Ukraine’s Special Operations Forces said Wednesday that its soldiers are using US-provided HIMARS rocket systems to target pontoon bridges and engineering equipment in Russia’s Kursk Oblast.
The statement, made on Telegram, marks the first time Kyiv has said it’s using US rockets inside Russia, which marks a significant escalation of the proxy war. The US has said Ukraine is allowed to use US-provided weapons in its Kursk offensive but has not confirmed the use of HIMARS.
Russian officials have previously said that HIMARS have been used to destroy bridges inside Kursk. “Where do Russian pontoon bridges ‘disappear’ in the Kursk region? Operators … accurately destroy them,” Ukraine’s Special Operations Forces said.
The US still says that it won’t support long-range strikes inside Russian territory, but Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is pushing hard for the US and other NATO countries to lift all restrictions on the use of their weapons.
On Monday, Zelensky said the Kursk offensive shows Russia’s red lines were a “bluff” and called his Western backers “naive” for worrying about the risk of escalation. “We are witnessing a significant ideological shift—the naive, illusory concept of so-called red lines regarding Russia, which dominated the assessment of the war by some partners, has crumbled apart these days,” he said.
But a NATO-backed invasion of Ukraine risks a major escalation from Russia. Only a few months ago, Moscow warned the UK that if British weapons are used inside Russian territory, Russia could respond by targeting British military sites in Ukraine and “beyond.”
This is an absurd war. There are so many rules. Neither side can afford to lose. The rules will be broken.
Russia can't afford to lose much more so than Ukraine.
It’s USA/NATO vs Russia, with stupid East European nationalists thinking they need to fight Russia to preserve their nations.
I really expect a nuclear war now. I live where a nuke would be sent… We need peace until I can move.
Where can you go?
Greenland! Actually, parts of Alaska might be fine. I doubt I could easily move to various isolated islands. They’d nuke each other; then stop.
new zealand!
Can you make any positive case for the use of nukes?
What would the Russians win?
What would NATO gain?
What would the Ukrainians possibly gain?
The Russians would lose the already limited support from China and India (plus pretty much everyone else) – Ukraine might surrender but the Russians would be more isolated than the Soviets before them and go the same way.
NATO would risk direct war with Russia a thing they have been doing so much to avoid – all to risk with no gain whatsoever – as in Russia would not stop much less surrender.
Ukraine would lose their backing from the west if they somehow were able to nuke something – so game over.
Blame this entire mess on the DC Ghouls that must be stopped before they kill us all. Evil pervades in Washington DC. China should know that if Russia falls they are next along with Iran.
I do not care whom to blame I care that there is no chance of anyone launching a nuclear attack simply because none of the players get anything positive out of it.
The DC Ghouls (if they exist) get much more out of continuing the operation on a conventional basis.
If you have some powerful group that could actually improve their situation by using nukes then by all means be concerned but as it stands no such group exists.
The MIC (if it has any power) makes more money out of a conventional war as do any cabal of politicians anywhere in the west.
The Russians know only all too well that they too are not going to gain from using nukes.
Inventing Ghouls who without motivation prefer to risk the end of times for no gain whatsoever is just nonsense.
"nonsense", is believing that the "DC Ghouls" do not exist. 🙁
Nonsense is disregarding any incentives such Ghouls may have if they exist – which is what you do.
Live on in your fantasy. My best. 🙂
I can see that you prefer to live in your fantasy driven fear fest – enjoy the ride – nothing can prevent you from fearing your own shadow.
Some time try History and Psychology studies. 🙂
Try forwarding an actual argument.
You are desperate and a very narrow thinker, but thanks for the back and forth. 🙂
As I said try actual arguments not just voicing your unsubstantiated opinions!
I have given U the last word, U can rest now. 🙂
Your fantasy and level of disinformation is staggering.
Of course the Russian bot says that
Im going to nickname you "bot" hereinout
Should be easy to showcase examples of me peddling disinformation than should it not?
So why have you not?
The answer is simple – because you can’t!
Russia can fall only together with U.S. and with the rest of NATO.
MAD is only effective if the threat is real. The US and NATO are attacking Russia.
"Ukraine would lose their backing from the west if they somehow were able to nuke something – so game over."
No they wouldn't. Russophobia in the West is rampant. Disregard for Ukrainian lives is manifest. It is perhaps not as pervasive and perverse as the disregard in the West for Palestinian lives, but Russian civilians dying is of no concern whatsoever. The Crocus massacre was met more with a sence of triumphalism, or well deservedness at best, than anything else.
Attacks on the Zaporozhizhia nuclear power plant have not been cause of any concern so far, even by the largely under Western control IAEA. An attack with nuclear dirty bombs or some sort of nuclear disaster by terrorist attacks on nuclear power plants inside Russia would likewise be met with enthusiasm and propagated in our press as a cruel but necessary and sensible tactic by the usual lot of wise men and women and generals in suits. This is after all the same press who are selling us a genocide of a defenseless institutinally brutalized people as a somewhat regrettable protective step in an ongoing peace process. They have proven beyond any possible doubt to be in possession of no shame, no sense and no humanity.
The idea that Ukraine would lose backing of the US and the EU over causing a nuclear disaster, as long as it is primarily at the expense of Russian civilians is alas a very far fetched one.
Even if Ukraine stops to exist, Ukrainian neo-Nazis will never lose backing of U.S. as long as U.S. remains under the rule of the oligarchy.
Zelensky and his team also would be happy to be a government in exile.
Ukraine is not a neo-nazi state
The Ukrainians don't agree with you.
Im Ukrainian, we aren’t
Im Ukrainian
The US obviously hates nationalists. They’re but useful idiots, like ISIS.
Not to the extent that we are willing to support nuclear contamination of large swathes of the earth and much more importantly risk a Russian nuclear response.
Perhaps much driven by the fact that we warned them of the attack and they chose to ignore us.
Because they have posed zero threats and there is scant proof that the Ukrainians were behind any of them.
A unsupported assertion does not deserve a response.
Failing to note that they have little luck with that strategy. And that with an action that has zero chance of blowing up in our faces.
Except that the key condition is very unlikely to be fulfilled – no nuclear action of any significance is possible without causing major fear of retaliation.
The Ukrainians have very little chance of getting control of the Kursk NPP – only if the Russians decide to prioritize keeping the pressure on in the Donbas over the safety of their people in Kursk is it even remotely possible.
You guys are delusional if you think NATO would nuke Russia before it nuked us in Ukraine
One could posit that your leaders rubbing use of American weapons in Russias face would deserve some of the bitter fruit were things to go deadly. Your Idiot leader (s?) had to tweak the country with most, biggest & best weapons on the planet which could make unforced errors that are costly to them unfathomably costly to you. David & Goliath stories all to often end with the David character dead or mortally wounded!!!!!
I absolutely agree but so many here seem to suffer from that particular delusion, so to cover that (unjustified) fear I cover their lack of motivation to do so as-well.
As a Ukrainian, I am genuinley confused about why you are saying West has no concern for Ukrainian lives. NATO is not systematically torturing PoW's and purposefully launching missiles at our cities and homes and squares. NATO members are the only ones in Europe who "care" for our lives.
USA/NATO prevented Ukraine to be neutral and prosper. The Ukraine is being used for cannonfodder by the USA.
Biden wants regime change and the breaking of the FR, a nuclear power and a popular president, how crazy.
Is the Ukraine and Ukrainian people better off, is the price to pay for NATO membership worth it?
no, we chose to be NATO aligned because being aligned with Russia meant being tied to a narcissistic dictator versus a democratic, free, and prosperous west
The West might be better than Russia, but we have a lot of problems too. Ukraine but needed neutrality though.
We genuinely wanted to join NATO and the EU. Being Neutral meant the specter of Russia, since before 2014, under Yanukovych, the only neutrality we had was a Russian neutrality.
I don’t see how it matters, but I don’t live there. I see the negatives of the “West” clearly. I don’t know Russia. Russia seems in some ways more appealing except for the very important lower standard of living.
Russia also seems very similar. It’s like 1984, two machines fighting a meaningless and perpetual war. And I know there were 3 machines in 1984, but the number doesn’t much matter.
Russia is in no way more a better place then NATO
Um, it has fewer job opportunities. I suppose that’s what you’re after. People like different things. One thing I hate about Russia is how it strives so ardently and jealously to emulate the US. That was most evident during Covid and the vaccines.
Yeah for hating USA putin has a fetish for them im sure
The majority voted for peace, Zelensky lied to the people, he chose war when he refused to implement the Minsk agreements, which the US had not supported. The regime change ended Ukrainian sovereignty. Most likely, corrupt Zelensky will not live long enough to enjoy the money he made. He will be thrown under the bus by USA/NATO, sooner or later.
Would you say the Ukraine is free and prosperous? It does not look like that to me and all the Ukrainians who left the country or the hundreds of thousand dead young men?
When ZELENSKYY refused to accept the Minsk agreements? “At the start of January 2015, Russia sent another large batch of its regular military, which together with separatist forces of the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) and Luhansk People’s Republic (LPR) began a new offensive on Ukrainian-controlled areas, resulting in the complete collapse of the Minsk Protocol ceasefire.”
“2. Russia is a Party to the Minsk Agreements. The original Minsk signatories are Russia, Ukraine, and the OSCE. Russia is a protagonist in the war in Ukraine and is fully obliged to follow the deal’s terms. Despite that, however, Russia untruthfully claims not to be a party and only a facilitator — and that the real agreements are between Ukraine and the so-called “separatists,” who call themselves the Luhansk and Donetsk Peoples’ Republics (LPR and DPR), but are in fact Russian supplied and directed.”
The LPR and DPR are not recognized as legitimate entities under the Minsk Agreements. The signatures of the leaders of the so-called Luhansk and Donetsk Peoples’ Republics were added after they had already been signed by Ukraine, Russia, and the OSCE. They were not among the original signatories, and indeed Ukraine would not have signed had their signatures been part of the deal. There is nothing in the content or format of the Agreement that legitimizes these entities and they should not be treated as negotiating partners in any sense. Russia alone controls the forces occupying parts of eastern Ukraine.
Russia is in violation of the Minsk Agreements. The deals require a ceasefire, withdrawal of foreign military forces, disbanding of illegal armed groups, and returning control of the Ukrainian side of the international border with Russia to Ukraine, all of this under OSCE supervision. Russia has done none of this. It has regular military officers as well as intelligence operatives and unmarked “little green men” woven into the military forces in Eastern Ukraine. The LPR and DPR forces are by any definition “illegal armed groups,” that have not been disbanded. The ceasefire has barely been respected by the Russian side for more than a few days at a time.
The Ukraine agreed, the UN RECOGNIZED IT AS LEGAL. Russia was not at war, the regime in Kiev and Washington turned the Ukraine into a de facto NATO MEMBER and actively executed NATO exercises while being involved in a civil war with the Russian speaking Ukrainians. You can twist it anyway you want, the Minsk agreement was valid and Zelensky supported by the US refused to implement it. Never mind another broken agreement by people who can’t be trusted. The US jumped in bed with Ukrainian neo-Nazis. The war could have been prevented, but the neo-Nazis and Zelensky sold their nation for cannon fodder to the USA. It is Biden’s war, he stopped any diplomatic settlement of neutrality, no NATO membership for Ukraine and peace and prosperity like Austria, Biden turned it down, not Zelensky, Biden said no. Ukraine was sacrificed by traitors to American interests. No matter how you slice it, that is what happened, corrupt people sold the nation for lots of money. And look what was in it for the people.
The Slavic name… are you a Slav?
Bull Sh*t
stay ignorant – it is bliss after all
The Ukrainians did not do the choosing, demented Biden chose what was good for the US MIC, the Ukrainian neo-Nazis sold out, the US got the better out of it while the Ukrainian people have to pay for it.
we did do the choosing
Ukrainians are cannon fodder for US interests not for the benefit of the Ukrainian people. Why else did the young men flee the country?
We are NO cannon fodder, and you CORRECT YOURSELF because if you came ot my home of Lviv and said this, we'D WHOOP YOU
Why else did the millions of Russikies flee their country?
You sound like an Azov member, are you?
No and even if I were the Azov isnt political anymore
After they did enough damage they are not in the public eye anymore.
"Russophobia"? You mean fear of a nation that invaded a neighbor and threatens nuclear war practically every other day?
I also love how you tankies equate Palestinian lives with Russian lives. The Ukrainians are more like the Palestinians, you jaggoffs! Blind fealty to the invaders has continued to amaze me! You guys really do need to f**k off…
Yeah, so you think Russia should have allowed Ukraine to join NATO & take a chance that NATO would put nuclear armed missiles right on their border like Russia put such in Cuba? Then Putin would have been guilty of putting Russia at risk of getting an unanswerable first strike which could kill tens of millions of Russians which the NAZIS of Ukraine would cheer as they are still pissed how Russia beat their Nazi comrads and screwed their glory? Too bad the Nazis picked the wrong leader at the pinacle of their military might and economic vigor.
There was always zero chance that Ukraine would join NATO.
As if "Russophobia" didn't exist long before Feb of 2022. Even you bought into the bullshit by saying Russia is trying to reconstitute the old USSR. Of course, that's right after you chide Russia for being unable to conquer tiny Ukraine.
I tend to believe people equate the Palestinian lives to ethnic Russians being persecuted for being ethnic Russians. And the Ukrainians aren't being ethnically cleansed so comparing them to the Palestinians is just as ridiculous. Nothing would have changed for them if the peace deal had been accepted in the spring of 2022. Ukraine would be as whole as it was prior to the invasion.
No I mean Russophobia as in hating Russians for being Russian. And I am equating the disregard for Palestinian lives and the disregard for Russian civilian lives, with the caveat that the disregard for Palestinian lives in the West is even worse. In fact it is about the same level as the disregard for Jewish lives was in the close circle around Reinhard Heydrich.
I could forward you as a case in point.
“The Russians would lose the already limited support from China”
More than that. In the 1990s, renewed in 2012, China openly/publicly placed Ukraine under its nuclear defense umbrella. A nuclear strike on Ukraine is a de facto nuclear strike on China, presumably to be answered in kind.
Not sure the Chinese would answer in kind, but they would for sure terminate a lot of their relations.
At the very least to preempt the bad look of having to do so as a response to western secondary sanctions.
But for sure you are right that they would be deeply angered by being thus defied and shown up as unreliable – which is why the Russians are not going to do so.
The proposition that some here have made to me that the Russians might strike a transport hub in Poland is equally absurd:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/iVb–Yh6BbE
Xi and Putin have met at least a couple of times since the war escalated in 2022. Xi may have well made sure Putin knew the consequences of using nukes on a country under China's "umbrella."
I'm sure, in fact it's been reported quite matter of factly, that Xi has tried to convince Putin to refrain from issuing veiled nuclear threats or even referring to possible use. And not entirely without success fortunately. Chinese national interests are not served by such a scenario for sure. And there are reasons having to do with the Budapest Memorandum in the context of the NPT to which China is signatory and the retrieval of Russia's nukes from Ukraine that the Chinese offered their protection (unilaterally). In 2013, before the coup, Xi Jinpeng renewed it with Yanukovich bilaterally.
No doubt the Chinese still are very motivated to do whatever they can to prevent a scenario with nuclear weapons use to become reality in Ukraine (which is about the lowest bar to pass as anything resembling a sane position), but the notion that they are going to strike Russia as retaliatory measure either with nuclear weapons or by conventional means is fanciful to say the least.
See the discussion on deterrence. The possession of the weapons to do it, coupled with the freely undertaken obligation to do it, is a deterrent to anyone testing the matter.
DOnt take Putin for his word
Nonsense. That protection, if it ever existed, ended when Ukraine invaded Kursk.
As for “if it ever existed,” the PRC publicly offered it in 1994, publicly reaffirmed it in 2012, and has at no time ever publicly rescinded it.
Why would it magically end just because the Ukrainians made a conventional military move in a conventional war?
Those assumptions were when Ukraine was neutral and before the USA overthrew the government of Ukraine in 2014.
Established nuclear doctrine includes the principle that nuclear weapons are intended to be used if a nuclear country is invaded by another country. What you are inferring is that China does not recognize that principle. So…. if the Chinese mainland was invaded the Chinese would never use nuclear weapons to defend itself? Of course they would.
As far as China not publicly rescinding its pledge to defend Ukraine if attacked with nuclear weapons? China likely figures no one would be stupid enough not to recognize that things have changed.
The USA overthrew no ukrainian government in 2014. Us, the Ukrainian people, overthrew the government because it was a russian puppet and wanted us to be a Russian satrapy.
Right. Victoria Nuland was just hanging out for the heck of it. And pay no attention to her recorded phone conversation on selecting Ukrainian government's president after the coup financed by the USA.
Yes, those "patriotic" Ukrainians were eager to accept a coup by a foreign power as long as they got to ethnic cleanse their Russian speaking fellow citizens. So much so they couldn't wait a few months for a legitimate election. Why? Because they feared the next election would not validate their agenda.
So… now the price for the betrayal of your own country and your own fellow citizens is being paid.
Just curious, are you Svoboda, Right Sector or National Corps. Or just a useful……..
They’re not “assumptions.” They are publicly and voluntarily undertaken commitments.
Ukraine has never been “neutral.” Prior to 2014, it was a Russian imperial satrapy. Since 2014, it’s been a US/EU/NATO imperial satrapy.
I refer you to 2022 statements by Xi. He did indeed say that China would oppose use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine. BUT he did NOT say anything about taking ANY actions if Russia were to use such. A decade old statement is meaningless if not reaffirmed.
As to Ukraine being a satrap? So what?
One other thing, your other inferred point on Kursk being no different than another area? Yes, there is a difference. All parties agree that Kursk is part of the Russian Federation. So, Russia using tactical nuclear weapons in Kursk for self defense would not violate any prohibition on such usage.
Point being if Ukraine does invade old Russia with the 175,000 troops NATO/Ukraine has on the northern border of Ukraine and/or NATO invades Russia via the Scandinavian countries, Russia is likely to use tactical Nuclear weapons. I refer you to the recent Financial Times article on Russian nuclear doctrine as it existed in 2012.
If the Russian regime uses tactical nukes on Russian soil, I suppose that’s the Russian regime’s business.
If the Russian regime uses tactical nukes on Ukrainian soil, China has twice affirmed that that will be treated as a nuclear attack on Chinese soil.
“BUT he did NOT say anything about taking ANY actions if Russia were to use such.”
Publicly.
If you were Xi, would you publicly mention the possibility of nuking a close ally?
Probably not.
But you might privately tell that close ally “don’t put us in that position.”
It's just as easy to assume he told him something else. Things have changed pretty drastically. I mean, "close ally" sounds odd.
The Russian and Chinese leaderships are rational people, the irrational talk is on our side.
Russian bot
Have you lost your mind?
not more than you
Actually, you just brought up a question what occurred to me a half-hour ago. What IF the Russian Federation employs tactical nuclear weapons against Ukrainian invaders on Russian soil ?
What's the legality involved ?
Nearsofar as I can figure, all the RF could be indicted for, is violating the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. But I just noticed they withdrew from that late last year.
So is there anything in international prohibiting TNW's on one's own soil ? Anyone have insights ?
Just because there's no treaty officially preventing Russia from using nukes does not mean that using nukes is a beyond incomprehensible, reprehensible, irresponsible, putrid, nasty, genocidal, deadly, odious, overtly murderous, inhumane, disgusting thing to do that would entail NATO declaring war on the Russian Federation on the side of Ukraine.
They would probably be on a better footing vis a vis relations with their allies if they:
1) Publicly announced that they would be conducting a nuclear test on their own soil, which they are presumably free to do since they are no longer bound by the test ban treaty; and
But it would be militarily idiotic and very bad PR.
2) Warned anyone who didn’t want to get fried to evactuate the area designated for the test.
Ukraine is almost the other side of the planet from the DPRC. The DPRC shares a border with the Russian Federation – a large one. The DPRC has moved exponentially close politically to the RF since 2012.
Any "nuclear umbrella" 'promise' from 12 years ago might best be viewed akin to Arizona's law from the 1920's prohibiting donkeys from sleeping in bathtubs (that's a real thing) – if perhaps useful momentarily once, really not so much any more.
Xi Xi is not stupid enough to think that Russia is a worthy ally or strong nation I hope
Exactly
Thomas, do you have a citation to back up your claim that China made a commitment to defend Ukraine militarily? The 1994 Budapest Agreement "guaranteed" the territorial integrity of Ukraine, but does not require the parties (US, Russia, UK) to provide military aid to Ukraine. I would be surprised if China's supporting memorandum went further.
Feel free to research the matter yourself if you are interested.
I did. research your claim. China was not a party to the 1994 Budapest agreement where Ukraine gave up its nukes. China issued a separate memorandum that only said in that China favors “fair consultations” to resolve any future differences among the signatories.
https://day.kyiv.ua/en/article/close/assurances-without-guarantees-shelved-document
China made no commitment to defend Ukraine. There is no Chinese “nuclear umbrella” for Ukraine, although some wonks at Wikipedia suggest there is without citing any evidence. There is a flag on that part of the article on China-Ukraine relations.
Maybe you can help them out. But as far as I know China has not made a commitment to defend any other country militarily, except possibly North Korea..
Interesting. Usually you’re both honest and thorough. Which box are you not checking off this time?
Let’s not insult each other. I don’t think China ever made a commitment to give military assistance to protect Ukraine. The sources I found said China made no such commitment. I cited one of them. A commitment to use military force to defend Ukraine would be inconsistent with Chinese policy to avoid military entanglements. The official and semi-offical Chinese press have repeatedly and consistently denied that China ever said Ukraine was under its “nuclear umbrella.” According to Chinese sources all China has done is affirm its support for non-proliferation and stated relevant to the Budapest accord that if there is a dispute between the parties, China would support “fair consultations” to resolve the matter. Neither the signatories, China or France even promised to bring a dispute over the agreement to the Security Council.
A guy who posts on this site often says that repeating a falsehood does not make it true.
You have repeatedly said, without citing sources, that you believe China said that Ukraine is under China’s nuclear umbrella. If that is a true statement, you should cite a source.
I have never said that I believe China said that Ukraine is under China’s nuclear umbrella.
I have pointed out that China did say that Ukraine is under China’s nuclear umbrella. Twice.
Saying something repeatedly does not prove it.
You have no obligation whatsoever to believe facts, any more than I have any obligation whatsoever to prove those facts to you.
Feel free to believe whatever you want to believe.
Ukraine once had nukes, Soviet nukes. It gave them up. I’m pretty sure that’s where the China guarantee originated.
1994 was a while ago.
Yes, 1994 was a while ago.
But the PRC publicly renewed the guarantee in 2012 and has never since publicly rescinded it.
I'd be shocked if China isn't rethinking their nuclear defense umbrella with Ukraine. Note that their last renewal was before US generals had openly talked about a war with China being inevitable. It was also before politicians from both parties made it a standard practice to visit Tawain and rub China's nose in dog shit. Is China really that stupid to come to the aid of a US proxy when the US seemingly has the same kind of gameplan for China?
Not likely the Chinese would do that. Not at all.
In the current geopolitical situation the Chinese won't do anything to weaken Russia. China's principal enemy is the United States. Russia's principal enemy is the United States. Together their chance of surviving as independent nations is better than if they allow themselves to be pitted against each other. The United States would only benefit in its goal of universal hegemony if China and Russia were to fall out with each other.
Once their common enemy is defeated, then the calculus changes and Russia and China can and will find things to be in conflict with each other. But the current priority is defeating the United States' efforts to subdue Russia and China.
America's triumph in its campaign for universal supremacy is not an advancement for liberty. It will be the triumph of an all encompassing totalitarianism.
At the current rate we can expect Russia to be a new prefecture of China due to their decline.
Such is the power of wishful thinking.
If only
China is not going to nuclear war over Ukraine. Why would they do that?
I didn’t say China is going to go to nuclear war over Ukraine.
I noted that China has, twice, publicly obligated itself to go to nuclear war over Ukraine with anyone who nukes Ukraine, and has at no point renounced that obligation.
Which means that nobody is going to nuke Ukraine.
No one is going to nuke Ukraine for reasons which have absolutely nothing to do with China – unless and until someone triggers a global nuclear war, at which point Ukraine stands a decent chance of escaping being a prime target -deserved or otherwise – and Ukrainians will be able to live out their existence in life On The Beach, perhaps in Crimea …
Do you have a citation for your claim that China placed Ukraine under China's nuclear defense umbrella? That goes against my understanding of China's policy and the material I have read about China's tepid acquiescence to the 1994 Budapest memorandum. As far as I know China has no firm commitments to defend any other country with military action except perhaps North Korea. The US and Russia have been in continuous wars for decades while China's has not engaged in war since 1979 when it invaded Vietnam and withdrew after 28 days. I am not a China expert. So if you have a cite that shows China made a military commitment to defend Ukraine, I would like to see it.
Remember what the movie Wargames said –
"The only way to win (a nuclear war) is to not play"
Earlier this year I was working overlooking the largest port city on Canada's west coast, and a part of me fully expected a vaporising thermonuclear flash at any time. Not a healthy way to live.
Vancouver is beautiful. Thermonuclear flashes arent.
Why?
Why
So move. What is stopping you? Sell you house, if you have one, move to the new place. Find a McDonalds and get a job.
A McDonalds would support me if I lived in public housing I guess
There are not only NATO weapons participating in this invasion into Russia but also a lot of NATO manpower. Obviously this invasion was planned by NATO generals. American spy satellites are participating too. It is a NATO operation under Ukrainian flag.
The hard part of combined arms warfare is the execution in the field – only properly trained units can execute this kind of warfare/plan.
That is why the Russians are failing to do it – not because they do not have the general staff capable of planning it and not because they do not have the information about Ukrainian forces.
Planning is the 'easy' part – executing it is really hard – without well trained troops it is impossible.
This is the result of battle hardened troops facing conscripts with no or very limited experience. No further explanation is really needed.
The idea that this is the result of NATO planning puts the Russians in a very poor light – with troops essentially as experienced as the Ukrainians why can't they plan and execute a similar breakthrough???
Is it that they Russian general staff is retarded? How did NATO generals outsmart Russians (and Ukrainians) without practical experience?
How did NATO learn to operate without air superiority – without most of the heavy weapons upon which NATO tactics is build, under Russian drone supervision?
You are talking as if this operation is successful. It is not. It is just a trap for Ukrainian/NATO forces. They failed to capture the nuclear plant and now they are losing useless hundreds of their armored vehicles and thousands of their well trained soldiers. Meanwhile Ukrainian defense in Donbass is disintegrating.
No I'm talking about this operation as if the Russians are trying to find excuses for why the Ukrainians are taking so much territory – which they are.
They never deployed remotely enough troops to take the nuclear powerplant so not even remotely likely that they thought this would be possible.
Suggesting otherwise is as absurd as suggesting that the Russian 2024 Kharkiv offensive was to take Kharkiv.
Is it – are the Russians advancing anything remotely like as fast as the Ukrainians were in Kursk?
I am not suggesting that the Kursk offensive is a wise move or that it is the best way to use the forces.
What I am suggesting is that it is not a NATO planned operation. Few with military experience in the west have been suggesting this was wise or the best way to use their forces.
It is however not a trap – as in not a thing that the Russians have planned nor a thing that they are about to spring on the Ukrainians.
It may be a waste of forces – but then the Ukrainians were already forced to station more and better forces along the northern border because of the Russian Kharkiv operation.
You are not informed on the issue. I wonder where you getting your information from.
Yes, obviously the Vatican re-wrote the facts to confuse him, and only you know the real truth.
I think the commenter is correct. There are at present no reliable sources of information, and there are likely none coming either.
Shush bot
The Ukrainians have deployed 25,000 or more troops in this effort. The claims that it was a few thousand troops never made any sense.
What would have made sense was for the AFU forces to dig in after the Russians deployed their forces in the area and then break contact and withdraw their best troops to the Donbass. This would have re stabilized that front with the defensive advantage going to the AFU.
But the allure of maneuver warfare is to great for the NATO trained and armed AFU. The problem here is maneuver warfare only works when one side has a decisive advantage in equipment, logistics and recon. Of the three, the AFU is unlikely to maintain it's logistics and recon advantage is limited without that advantage.
Worse, a potential logistics failure would expose the best AFU units to being isolated and defeated in detail as they are increasingly being spread out in order to avoid Russian air superiority. Note: re concentrated forces would be necessary for any maneuver warfare but that presents targets for Russian air assets, especially stand off types.
A question here is how well Russian conscripts will perform. Although their are some quality Russian units deployed, most are lower quality. If they perform well, the advantage shifts to the Russians.
Good point about the “lure of maneuver warfare.”
It looks, by now, Russian conscripts in Kursk are replaced by contractors. Or, at least, a lot of contractors were moved there. Enough to stabilize the frontline and prevent possibility of Ukrainian breakthrough to the nuclear power plant.
I don’t think that would work. There just aren’t going to be enough troops without the use of a large number of conscripts. It looks like the AFU is going to put another 50,000 troops into the Kursk offensive. This is obviously a major invasion into Russia by the Ukrainian cats paw of NATO. Lots of disinformation going on, but the key is going to be if Russia can disrupt the NATO logistics. NATO pilots flying
F- 16’s out of NATO bases in Poland and Romania are likely going to get involved in this offensive.
Reports that the AFU have massed a total of 175,000 troops in the North for this effort. Those are said to include several thousands of NATO troops. There are said be entire sheep dipped NATO units.
Who knows if this is accurate? But the build up of the AFU in the North of Ukraine does appear to be valid.
Yes, some experts expect more of Ukrainian offensives. At least one more should happen before the elections. There were some massive drone and missile attacks at different Russian targets, but as they never succeeded, no one in The West is talking about them.
Russia has enough of volunteers. It doesn't look as they plan to use conscripts in Ukraine.
I am inclined to see the AFU Kursk offensive as one more provocation baiting Russia into an intemperate reaction. Because, that seems to be the only page in the US playbook, after the US economic sanctions failed and the Russia army did not collapse as expected in the first six months of the war.
All I can imagine is that some people in the State Dept. and the Pentagon believe the US can fend off Russian missiles in a nuclear exchange.
Which seems like madness to me, but it also seems that the US is desperate to preserve its empire, and a loss by Ukraine would put a large dent in the empire's reputation as the prime military superpower. And without that bludgeon a lot of other countries might wander from the fold.
I don't think it was just baiting. If they could capture the nuclear power plant, they would try to use it as an argument in future peace negotiations.
I'm not in able to evaluate the sensibility of the operation as of yet – but what you propose does not seem wrong to me.
Especially the last bit:
1. It has been succesful so far. Theyve liberated more than 500 square miles.
2. Their intent was never to even take the nuclear plant, that is pure fantasy that only a bot could invent.
3. "Hundreds" of armored vehicles and "thousands" of Ukrainians are not being lost – thats more than they brought in with armored vehicles and we have not lost "thousands" of men – not even close
4. The Donbass defense is not "falling apart." A few villages falling is not the end of the world. And every actual city the Russians try to take ends up being a months long slog – Bakhmut, Avdiivka, Časiv Jar, Ivanivske, Severdonetsk
Bot, PLEASE stop!
David, you have to proofread your articles. I think you meant Russia—the notion that NATO would invade (parts of) Ukraine was/is a Kremlin talking point you may have inadvertently let slip by here.
It is a reality. The Ukrainians are US puppets. And puppets do what the puppetmaster tell them to. Puppets don't march on their own away from the puppetmaster's grasp without severe consequences. Ask any of the few former members of US Congress who dared to become less than completely servile to AIPAC. So that's not a thing. The puppetmaster has to be stone cold dead and already half eaten by worms and maggots before that happens.
It is a NATO invasion or for the more sensitive soul the euphemistic designation 'incursion' could also be applied, as it is perhaps a more Western thing to believe that words change reality. A demand to conspire in the denial of transparent truths or play language games is unlikely to alter reality either. The search for a treshold of collective delusion beyond which it becomes suddenly possible to conform reality to propaganda is unlikely to be a worthwile activity.
Fact-free speculation of conspiracy theorist. Find the proof of any of your 'suggestions' or even the western military experts of any renown that have suggested this was a smart or winning move.
Same to you. And that's why I deliberately used the word demand and not ask.
So not even a hint of evidence to support your position.
That tends to be the play of the game with Russian talking points
the entire war started because Russia protected Crimea from the Ukraine menace
The wet dream of American imperialists is to have their navy base in Crimea.
It would remain a dream as Turkey is not likely to dump the Montreux convention – loosing them their power to control a lot of things in the area.
1 – Turkey is flexible.
2- The navy base in Crimea could belong to U.S. and the ships could change U.S. flag for Ukrainian one or, for example, for Rumanian. Still they would take orders from U.S.
No they are very guarded about maintaining their special power position – what you are suggesting is that they would give up a special powerful position they have held since 1936 for no gain.
Have you seen the US doing anything like that on scale before?
And the Montreux convention would still limit any 'US' presence so much as to make it meaningless i.e. not able to meaningfully impose conditions on local powers.
Of course they did it before and they are doing it now. NATO militaries put on Ukrainian uniform and pretending they are Ukrainian. Still they are acting in the interests of U.S. They same could easily be done with ships.
Yes because none of those NATO soldiers have any family or social media presence… try to pull the other one!
Any loss of NATO staff of any significance would be known in vary short time – the days where any nation had the ability to deploy troops of any significance without us knowing are pretty much over.
Volunteers.
No matter what status the people fighting have, if they are western we hear about it pretty fast. It is really simple – people have a social media presence even those who do not have family or friends who do and who will be missing them if they die.
I don’t know. I’ve met old men who’ve talked of wanting to die fighting Russia there, just out of a desire to do something good in their old age.
I expect there are many volunteers. People like a good cause to fight for. I don’t see the conflict the same as they do of course, but such is my experience. I don’t have much of a presence myself.
There are or at least were quite a lot of volunteers in the start and we hear about most of them when they get injured or killed – thereby stressing my point that there are not large NATO groups fighting in Ukraine (or if there are then they somehow manage to not suffer losses and not being missed by friends and family).
If it was different you would have been able to see the consequent reports of deaths and maimed men of fighting age in our social media – hiding any significant number of men getting killed or seriously injured is no longer possible.
Tinfoil hat, horses**t spewing going on here recently. I wonder why?
I'll posit that the tankies (deep, deep, inside) know the Russians are on their heels and that means they lean on conspiracy theories to comfort themselves.
Kind of like a Ghost Dance, hey gang?
Are tankies still a thing?
Ay oh, oh ay – let's not bring up racial slurs! I Blocked that clown Rational Thinker for using that word offensively way too many times & after I encouraged him to stop.
You're just quoting a word you heard so you're not at fault, but, no, it's a totally racist expression that civil society is working to move away from.
Racist? It refers to Stalinists, right?
Inasmuch as "orcs" once (and still only does, to my mind) referred to LOTR :
"Following the idea that Morgoth created the Orcs after the Awakening of the Elves, Tolkien developed it in the Quenta Silmarillion of 1937. There it is said that, after the destruction of the Two Lamps, Morgoth created many evil creatures of different shapes, "yet the Orcs were not made until he had looked upon the Elves, and he made them in mockery of the Children of Ilúvatar".[7] Later in the text is explained that they were made of stone, like in the previous version.[8] Therefore this origin is a development of the previous one, but already points to the great sin of the mockery of the Children of Ilúvatar."
Bur here it seems, there's selective opinion on what "is" and "isn't" officially racist enough to warrant censorship.
Orcs is racist because it suggests, as I understand, that Russians are more mixed, and thus less white, than Ukrainians.
Tankies is different, I think.
My memory of Tolkien is that orcs might also have been altered elves. So, Tolkien might have given multiple explanations.
This: https://lotr.fandom.com/wiki/Orcs
I don’t claim to be an expert on Tolkien. I do like his work.
There do seem to be retcons in Tolkien"s mythos. I knew his variant as corrupted & tortured Elves, same as you I think. Dwarves I knew were the first race but "mothballed" until after Men were created.
Yeesh the Silmarillion was a tough read.
Well, I don’t think tankie is racist, just outdated. The dwarves were adopted children, in a sense, and so were unplanned. The elves were to come first. I did just look the dwarves up, but I knew they had a separate creator, just had forgotten the details. Same creator in a sense, because only one could create life; but they were created without life by another.
no it just suggests the brutality of the russian occupiers; as in orcs being harsh and ruthless
It’s not about what is racist “enough.”
It’s about what’s racist, period.
“Tankie” is entirely, completely, and without exception a term referring to an ideology. It’s no different than “conservative” or “liberal” or “hippy dippy doo.” It refers to chosen belief, not inherent characteristic.
“Orc” seems, at least in the current context, to be used as a slur aimed at a specific ethnic group (Russians).
more such russian soldiers and civillians who support the war;p us ukrainians make little distinction between the 2 groups
yes
hakim, yugopník, bad empanada
Bot where do you come up with these ideas?
Are you mentally incapitated? Russia ILLEGALLY ANNEXED CRIMEA! Ukraine didn't annex Crimea, RUSSIA DID
Blocked for screaming.
Illegal? It’s just lines on a map. Does anyone much care that Israel took lands in conquest? No one cares. It never mattered.
The solution is just for the US to stay out. Foreigners do crazy foreign things. It never matters.
What if Mexico annexed new mexico or arizona? are they still “lines on a map?”
Haha, you don’t know me. I’d cheer it. My views are unusual.
Hah
I’d love to start secession in the US and Canada. Break up the Union. Divided we stand. It might be best to break up India, China, Russia. I’m not part of any empire. I’m a nationalist as an ideal. However, I don’t claim to know what’s best for others, usually anyway. I might aim to meddle a little in others affairs.
Irony. The USA took them from Mexico.
Touché
False. Crimeans voted convincingly to accede to the Russian Federation. "But but the vote can has not legal !" you whine – yet it still represented the democratic will of the majority of Crimeans. And overwhelming evidence shows they continue yo be happy with their decision.
No they did not,. hopefully Kremlin.ru isn’t your main source
Never visited it.
No, actually, the vast majority of my reliable and trustworthy news comes from right here – antiwar.com . Has for ~20 years.
Oh
And for the record, that referendum did actually happeen (my bad) but the real result was never disclosed and it was held under the russians
See. Putin's invasion of Ukraine was "Unprovoked and Unjustified." He had nothing to worry about. NATO's invasions are always "Provoked and Justified." If our invasions were "Unprovoked and Unjustified," we have a population so brainwashed, they would insist they were "Provoked and Justified." Sure we have to keep brainwashing them, but they start believing it in their bones and incessantly repeating it.
To your last sentence….
As demonstrated by the master, Joseph Goebbels.
Mr. Čar I I hold you to standards.
Dropping the Göbbels bomb is NOT one of them
It is clear that you do not understand the meaning of my response to NA in the context of propaganda.
I know English is not your first language and I do not fault or criticize you for that.
However, I do criticize you for making comments that are incorrect and make absolutely no sense.
Sorry
That's funny. …No. Not the part that millions have died in this preventable war. It's the part when Zelensky said Russia's invasion of Ukraine to force it to negotiate was like holding a gun to Ukraine's head.
They are bluffing. If they weren't bluffing, they would have used them by now. Let's keep going until we force them to stop bluffing.
I am "naïve" because I never believe Zelensky? …What's that? Yeah. I still don't believe him. He was a comedian, a politician, philosopher, and now a shrink? How "naïve" do you have to be?
The incursion into Kursk is immaterial. It is a publicity stunt that will deflate as supply lines become destroyed. Russia has always had, and used real estate for strategic retreat. The outcome of this war is not one of territorial conquest but rather is one of attrition. In that regard Ukraine will just continue losing more and more men.
"Now, remember, the first step in avoiding a trap – is knowing of its existence."
If the RF was genuinely surprised by the thrust by the Ukrainian SS (Special Superkommandoes), I do wonder if they're slow-playing a counterattack to draw more Ukrainian assets in.
They look pretty surprised. It makes Putin look extremely bad. He didn’t go in in 2014. It’s apparent now that he should have.
Putin looks smart, he does not want war with NATO on the European continent, he is watching NATO shredding itself without any Russian help.
The demented Biden sabotage of the NSGP is doing it for him, most NATO members are also members of the EU just like Germany is. The Biden deindustrialization of Germany is destroying the EU and NATO. Putin could say "thank you Mr. Biden, you break the backs of your allies."
It’s ironic how Europe chases Russia out of Europe into Asia. It just empowers Asia. The elites of the “West” dream of dominance, but the sun is setting on the west.
Russia just wouldn’t bow. It’s too big to bow.
The BRITISH have always been opposed to German and Russian co-operation, it was the reason why a regional continental war became the first WW. The UK has a privilidged position not to be a continental power, sitting outside and stirring conflicts on the continent. DE Gaulle was right, they are not real continental Europeans. The elite did not like the Bismarck Germany.
Well, it’s also that you have transnational elites that span multiple states to varying degrees. It’s not always state vs state or nation vs nation. Elites can pit groups against one another for profit or other gain.
I’m ethnically British, and it’s indisputable that ethnic English benefitted from colonialism. However, not everyone benefited, of course
With Russia losing 1200 soldiers per day, along with a majority of their armor (and now possibly more attack aircraft), that real estate for strategic retreat might come in handy!
" In that regard Ukraine will just continue losing more and more men" And so will the Russians. At what point do the people Russia ask: "Why are young men dying? For what?"
Ukraine doesn't have the manpower to sustain trading casualties with Russia. And the majority of Russians agree with Putin about NATO/Ukraine being a threat to their security.
The Russian young men know, they are dying for their motherland. The Ukrainian young men are dying for the American MIC's profit margin and they know it.
are you a slav
I am not, just someone asking common sense questions.
The democratic western nations USA/NATO and de facto NATO member Ukraine and Israel’s leadership are Biden, Netanyahu, and Zelensky, they are a team of madmen leading the blind. They are mad war criminals, Zelensky is only a de facto head of state, we can say madmen are leading the blind. They are responsible for the killings and inhumane treatment and suffering of millions of people, it takes mad people to do that and come out acting like nothing happened.
How are we responsible?
We didn’t force Russia to ever invade us.
As the institute for the study of war says,
“Putin didn’t invade Ukraine in 2022 because he feared NATO. He invaded because he believed that NATO was weak, that his efforts to regain control of Ukraine by other means had failed, and that installing a pro-Russian government in Kyiv would be safe and easy. His aim was not to defend Russia against some non-existent threat but rather to expand Russia’s power, eradicate Ukraine’s statehood, and destroy NATO, goals he still pursues.”
The one and only person responsible for ever starting this war is Putin. 2014 was a legitimate overthrow to remove a horrible person, like January 6th in America tried to remove Biden.
Russia annexed Crimea
Russia sent in Russian protestors to make it look like the Donbass hates us.
Russia invaded Ukraine with the help of puppet belarus on February 24, 2022
Russia has caused destruction to our beautiful cities and towns.. Bakhmut, Pokrovsk, Severdonetsk, Chasiv Yar, Mauriopol… etc
Russia summarily tortures and abuses prisoners of war, not us Ukrainians
Russia brags about commiting war crimes
Russia makes no secret that they want to abolish Ukraine and eradicate Poland and the Baltics
Some of my friends have died in missile strikes. And I can assure you, Zelenskyy didn’t order the killings
That sounds like a propaganda rag.
"The Institute for the Study of War (ISW) is an American nonprofit research group and advocacy think tank founded in 2007 by military historian Kimberly Kagan "
Kimberly is the sister- in- law of Victoria Nuland who is married to the other Kagan brother.
Nuland, Kagan brothers that is all I need to know. Talking about a family band of war criminals.
better military historian the benny johnson, breaking points, or kremlin.ru or whatever else sh*t sources you people listen to
They are a PNAC family, among the Iraq war disaster originals, and Nuland did a great job managing the regime change for Obama/Biden. One time when history repeats itself.
ok
Netanyahu, Biden, Zelensky are three deranged people. What a team they make.
Zelensky is a de facto president, he cancelled an election and can you guess why he did that, because he is so popular in Ukraine?
Your information and judgement is BS.
come to ukraine yourself. you’re a coddled american idiot.
Invite Biden, he made the Ukraine disaster possible, he is not done yet, he will sacrifice the last Ukrainian man for his satisfaction.
I hoped for Ukraine to become a neutral nation, to hell with NATO, and prosper like Austria. The Minsk agreement was the key to it but Zelensky threw it in the garbage encouraged by the Americans.
Biden didn’t make any disaster happen in Ukraine, RUssia did
You have a hermetically closed mind. There is plenty of documentation to prove you wrong.
Ok you think that
We are being ruled by psychopathic deranged people, the demented, deranged president in DC is only one, Netanyahu is a deranged out of control psychopath in Tel Aviv, and so are the members of the regimes, no one with sanity can be seen. The people must be bonkers voting for one psychopath to replace another one. There is no rationality in what they say or do.
Both Trump and Harris would continue to provide the weapons to continue the massacre of the Palestinian people, women and children included. Who in their right mind can vote for people like that?
I know, I can't. I am ashamed and outraged that we have no officials, and no voices in MSM to call it what it is, massacre of a nation.
The candidates are pathological killers, how can anyone vote for them?
As in Dante's sign over Hell, on election day 2024, 'Abandon all hope ye who enter this voting booth.' Both parties are paid off by the war industry and AIPAC.
Good lol
the more dead russian soldiers the better
ESAD
The Ukrainians are short of cannon fodder, they could use your help. Why don't you support them where it counts, stop being a couch potato, they need you behind a gun, not a computer.
Some one should tell Zelenskii that if a nuclear war with Russia or the U.S. that Kieve will be vaporized as the first targetto be hit!!!!!!
Poor Russia. They invade a country and then cry went that country hits back. If Russia did not invade Ukraine this counter attack by Ukraine would not happen.
Stupid Ukrainians, they had the option to be neutral and prosperous and they turned it down for the promise to become a NATO member, instead their country is a failed nation in rubble and the loss of millions of people, KIA and refugees and permanent disabled young men. What a price to pay for a small dog trying to fight the big dog next door. How stupid, they trusted the USA of all people.
They had the choice of being a Russian imperial satrapy or US/EU/NATO imperial satrapy.
The former might have been the wiser choice, but no need to pretend it’s anything other than what it is.
They had the option to be neutral the same as Austria. Look what is left now. Considering the power structure, a little dog has to use brain where the muscles are missing.
Ukraine had nothing to lose and everything to gain with neutrality only the USA could win losing nothing with a war with Russia. That is called Realpolitik.
Zelensky wanted to negotiate and Boris came all the way from London with Biden's message, no diplomacy, keep fighting the big dog. The deceptive US governments in action. Facts are what they are.
The Ukraine became a US satrap in 2014 when Nuland organized the regime change, with lots of $$$. Starting a civil war in Ukraine. The Biden regime are the real war criminals, the whole world knows the truth. It is demented Biden's war and it will continue regardless who wins the election.
You do know, demented Biden wanted regime change, Putin must go, he wanted to weaken Russia by splitting up the RF.
It is possible that Putin will witness the end of the demented Biden's US hegemony and the end of NATO and the EU.
How can you justify Biden's actions, intelligent politics and morally justified for the benefit of the American people or war profiteers?
"The US still says that it won’t support long-range strikes inside Russian territory…"
I play D&D. Have for many years. And because of the game system's construction and several too-clever friends in our Party, I have a keen sense for Unmitigated Rule-Lawyering.
The US won't support "long-range" strikes inside Russian territory. Read : "HIMARS et. al. have a range of X. X is the maximum range we'll 'allow' strikes into RF territory as we consider { X < 'long-range' }. BUT if Ukraine Just So Happens to Find A Way to move such weapon systems INTO RF territory, then HIMARS can strike deeper into RF territory by never exceeding X, which the USA is still 'legally' cool with."
Thus if Ukraine can tunnel a suicide-corridor into RF territory and get HIMARS & related Western launchers within short-range striking distance of Moscow, the USA can whistle pleasantly and look the other way – is its rules of engagement suggested to the Ukrainians haven't been violated.
Or striking distance range of the Kursk NPP.
And why not? Russia has notified the IAEA that Ukraine has attempted a drone attack on the Kursk NPP. Grossi is apparently gotten the urgency of the situation and announced he plans to visit the the Kursk NPP some time next week. So we will be flooded with stories about Russia deviously attacking their own NPP next few days I guess. Has to be you know, Ukraine would never do such a thing, because they would lose support of the West.
Grossi is a complete joke.