Russia - threadbanned users in OP

You really need to brush up on Churchill. Zelensky is a decent man so please don’t compare him to that pig of Churchill . Churchill is closer to putin in character. Embarrassing stuff.

Churchill planned and executed chemical weapons attacks. Churchill suggested that chemical weapons should be used “against recalcitrant Arabs as an experiment.” He added “I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes to spread a lively terror” in Iraq.

He diverted food aid from Bengal in India during a famine. He said they were a beastly people with a beastly religion and deserved all they got for breeding like rabbits.

In 1937, he told the Palestinian royal commission "I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place."

Churchill certainly believed in racial hierarchies and eugenics, says John Charmley, author of Churchill: The End of Glory. In Churchill's view, white protestant Christians were at the top, above white Catholics, while Indians were higher than Africans, he adds. "Churchill saw himself and Britain as being the winners in a social Darwinian hierarchy."

And I assume you’re Irish(pretty embarrassing if you are)

In January 1919 Churchill assumed the role of Secretary of State for War and Air. Eleven days later the Irish War of Independence began.

Churchill's role in Ireland is most associated with deploying the controversial "Black and Tans" Named after their uniforms, these temporary constables soon developed a reputation for excessive violence. 

In Churchill: The Greatest Briton Unmasked, Nigel Knight claims that Churchill repeatedly refused to stand down the Black and Tans and even advocated the use of air power in Ireland.

Please choose better heroes or maybe you just idolise that above.

Source for this claim of the Ukrainians wrecking Gepards?

Is this it?

If so, your spin is unreal.

https://bulgarianmilitary.com/amp/2022/07/31/norway-delivered-gepard-spaag-35mm-shells-are-useless-in-ukraine/

It is not so it seems that your spin is unreal.

orcs wearing Ukrainian uniforms or fighting while wearing white arm bands has been happening since the Crimea invasion and still to this day.

It's a war crime.

""I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned"

Richard Feynman"

He might not have said this. And, there are definitely putinbots on the thread. Once found out, they run off, are threadbanned, and sometimes rereg.

"This war is really the west's fault..." (despite Russia being the ones who invaded Ukraine)

"I'm anti-war. That's why I think NATO should stop giving Ukraine weapons, perpetuating this dreadful conflict..." (No suggestion that Russia simply withdraw from Ukraine instead. 😐️)

"As bad as this war is - the pounding of civilian infrastructure and the targeted killing and deportation of innocent civilians by Russian forces... what I want to talk about for some reason is how America invaded Iraq in 2003."

And many more attempts to divert, confuse and obfuscate the issue at hand.

This is somewhat reassuring, especially the "no time lost" aspect -

It's hard to see that clearly through the fog of war, and estimates will vary wildly depending on the source, but conservative estimates put Russian casualties at at least 100,000 (killed/wounded), and possibly even closer to 500,000. It would be naïve to think that Ukraine hasn't been taking similarly-heavy casualties, but where the difference is coming is in the hardware. Russia have lost so many tanks, aircraft, APCs and artillery pieces since their invasion began, whereas Ukraine have been getting a lot of weaponry and training from the West, while also having captured Russian stuff added to its arsenal. In order to advance its aims, Russia will either need to build or buy, and train those conscripts in how to use it. The numbers thing isn't going to really work for Russia. It doesn't have a bottomless pit of men to draw from. It has a population of close to 150 million, and obviously not all of those are going to be men of military age, and even of that demographic, around 1 million have fled. What Russia is then left with is an increasingly unprofessional army of conscripts whose commitment to the cause is going to be in question.

I see the US are recommending that Ukraine hold off on further offensives until they get more training. Am I the only one sceptical about this? Ukraine have shown competence in conducting offensives and there is no sign they would go with mindless human wave attacks.

Could the US be worried that the Russians could completely collapse soon, which would be messy. They may prefer a negotiated settlement rather than military defeat.

Seems you’re still salty about being wrong the other night re Germany bbc news report. Sad! Well at least you seen my rant, you might have learnt something this time.

Putin seems to regard this war as a crusade and my feeling is that any acceptance of a negotiated settlement would really serve as a pause to rebuild and try again. On the other hand, Ukraine would sure want a clause in the settlement that essentially makes it impossible or at least catastrophic for Russia to invade again (e.g. admission into NATO), and that's a term Putin would really struggle to accept.

It seems that Russia and Ukraine remain too far apart in their aims to come to a negotiated settlement. One side or both may become much more amenable to a compromise if or when they assess that victory by force would be impossible.

This was clear from the moment Putin invaded. Non-proliferation should be out the window, given the US and UK betrayal and hoodwinking of ukraine in order to get them to disarm, and the incredible cost to Ukraine of that. Trump showed the US can not be relied on for a second. Australia and NZ are in a NATO like treaty with the US called the ANZUS treaty. Trump made it clear it is illusory, despite Australia being the US's most steadfast millitary partner, having sent support for every major foreign military misadventure they have engaged in, from Vietnam onwards.

Australia and Taiwan both need nuclear deterents. They should join forces and develop a nuclear and missile capability in Australia. I have some disquieting thoughts that maybe China did nothing to disuade North Korea because it wanted it's own nuclear Wagner group.

If any NATO member like Hungary or Turkey make waves or stupid demands to keep Ukraine out of NATO, Ukraine should just say fine by us, we'll develop nuclear weapons instead. They would have no problem doing so technically, having been responsible for at least 40% of the USSRs military production and research.