Firstly I 'feel' no need whatsoever to clarify anything here. My position is clear and hasn't altered. If anyone wants to discuss my position it's on the record here for all to see bit I'm certainly not going to do your research work for you, if you're that interested you know what to do.
Isn't it interesting that you say it's clear to 'everyone' - my, my you're allowing your arrogance get the better of you there..
On NATO expansion eastwards
https://twitter.com/andersostlund/status/1488043801813958656?s=20&t=y3tdl3vnWnW_sg_qBdf8oA
If NATO enforced a no fly zone over the the Ukraine it would probably make the invasion unviable.
The Russians lost thousands in eastern Ukraine, against a military that was run into the ground and under resourced under Putin's orders.
They are well prepared for whats coming and have been preparing for the last 8 years ,I will agree this will be bloody but it definitely won't be one sided
not looking good. the only hope at this stage is a swift takeover from russia with little resistance to keep the body count down, otherwise it's gonna be a bloodbath. unless of course NATO decides to properly jump in, which could also be a bloodbath but at least it would make the russian's think twice.
Seems to me like classic deflection tactics when being pressed to back up points, I mean if you can clearly state your opinions so the goal posts cant be moved .
It's clear to everyone then what you are at, you have got alot of responses because what you are saying isn't true or doesn't stand up to the facts.
But do feel free to clarify your opinion for all to see.
Indeed. There are reportedly some bits and pieces of reservist equipment on the move and some reserve troops as well, but seems sketchy as yet. I am keeping my money on the invasion happening in February. I guess he can move his shít around as and when he wants, but he's moved an awful lot of shít an awful long ways just to move it back again.
Russian oil & gas needs to be banned from Europe if he invades as well as the other sanctions they're talking of. No if's or but's, turn off the money tap.
No, doesn't look like it. But Lukashenko only won the election because the Lukashenko controlled central election committee gave him an astounding 80% of the vote...a figure which drove mass protests for a long time afterwards, until they were ruthlessly put down. He's most likely acting under Putins orders, but if / when the war kicks off, it may not go quite according to Lukashenk's plan. Restoring all the Baltic states to the Russian Motherland ...Thats a very shaky assumption to make, especially as the A/M Baltic states are not in favor of such a move. He's right about one thing though, a war will change the boundary's, but may not be in the way he imagines, and he could find himself ex -president.
No, not convinced either way. I won't be telling anyone definitively that future events will or will not happen.
Good old RT getting the we were attacked narrative ready , we are only invading to prevent Genocide .
Genocide of who???
Nobody in Russia seems to know who
On the Twitter machine earlier
https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1487876323951448067?s=20&t=264RIWSUNghuI7SvXP6RhA
Huge amounts of Russian military moving into Belarus and on Ukraine's borders now. No chance this is a hoax given the type of kit that is being sent.
Enlighten me...
You have Zero clue 🅾️
No he's not FFS...if Putin is not going to invade then why the hell would this guy?
No deflection here my good man, I've made my position quite clear, why the hell do you think I've prompted so much abuse and false narratives? Now if you're interested in my position you can scroll back through the thread, I'm certainly not going to do your research for you.
I note you said 'if'....you're not convinced either I see! 😄
Looks like Belarus is getting ready to fight the all the Former Soviet states .
Jesus this not going to end well
I saw this tweet as well on Friday which is another similar cog in that war machine:
So you are deflecting then? You cannot give me clear objectified points that you are going to stand behind 100%.
Im afraid if you dont even know what points you are trying to make yourself you are losing credibility.
So if we have a new wave of 'little green men' taking over parts of Ukraine who pretend they aren't Russian soldiers, does that count? Because that's what happened last time.
The last piece of the puzzle will be the mobilization of the Russian reserve Forces , everything else is in place, armour , artillery, infantry , amphibious forces,and Anti Aircraft brigade's
That analyst two weeks ago said that one of the warning signals of pending action would be the arrival of medical units. Their materials are a little more sensitive to storage requirements than tanks.
Mod - Back on topic everyone. Anymore trolling or dragging in irrelevant off topic nonsense will mean threadbans
The Soviet casualties in WW2 were undoubtedly enormous. However a few things should be borne in mind:
Prior to the German Operation Barbarossa in Summer 1841, the USSR and Nazis were allies (the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, which people often overlook), and some Russian casualties were surely due to the extra supplies and geographical advantages sent to Germany in 1939-41. Also, in 1945, it seems that in order to get to Berlin ahead of the Americans, the final Russian offensives of 1945 involved huge and arguably un-necessary casualties.
The sacrifices and suffering of the Russian people were truly enormous, but the Russian regime was not blameless, and did not come into WW2 with clean hands.
You claimed that the soviets saved the Americans from occupation by the Nazis in WW2. Please explain how that was going to happen?
I never claimed they won the war completely by themselves, I claimed they won it largely by themselves, yes they had some minor help relativel from the US and UK relatively speaking but the Soviets by FAR made the largest contribution to the war.
Yes all countries portray the belief that they won the war themselves but the Soviets are the only ones who have substance to their claims, they killed most of the Nazis themselves, fought them the most by far, the Nazis also spent most of their time and resources trying to defeat the soviets and the Soviets also launched the invasion that ended the war.
As I said the Soviets lost ten million soldiers during WW2, while the USA lost 400,000 and the UK lost 300,000, the US and UK were little more than a support network for the Soviets despite what Hollywood films would have you believe.
First off that wasn't your claim. Your claim was that the Nazis would have occupied the USA during WW2. That's a ludicrous leap by any stretch of the imagination, for no other reason than the geographical positioning of the USA. If you think it's not then I'd like to hear how you think they would have managed it.
Secondly, yes I am denying that the Soviets won the war by themselves. Did they make the largest contribution and human sacrifice to defeating the Axis Powers - Absolutely, yes they did. Did they beat them single-handedly? Of course not.
I have noticed that Nationalists in the UK, USA and Russian all seem to pretend that that their country won the war on their own when the reality is that they all made their own contributions. They weren't the only ones either. Plenty of other smaller nations (such as Australia and New Zealand) also contributed. If the Nazis didn't have to fight in places like North Africa and commit resources to try and prevent the British gaining a beachhead in France then they would have had more resources to pour into their Eastern front battle against the Soviets. Similarly the Soviets were not distracted by having to fight the Japanese on their Eastern frontier as the Japanese were preoccupied with fighting the Americans in the Pacific and the British in south-east Asia.
Fighting a war on multiple fronts against multiple nations is infinitely more difficult and complex then fighting one concentrated enemy on a single front.
There will be no invasion as in the invasion Joe Biden, Boris Johnson etc are telling us is imminent...
So are you denying the Soviets largely won the war by themselves? Or what are you trying to deny here?
The Soviets lost 10 million soldiers and 15 million civilians during WW2, while the USA lost 400,000 soldiers and a few thousand civilians.
Not only that but the Nazis took more than three quarters of their casualties to the Red army.
Can you please explain what you are trying to deny here? Are you denying the Soviets played the largest by FAR in defeating Hitler.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w9.vanillicon.com/v2/99cb88aba86d6cd761548c5d5bb50f6a.svg)
