Russia - threadbanned users in OP

Sickening. As is the aftermath video which I won't share on here. By the way, it was an elderly couple in that car.

Indeed, but I don't want to get my hopes up, many areas are flat open ground, not suitable for infantry (where Ua are strong), Ukrainians are losing valuable military vehicles and armor they can't afford to lose, the Russians will adapt their tactics accordingly, their cruise missile and rocket strikes are potent, if Russia get air superiority then it will become exponentially harder for Ua

No excuse in my opinion. This isn't the Middle East where armies have to worry about militants with no army uniform using vehicles as suicide bombs. Quite obviously a civilian car.

You suggested that if you are a man fleeing a warzone, that's a life choice (much like veganism or not wearing socks, perhaps?). I'd like you to address that point please.

Here's the quote, for your convenience: "And no foreign country should be obligated to facilitate that life choice."

Uh...these are the Russians that civilians need the weapons to defend against. Thanks for finding the supporting evidence.

Ah yes the Neville Chamblerlain approach. It didn't work in 1938 and it aint going to work in 2022 either.

You must have a damn great white flag or would you just hang the bedsheets out the window.

The threat would have been Georgia, Moldova, and the Baltic states to start reconstituting the USSR.

But that was depending on his blitzkrieg in Ukraine working.

Instead he has created his Stalingrad.

What if, perish the thought, Russia nukes Kyiv to end the war to avoid any more losses and claims they were just doing what the US did to Japan? Does the West step in then or what?

If civilians take up arms they are considered combatants, according to the Geneva Convention. They're soldiers without a uniform and a fair target.

So handing out arms to civilians is a double-edged sword. Not that I would ever question the wisdom of Vlydymyr Zelenskyyyy!!

Big warning on this one (this is the aftermath of the Russian attack on a civilian car).

I think you are being a bit obtuse. Populations tend to be roughly 50:50 in terms of male/female. If you see a wave of refugees that are 90% male, then you have to wonder why are all the females left behind. Most societies do prioritise women and children.

If you get 1m "refugees" and 900k of them are men, then people will obviously question whether those 900k men are actually refugees fleeing a place of war. Nobody begrudges people fleeing an actual war. But they are entitled to be skeptical whether those individuals who claim to be fleeing a war are actually fleeing it. It would not be impossible for someone to hop into a boat and land in Europe and claim to be coming from somewhere they were never within 500 miles of.

The Syrians were fleeing a war. And I think Euope rightly took at least 1m of them. If you have a huge number of people with no documents landing and claiming to be fleeing persecution from some remote part of Africa that has been on the news as being taken over by militants, it is not unfair to treat the lack of evidence or documentation as being perhaps a little convenient.

Big Russian Kyiv assault finally seems to be almost ready - https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-russia-war-news-putin-zelenskyy-latest-live-updates-12541713?postid=3498774#liveblog-body

Not really, the yanks have shipped out hundreds of light anti armour weapons to the Uks, this is one result, anything approaching Russian armour aggressively will be taken out.