Russia - threadbanned users in OP

Crazy footage

It was expected being they need to replace their Older Tornados , hence why they are only taking 35

Looks like a happy camper. Is that the only facial expression he can make?

Usually the sights are off being they don't sit on the gun ,so there is usually some difference between whats on a screen and where the bullets hit ,and yes it's 30mm cannon

Russia has said it has not asked China for military resources, as it has enough resources for its onslaught on Ukraine, on UKRAINE, no mention of the resouces in general for its next annexation

That lad was 100% playing eye of the tiger with that gun on the 2nd apc

I'm guessing completely here, but it looks like the commander view, whereas the gunner likely has different optics

Fairly new piece of kit too. Bloody fast, can go up to 110 km/h. I think the Ukrainians have about 60 to 80 of them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BTR-4

This is grim I know but if you look closely you can see the Russian infantry hiding behind the targeted vehicle, so it seems the gunner fired explosive rounds under the vehicle also

Ok, sorry perhaps it was a bit disrespectful. We need a smaller number of troops who are more highly skilled. We are much more likely to be under cyber attack than we are to be invaded by a traditional military.

I'm not convinced at this stage by the merits of joining NATO, primarily on the basis that we are not under any territorial threat and also on the basis that I don't think we bring much to the table at this stage without huge spending that seems unnecessary. However, I can see the problem where we wave neutrality around as this kind of tacit restatement of us being this happy-go-lucky little country that wouldn't hurt a fly, and prompting many Irish people to adopt this sense of having a moral high ground over other countries in the so-called West. There's a sense of: "We go to Africa or Lebanon or the Mediterranean waters and we keep the peace and provide aid -- we aren't like those imperialist Brits or those imperialist Americans!"

Don't get me wrong, a lot of that is fair, but it can sometimes feel like a moral get-out clause -- in that we are happy to profit from the Western system (which we have done quite handsomely here over the last few decades) so long as we can pretend that when it comes to Western transgressions in the world we can wash our hands of any sense of moral culpability. We will take all the American FDI and benefits of European integration -- the fruits of participation in the Western system -- but be slow to recognise that we are essentially profiteering from things like US hegemony and indirectly benefiting from the massive insurance policy of the Western system that any attack or invasion by agressors against the NATO alliance will rain fire down upon the Earth.

I don't think it's a binary choice between NATO or neutrality, but we may find in the immediate years to come that our Western partners (particularly within the EU, where Macron has been pushing a common defence policy for a while now and the Germans look more prepared to go with that flow now than they did under Merkel) will be more demanding of us when it comes to nailing our flag to the mast.

You will struggle to find anyone who doesn't think Putin is evil.

What's more common, however, is people trying to the understand underlying political mechanisms at play throughout this crisis

An adult discussion perhaps, but you and other's repeatedly decide to parrot that immature horse **** "both side" "comrade" etc etc which makes the thread read like the chat history on teenage online games forum

True, but Putin doesn't give toss for Russians and unfortunately the prevailing wind direction is south, not NE.