2 things on this.
1.The Kirsk - Putins first major political crisis as president - he let his own Sailors die a slow and painful death at the bottom of the ocean while refusing international help and sedating complaining mothers, Oh and he finished off his holiday before returning to address the situation.
2.Russia were very clear to go to lengths to point out that those missiles that landed in Poland were not fired from Russia - because Russia wants nothing to do with a conflict involving a Nato state because he knows it will either end in a Nuclear **** show or ultimately complete de-militarization of the russian army.
Even without Russia at the top table of any new body, the US, China, the larger European economies are going to dominate it, and they'll set it up so that there's always some kind of get-out clause that suits them, or else they won't participate at all. It's not possible to have some kind of independent and impartial authority above all nations equally, unless we get in contact with some aliens that are willing to do the job.
Which has a longer range, land based AA or the sea king's anti-sub weapons?
Iranian drones are cheap as chips compared to the missiles required to shoot them down
Until an inexpensive AA missile for those drones is introduced, the russians/iranians are burning western money by sending those drones in the air. Financial as well as physical terrorism.
People have been speculating about the exhaustion of russian precision missile capabilities since spring of this year - every 2nd month a new prediction comes out from some talking head about how they have effectively run out of precision munitions and cannot launch any more long range strikes on desired targets. Then a few weeks later the russians do another wave of precision missiles against Ukrainian infrastructure.
The reality is nobody actually knows how much they have in reserve - they have been paranoid about "the west" for decades, and likely stockpiling all sorts in preparation for the war with NATO that never comes. The invasion of Ukraine was likely planned for some time, so no doubt in the interim they have ramped up production and stockpiled essential parts for their missile industry also.
I would image the Sea Kings are used as spotters in anti submarine warfare rather than actually sinking the submarines themselves...?
Edit - I see they can actually carry anti submarine weapons, interesting!
It will sink just the same. Why would it matter who made the helicopter?
Looks like UK are giving Sea King helicopters to Ukraine. Sky News believes they will be used to hunt and destroy Russian subs in the Black Sea. So, what would happen if a Russian sub was sunk by Ukraine piloting a UK helicopter?
Don't think of a yellow horse.
Lets see how the current strategy plays out. I won't suggest what Ukraine should do next as I am unaware as to what Ukraines current and future logistical capabilities would be. It will depend on what NATO supplies them with. You can't plan with what you don't have. Also bare in mind what Antony Blinken said last Summer re the use of donated weapons systems on Russian soil. NATO does not want escalation. I believe that remains the case.
Me neither. Ukraine should be bombing them right back, it's the only way the Russians might ever question their government. But they can't, cos they depend totally on western weapons and the West is still afraid of nuclear retaliation
How could a new body do any better than the current UN? The problem the UN faces is unsolvable - the only way to solve it would be to have a UN army bigger than any individual nations, so that the UN can police those nations who dont respect its rulings. And that will never happen, not a hope there will be enough buy in to support something like that.
"lol"
So why are they reliant on Iranian drones then?
The Kazakh chocolate industry have spotted a new market.
TASTE THE FREEDOM Vatnik.
Make a nice Christmas present.
Because war is brutal? It's brutal on the ground for both Ukrainian & Russian troops. But it's also additionally brutal for many Ukrainian citizens since they are being targeted as a Russian military tactic.
Anyway, so what's your proposal to bring this war to a conclusion. It reads from above, that you think NATO and allies should supply as many weapons and munitions as necessary to crush the Russian army on Ukrainian soil. What else do you propose? How do you see it all ending?
Nope. The current NATO strategy of arming Ukraine is working quite well I would have thought. Why escalate (or descend) to a level of brutality that the enemy are engaging in as a possibly better strategy?
How many missiles do Russia have left?
Russia doesn't have an unlimited amount of missile to take out this infrastructure, infact from reading of it, they are almost of out them
lol
The UN has only ever applied to tinpot dictators from backwaters in Africa and Asia. It was never able to hold the big players to account. Now its just become clear to everyone
The UN is now broken. It has shown itself to be utterly useless when push comes to shove. Time for a new body when this mess is over.
What this invasion shows is that if you've nuclear arms, you can basically do whatever the hell you like with minimum consequences beyond a bit of social, economic and political isolation. That's the message it sends and it's why North Korea is now starting to beef up its missile programmes and no doubt more will follow.
Honestly, quite a depressing situation - humanity doesn't look like it has all that many more generations left before it wipes itself out.
OK, if it suits your argument that you want to push so much - then Ukraine could be enabled to carpet bomb Russian cities by way of revenge. Happy now?
What are you saying? Turn the other cheek? And let the Russians rape you?
Strange thing about this war 17-pdr, most Russians living in Russia, especially in Moscow and St. Petersburg (Main Citys) etc. do not give a damn about Russian bombing atrocities killing innocent Ukrainian citizens, the majority (Russian) even openly support such killings. And neither do they give a damn about the deaths of their own soldiers. Of course, for the families of the dead soldiers, it's a different matter, and you can be % sure that they are not supporting the war. Now extrapolate a bit, (not that it's going to happen) and Ukraine gets weapons with far greater range, and greater destructive capabilities and starts tit for tat shelling in Moscow and St, Petersburg etc. You can be sure that while death and destruction raining down on citys thousands of klms away from them, does not bother them, the same thing happening to them directly will cause a big change of attitude, and questioning of why its happening to them. And for sure the war would not have lasted as long as it has.
Its already a humanitarian crisis. Millions have fled. Do you think that no electricity changes that?
What russia is doing now, is an admission from a military point of view they have lost the war. They cannot do anything else but bomb civilian infrastructure and hope that the Ukrainians sue for peace, but that is highly unlikely to happen, given the success that Ukraine has had on the battlefield.
To add, Russia doesn't have an unlimited amount of missile to take out this infrastructure, infact from reading of it, they are almost of out them and Ukraine anti-missile defence is much better now then it was previously.
I maintain that if and once Ukraine and Europe get over the Winter and we get into Spring... Russia will be the one to blink.
It really just shows the UN Security Council as being a useless talking shop. There's one rule for the permanent members, and one rule for everyone else. It effectively means the organisation has no moral authority whatsoever anymore, if it ever had.
I still can’t understand how a country can bomb another countries infrastructure so their citizens freeze and have no light in the 21st century and seemingly get away with it without serious retaliation.
And said country is on the UN council.
In this case, though, the drug dealer (Russia) went down the road and assaulted the average Joe (Ukraine). Are you saying that Ukraine should have just taken it?
When you look at it, this is an incredibly unbalanced 'war'. It's an invasion of a country which is effectively prevented from fighting back fully. In any normal war time situation the past, if a country bombed the hell out of a neighbours' infrastructure they could be fairly certain of getting a reply on their own territory.
Instead, we've Ukraine on an entirely defensive position and being incredibly restrained in their response. All they're doing is clearing an invasion of their own territory on their own territory.
Russia is certainly feeling economic and social consequences as their businesses and citizens are finding it hard to trade and interact with the world and diplomatic consequences as they're frozen out of various organisations, but it just shows how they can invade with utter impunity in many respects.
In the meantime, you've still got useful idiots regurgitating Kremlin propaganda, which keeps trying to present a 'both sides' nonsense argument.
"Morality kinda goes out the window when you'd have the likes of the Russian bastards brutalising your country."
So indiscriminate warfare is ok as a retaliatory measure to the other sides indiscriminate warfare? Is that what you're saying?
yeah but what happens to their millions of citizens with power/heat/water? Its a humanitarian crisis about to happen, not as simple as "man up, soldier on"
Not to mention the impact it will have on ukrainian logistics for the war effort
Ukraine fight on as they realise that Russia have no other ace's up their sleeve
Oh and by the way, might be a case for rounding up and interning all Russian citizens here. You wouldn't know what they'd be up to, would you?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/23cbe5e5e50cebb31e4a86160a77c62d.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/ac24e4e8dbd15466c93a4c42455a319a.svg)
