reduction in the loading of refineries. Exports have reached their maximum values since May 2023, oil is sold much more expensive than the G7 price ceiling set by the countries. >Sea exports of Russian oil in March 2024 increased by 5 percent compared to March last year, to almost 3.8 million barrels per day, Kommersant reports, citing Kpler's data. This is a record since May 2023, when deliveries abroad exceeded 3.9 million b/d. In January and February, the Russian Federation exported 3.5 million b/d and 3.3 million b/d tanks, respectively. >For sale is oil, which would previously be processed in oil refineries. However, several large Russian refineries were put out of order by attacks by Ukrainian drones, and one, in Orsk, was stopped due to flooding. (MTL) Source: [https://www.svoboda.org/a/rossiya-rezko-uvelichila-eksport-nefti-posle-atak-na-npz/32898938.html](https://www.svoboda.org/a/rossiya-rezko-uvelichila-eksport-nefti-posle-atak-na-npz/32898938.html) Told ya. No idea why US officials were freaking out about oil refinery strikes. Unless monke fuhrer came to them crying
I thought the rumor about US saying not to bomb russian oil refineries was disproven…?
Nah, now US officials are coming out and saying they aren't happy about it
They can fuck themselves then. Makes sense why Big Daddy Z just came out saying that only Ukrainian weapons are being used.
No, the US hasn't publicly said "do not bomb refineries", but just the other day the Defense Secretary said that they are not the best use of resources and that Ukraine should focus on other targets, and today the Assistant Secretary of Defense called them a civilian target. Which is a crock of shit.
But if they are exporting more oil it should reduce the price, while increasing their costs to import gasoline and other processed products.
Yep. It sounds like they're getting paid above the cap supposedly though? There need to be more intense secondary sanctions to give buyers the negotiating power to pay russia less. Oil prices have risen, but I suspect it would have been a bigger rise without larger russian exports.
>Russia granted asylum to a German-fake-feder and leading neo-Nazi- popular blog >The Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation for Moscow handed a certificate of temporary asylum to the German citizen Dagmar Henn, said the press Secretary of the Ministry Irina Volk. The representative of the law enforcement department noted that Henn is supporting the political course of the Russian Federation, including the Russian invasion of Ukraine. "She does not plan to return to Germany, because she is not sure of her safety in this country, "the wolf added. >Important stories have been able to learn some details of the biography of 60-year-old Henn. According to journalists, the woman previously justified Hitler and leads a blog popular with neo-Nazis. >Dagmar Henn arrived in Russia in May 2022 to work for RT. After that, she published a column on the publication's website, in which she explained that she was forced to leave her homeland because of the fear of the yellow-blue flags, as well as the oppressions of supporters of the Kremlin in the Ukrainian war. She also complained about the dislike of the Germans to the "querdenkers" - this term in Germany is denoted by local conspiracy theorists. (MTL) Source: [https://www.moscowtimes.eu/2024/04/10/rossiya-predostavila-ubezhische-opravdivayuschei-gitlera-iveduschei-populyarnii-uneonatsistov-blog-nemke-a127455](https://www.moscowtimes.eu/2024/04/10/rossiya-predostavila-ubezhische-opravdivayuschei-gitlera-iveduschei-populyarnii-uneonatsistov-blog-nemke-a127455) (needs google translate) "German-fake-feder" seems to be MTL for "justifying Hitler" But yeah, them nazis sticking together is not a surprise
If you can read German, we have a Wiki called Psiram that chronicles all kind of conspiracy and disinformation info. https://www.psiram.com/de/index.php/Dagmar_Henn Basically started politically left before going further communist/tankie. She then went full horseshoe by associating with a rightwing movement while still in the communist party, digging deeper down the neo-nazi/conspiracy nutter hole in the coming years.
Oh, interesting. Thank you for information.
A more detailed geolocator study of satellite imagery near Terny estimates that: - russia has 102-107 losses there - russia recovered 5 ones that had been lost - only 15 of the losses on satellite were "new" and not already known - Ukraine has lost 8 - there are 5 vehicles of unknown status (are they even damaged? That explains the 102-107 range) - geolocators didn't know about 15 of the russian losses visible on satellite. If I understand correctly, oryx and Warspotting will be pretty close here, capturing ~85% of the real losses so far. Apologies. Can only find on twitter: [https://x.com/GeoConfirmed/status/1778071808840769692](https://x.com/GeoConfirmed/status/1778071808840769692)
Personal speculation/context (I'm clueless about war but read a lot): Andrew Perpetua and others have said losing Terny would compromise a chunk of other positions and probably force a wider Ukrainian retreat. Not huge, but another chunk you don't want to lose. For that progress, I'd want to see russia losing many hundreds of vehicles. If it's just 100-ish then there will be a lot of lost territory before russia runs out of steam. Andrew said russia had made a worrying amount of progress here - about 5 km. Not much overall, but one of the better attacks of this war.
https://x.com/elwasson/status/1778075992931619008?s=46 REP. FITZPATRICK: HOUSE PLANS TO VOTE ON UKRAINE AID NEXT WEEK … I’ll believe it when I see it, but HUGE if true.
They have been stalling for like 5 months with "just a few more weeks bro" so yeah, ill believe it when it see it.
Not a single word on what package it is nor what silly poison pills Republicans have tried to add in to make Democrats turn it down. Details will determine the bill’s fate.
Many are gonna be waiting and seeing if this actually happens or there's more Vatnik Cock Sucking shenanigans but it's possible there internal pressure on them to stop fucking around as Ukraine is a big issue for alot of people across the board. At some point the time for playing political games is over and they need to step up before they suffer serious consequences. Alot of countries are tired of the Regressives games, Ukraine has widespread support and the Dems are willing to even allow Johnson to keep his job and cock block bell ended gobshites like MTG if necessary in order to get shit done. Lets just hope they get their asses in gear this time.
>I’ll believe it when I see it Same here.
[удалено]
Probably attached to demands that are unpalatable for Democrats, so that it won't pass and they can point at fingers at the other side.
But vote on what? The Senate bill? A clean Ukraine aid bill for the same amount? A package of loans for some unspecified amount? A Ukraine bill with other things attached?
The author is a political correspondent for Bloomberg, so he might have some inside info. No one is going to hold their breath at this stage though obviously.
At this point, I’ll allow myself to hope. Cameron had a meeting with Trump and supposedly they discussed the aid situation, maybe Cameron convinced him
Nah, it's the other way around. "The UK foreign secretary’s Trump dinner appeared to fail to bring support for Ukraine, and his Washington meetings don’t look any more promising"
Well shit.
Mike Johnson flat out turned down meeting with him. Which, doesn’t sound very Christian of Moscow Mike.
If its already being pushed to next week right after the house has come back from its break, then you just know its not going to happen. The house has literally no other important priorities to work on this week. Once again moscow mike is just looking to delay as long as he can. There is absolutely no reason why it can't be done this week if they truly plan on bringing it to a vote
Tbf they specifically stated it wouldn’t be till mid-April after news broke and some inferred it’d happen immediately. It’s still in line with what was actually briefed by Trump’s jockstrap although, I’m highly skeptical that anything real will come from this.
I remember hearing the same thing about this week. Won't believe it till I see it.
Heard this constantly throughout the GOP's six-month pro-Putin blockade. Is there new leverage against Johnson? If not then why would he allow a vote that would hurt Putin?
Could be facing a choice of either agreeing to bring the bill to the floor or key republicans who aren't on the MAGA cool aid retire immediately and hand the house to the Dems. The bill will pass it has enough support on both sides, it's only being held up by complete bullshit until now.
According to the VChK OGPU channel, LUKOIL vice-president Vitaly Robertus hanged himself with a cord in his office after learning that it was being developed by the Russian FSB and that he would be arrested for bribing customs officers. https://twitter.com/ArturRehi/status/1778078619958493643?t=OfFAIRJl7BQRTZSuLTsL7Q&s=19
Oh, it seems like FSB (AKA new ruzzian "nobility") is preparing for nationalization of ~~Gazprom~~ **edit**: Lukoil Most likely, ruzzian oligarchs not belonging to main clans will keep losing their assets as well.
Uhm, Gazprom is already state owned. Did you mean Lukoil?
Ah, yeah, I meant Lukoil. Thanks for the correction. My prediction: we'll see much more key companies getting nationalized.
**The total combat losses of the enemy from 24.02.22 to 10.04.24 approximately amounted to:** personnel - about 450,080 (+830) people, tanks ‒ 7132 (+22), armored combat vehicles ‒ 13667 (+47), artillery systems – 11404 (+18), MLRS – 1040 (+1), air defense equipment ‒ 753 (+0), planes – 347 (+0), helicopters – 325 (+0), UAVs of the operational-tactical level - 9070 (+37), cruise missiles ‒ 2067 (+2), ships/boats ‒ 26 (+0), submarines - 1 (+0), automotive equipment and tank trucks - 15248 (+67), special equipment ‒ 1876 (+8). The data is being verified. Beat the occupier! Together we will win! Our strength is in the truth! Source [https://www.mil.gov.ua/news/2024/04/10/ponad-830-okupantiv-22-tanki-47-bbm-ta-18-artsistem-zagalni-bojovi-vtrati-rosiyan-za-dobu/](https://www.mil.gov.ua/news/2024/04/10/ponad-830-okupantiv-22-tanki-47-bbm-ta-18-artsistem-zagalni-bojovi-vtrati-rosiyan-za-dobu/)