A Ukrainian soldier speaking to the Japanese broadcaster NHK has said that Western intelligence was used to monitor Russian troop activity in Russia’s Kursk Oblast before Ukrainian forces launched an invasion of the region.
“He says the Ukrainian military surveilled Kursk using drones and satellites, and detailed intelligence data provided by the West was crucial for the operation,” NHK reported.
The US has denied that it was involved in the planning of the invasion but has offered strong support by allowing Ukrainian forces to use US-provided armored vehicles, missiles, and bombs. Ukraine is now pushing hard for the US to allow its weapons to be used for long-range strikes.
The Ukrainian soldier, who was described as a spokesman for a Ukrainian brigade, suggested one purpose of the invasion of Kursk was to demoralize the Russian civilian population.
“We should not forget about the moral and psychological factor of the Russian civilian population,” he said. “Our operation was planned both tactically and as a move to demoralize the enemy.”
While the fighting continues in Kursk, Russian forces are making steady gains in the Donbas and moving more rapidly toward the Donetsk city of Pokrovsk. There’s no sign the violence will end anytime soon, as Russia is now ruling out peace talks with Ukraine following the Kursk invasion.
Yes now often up to several kilometers a day – rapid is perhaps not the right word would faster than previously not be a better way to describe it?
Whereas previously they were open to talks about how the Ukrainians could surrender – got it.
You're cured now of your previous delusion that US, UK would have nothing to do with the invasion by their Ukrainian puppet army right? I mean since you shifted the gears down to the old stationary Russians-are-weak theme. Are they still fighting, drunk and demoralized with shovels and stripped down washing machines by the way?
Several problems with your reply:
1) I have not indicated that the UK/US had nothing to do with the Kursk SMO – only that they did not plan it.
2) I have written nothing to say that I am not still of that opinion.
3) I have never suggested that the Russians are weak or that they are fighting, drunk and demoralized with shovels and stripped down washing machines.
My comments are open so I challenge you to find backing for this clear example of you strawmanning my position.
You did, but now you're not anymore apparently. The next goalpost is apparently that they weren't involved in the planning, they were just, I don't know, cheering them on or something like that. Well okay, you're at least adapting, which is something I suppose.
I never did as can be seen from my comment history.
As stated my comment history is open and you have failed to find any comment to support your lies.
No I have had this opinion from the very first time I commented on the Kursk situation – and for the record it is that there is no evidence that this was a NATO plan.
I based this on the absence of any evidence as wall as the absence of any military experts in the west arguing that this was a good idea.
Wish I could say the same thing for you – however you just keep up the lies – my comments are open there are none that I have edited or deleted since the Kursk initiative.
The US perhaps with the exception of Biden between the times he's being told (and the EU) know everything that's happening in Ukraine. They know what they are going to do and everything they do needs approval of the US, to the microlevel. They know where Ukrainian forces are, where they go, and what for, where, what and how many. What weapons they use for what goal has to be approved. Puppets don't make important decision.
The idea that an invasion of Russia was planned by Ukraine, the intelligence and the Americans, British, French and Polish specialist troops necessary just added later is just either plain stupid or wilfully ignorant. And most importantly, it doesn't fool the Russians.
It was not a good idea no. The NATO plan, much like all of their plans failed, yes.
Assertions without evidence can/should be dismissed without evidence.
If you were right then the Russians would have captured some of those Polish special troops.
The plan is indeed doubtful as can be seen from most NATO experts having voiced their opinion on it.
Which makes it all the less likely that it is a NATO operation – if it has any merits then they are of a psychologic / political nature and it is then early days to judge.
Like the Tet offensive the results will be seen only later – I doubt that it will be a success but then I have doubted the idea that Ukraine would win this on the battlefield since 2023.
Evidence that the Kursk initiative is not without effect though is there:
Sure, it is going to turn out to have been a brilliant plan if only we wait for the miracle to materialize.
Well, the story is evolving to be have been primarily a British plan, but then that could be an attempt to give the US some plausible deniability. The US not knowing what the British are up to is equally credible. That is going to be interesting to see unravel.
No one I know are proposing that it was a brilliant plan – most are very doubtful – especially since Russia seems less vulnerable to changes in public opinion.
It was brilliant on a tactical level sure, but strategic – it depends on Putin being more vulnerable than most in the west would suppose.
Any evidence to support this speculation? Just asking because the part of planning the operation is by far the easiest, it is in the execution that combined arms operations are difficult.
The idea that only the west could plan this while Ukrainians could execute a western plan is patently absurd.
You either have to propose that the troops involved are NATO troops or face the fact that the best Ukrainian units are capable of combined arms operations – well at least on a limited scale – while the Russians are not (not even on a limited scale – their Kharkiv operation illustrating this point)
how comes it SRI is not "part of the planning"?
Of course the US was part of the planning. It's their reconnaisance intelligence that was the basis for it. First they denied the whole thing, pretended like it was a complete surprise to them. So the press tried to sell that story.
Now were at the stage where information gets out about how they were involved after all. So then the next hurdle to throw up is pretending they were only delivering intelligence at Ukrainian request, no questions asked, because that is how it works. At the same time information is getting out about how the Brits were the orginators of the Kursk invasion plan, again without knowledge of Washington. As if the Brits would dream of doing anything ever without explicit US approval. But that is where we're at right now to the best of my knowledge. Chances are the story will continue to unravel pretty quickly and will soon again comply with just plain common sense. This is after all a US proxy war, and proxies (or allies) just don't get to decide about important matters. If they do, they get deposed, lost or killed.
Yes, … or like theh Nordstrum, those 2 guys in a boat.
Yes, you have to remember the most far sought, fantastic, implausible story requiring the maximum amount of baseless assumptions and flies in the face of basic logic, that story is NOT the conspiracy theory.
"Demoralizing the population" doesn't work, as we have seen in plenty of cases of terrorism. Terrorism instead quiets opposition to the government and strengthens the government's arguments.
The answer to any doubters then becomes, "How can you say that when our enemies did X?"
But the real purpose of the Kursk attack was to take the nuclear plant near Kursk. Only that had an actual value that could be used to blackmail the Russians. Possibly to hand it back in exchange for getting the Zhaporozhiye power plant, which the Ukrainians have been shelling since they lost it.
After failing to take the Kursk power plant on the first day, which was their only chance, the Ukrainians have resorted to terrorism, shelling the plant.
Of course the media won't mention the power plant, because that would show Ukraine's total failure. Instead they bounce between other explanations for the incursion. Most laughably that "it's a buffer zone to prevent Russian shelling." That's Zelensky imitating the Russian incursion near Kharkov. The Russians actually had a reason, as the Ukrainian terrorists have been shelling Russian civilians in that area. But in the Kursk region, there is no reason for a Ukrainian "buffer zone" as unlike the Ukrainians the Russians aren't shelling a city across the border, and their planes can of course easily fly over the Ukrainians near Kursk, as we have seen.
Try pulling the other one!
No-one not in the Ukrainian army nor in any NATO country (if you are one of the people believing this is NATO fighting) would ever plan on a first day advance of 90 kilometers. https://www.google.com/maps/dir/51.6688553,35.6030158/51.1707501,35.1327958/@51.587982,35.2164102,100791m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!4m1!3e0?authuser=0&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MDgyNy4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D
And for the record no one would suppose this could even be achieved in two days – and no the Ukrainians are not shelling the Kursk NPP – they are not within artillery range.
As for the Russians not shelling Ukrainian cities – look no further than any of the cities they have taken since 2022.
"Demoralizing the enemy" hooked me too, Jon. It's more like "Galvanizing them!" Here is my concern. We have crossed the point of no return. Russia is not backing down and neither are we. Forget about a US Antiwar movement. The people who should be cheering for Antiwar are busy cheering for "the most lethal military in the world." We are FU@KED!
If there is anybody the Russians will talk to they are in Washington DC, and those people are too crazy to talk about anything except more war.
Actually you are partially right – as the Russians can only end their aggression if the sanctions are at least partially lifted – since this is not going to happen, I guess seen from your perspective 'they' are crazy.
Most of the rest of is know that sanctions have to be kept on as we would otherwise endorse a new world order where countries can decide to redraw borders as they see fit – and thus create a much higher incentive to build nuclear arms.
Well, for the US it shouldn't be a problem to endorse a world order where countries can decide to redraw their borders as they see fit and the US has demonstrated over the course of decades that land confiscation is not a problem at all. In fact the US vetoes a 100% of the time any such proposition of sanctions against hostile takeovers and endorses land confiscation when it comes to Israel. In fact for the US even genocide does not register as problematic as they are key in helping it continue.
And of course illegal invasions of other countries is about their core business.
Which is exactly why we should resist any move towards expanding any further undermining of that world order.
So do you want to change things to allow all countries to behave lie this!?
Invasions sure permanent annexations thankfully not (yet at least) – while the US at least stand back from that, there is the hope that the costs of such invasions can curb their appetite for more and the desire of any nations to copy their abhorrent behavior.
Defending the hypocrisy, charming.
Where do you see any defense of the hypocrisy?
The stupid semantic hide and seek games you play I can do to. It is extremely boring.
For example, Russia has not annexed any land. It has listened to the right of self-determination of the people of Luhansk, Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporizhzia and Crimea before that and accepted their choice. An inherent right of peoples protected under International Law. They have held referenda on these matters and with great majorities, well near unanimity, they voted on becoming part of Russia. These countries are therefore now part of Russia and it is therefore at the moment liberating these countries of Ukrianian occupation.
You genuinely see defense in my comment???
Putin disagrees with you – they even held a celebration!
Except they didn't have control of those oblasts and holding such referendums after invading is not respecting the right of self-determination – not by any international law.
To do so within international law you need to control the whole area and not have displaced large parts of the population by invading – and not least have international observers.
Finally none of this relates in anyway whatsoever to the idea that me condemning the US for its policies on invading countries or failing to condemn Israel does not constitute defending hypocrisy.
Yes you do. You are concocting excuses for the US, even though we're speaking of invasions, death an destruction on an entirely different level, not even speaking of international torture, supporting and facilitating and even committing terrorism for regime change. You certainly don't volunteer any condemnation. You are as you say failing to condemn Israel, not for annexing land, not even for committing genocide. That's a pretty low bar to pass, which you still don't for some reason. But you do however have an entirely different set of standards for Russia. Well that is by definition hypocrisy. So that leaves you blowing smoke. Which is just not interesting.
You seem to be having a debate with someone lese or live in an alternate reality.
I condemn the Israeli genocide and their prosecution of the war in Gaza. Most often where it matters so not in a debate on Ukraine – even there I do so by implication – that you cannot read this from my comment is not my fault.
No I have exactly the same standards for Russia as I do for Israel – if I could get Israel sanctioned through the UN I would do so immediately – that is strongly implied by my comment – again that you cannot see this in my comment is perhaps down to you believing that you know my position!?
If you had actually bothered to read my comments on Israel's war even the few ion this site you would know better.
annex, v. to incorporate (an additional geographic area) within the domain of a country, state, etc.
Annexations are done by referendum all the time. Usually not fake referendum under military occupation, but that’s a different question. If those areas are now “part of Russia,” it’s because they’ve been annexed.
Mexico would have words with thee about California, Texas, Arizona, ironic New Mexico…
Indigenous people across Canada are having words with us (and thankfully, we are doing our best to listen) about annexations that also weren't voted upon.
As to "fake referendum", is it your contention that the vote in Crimea did not represent the legitimate will of the majority of people living there, to return to the Russian Federation after decades apart (due to an inebriated gifting gesture in, what, the '50s ?) especially given the evident treatment of ethnic Russians by the post-coup Kievvian junta ?
kyivan junta? my god you are misinformed.
So Ukraine has been a democracy absent any & all known, verified overthrows of government since 1990, is your ignorant claim. The Maidan and Vicky's phone calls and neo-Nazi goons were all…imagined ?
How's Election Season shaping up for Zelenskiyy right now ? Good shot at reelection ? Oh riiiiiight.
You have proof that the said referendums were fraudulent? Or are you are just making the claim?
Somehow I think that the people in Crimea and the Donbas republics would choose to become part of Russia rather than be second class citizens under a US puppet government. Especially given the enmity the US has displayed toward Russians in general.
As far as military occupation goes? The Ukrainian post coup government had military occupation in areas of Ukraine that were unlikely to be thrilled over police and troops during post coup elections.
For me, I had hoped that areas that didn't want to be part of the Ukrainian ethno state would be allowed to secede as an independent polity. Russia might have allowed that, but the US puppet government in Kiev wasn't going to accept that.
So okay, Russia's annexation is more or less standard practice. Ah, it's done all the time. Less of a reason to uphold sanctions then. The annexation of Palestinian land by Israel, not recalling any referendum asking Palestinians, all the while has not been a reason for sanctions certainly not anything resembling Russia is subjected to.
And then I would have to explain how on earth this could be construed as hypocrisy.
Yeah I wouldn't know.
if you wre president of of the world we wouldn't last a day
Based on his comments you came to that conclusion how?
magic
I wouldn't want to see a president of the world and I certainly wouldn't volunteer.
good
"So okay, Russia's annexation is more or less standard practice."
For the most part. Although the "referendum" pageantry in occupied territories is usually a frill that only imperialist regimes like the US and Russia bother with.
RUSSIA NEVER ANNEXED ANY LAND? ARE YOU СРАВО МЕНЕ???
ТИ ТАКИЙ ДУРНИЙ НАВМИСНЕ ЧИ ВАМ ХТОСЬ ПЛАТИТЬ????
УКРАЇНУ "ВИЗВОЛЯЮТЬ" НЕ ОРКИ
НАС ПЕРЕМОЖУЮТЬ
No, those are just facts. Ukraine has been used. It was a gamble the West was willing to take, and your corrupt leadership just played along.
As it was put in the Rand report:
"However, such a move [Russia counter escalation] might also come at a significant cost to Ukraine and to U.S. prestige and credibility. This could produce disproportionately large Ukrainian casualties, territorial losses, and refugee flows. It might even lead Ukraine into a disadvantageous peace."
The prestige and credibility have been wasted. The disproportionaly large Ukrianian casualties are the saddest fact. The territorial losses are an ironclad guarantee. The refugee flows equally real.
What exactly was meant by that "disadvantageous peace" that the US and the EU were so generously gambling your fate on, is what Ukrianians are going to find out now.
thet was neutral
a line of attack for people like you: never play defense and suck up the smallest point that has a weakness and focus your rebuttal around that one thing.
There would be a lot more order in the world and lot more peace if the US would stop overthrowing governments, invading other countries, financing despots and supporting murder and mayhem.
Other countries that collaborate with the US in such things claiming that it is supporting world peace and order are a big part of the problem.
Yes indeed.
there would also be more despotism and disorder if the USA did nothing at the same time
Bullshit.
ITS true
Russia will win their objectives, plain and simple and I for one clearly understand why they have taken this course. The USA and NATO, clearly at fault and the aggressor.
So you know the Russian objectives – could you be a treasure and share this knowledge with us?
Michael, don't play stupid with me buddy, either you know or you really are stupid as s###! 🙂
Washington is doing nothin to stop peace in our Ukraine
Washinton naver invaded us.
The US over threw the elected Ukrainian government in 2014. As an American, I've seen that happen in many countries times. It always ends badly.
The civil war in Ukraine began after that coup.
The country that was Ukraine ended in 2014. It will never go back to what it was.
The US didn't invade Ukraine. The US didn't have to. All that the US had to do was to exploit the internal forces inside Ukraine. Hegemons are very adept at such things.
yes you’re right. The Ukraine from 2014 is gone and will never come back. It will hopefully stay buried for all eternity
Slava Ukraini
Try reading what I wrote. "The country that was Ukraine ended in 2014. It will never go back to what it was.". BIG difference.
Place the blame for that where it deserves to be: those that willingly enabled a foreign power to wreck your country. Those whose hatred of Russian speakers allowed themselves to be deceived by the hegemon. Those that are getting wealthy by this war.
When this is over, those Ukrainians who wanted a ethno state will likely get their wish. A much smaller, poorer state dependent on EU aid. Without those who sacrificed themselves, and yes, BRAVELY sacrificed themselves. This is a great tragedy.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4c9d9b8c7a27e183cc96d959cb8cfb59a7e77944383b2dbd9dce7e036bc376e2.png
Good luck with that.
What are the white areas?
WE ANNEX
black is russia annex because I thinl that divet looks kind of annoying.
Read what i said! Screw pre-Ukraine 2014!!!
And Ukraine will not become a "weak ethnostate"
If any party has to give up land, here are my ideas:
It is already a weak state. Without money extorted from Americans by OUR corrupt political class, Ukraine would collapse quickly.
no it wouldn’t
??? Seriously?? Zelensky and his "top aids" have said REPEATEDLY that without continued, and even increasing, aid and support Ukraine will lose. Ukraine can't even afford to pay its own salaries – they need foreign money (what isn't looted) for that.
Hey man, Bob Vila INSISTS it wouldn't. He INSISTS. Are you as compelled to believe him as I am not ?
So, you think a neutral Ukraine was a bad idea?
Yes
Your president didn't think so.
March 28, 2022. President Zelensky publicly declares that Ukraine is ready for neutrality combined with security guarantees as part of a peace agreement with Russia. “Security guarantees and neutrality, the non-nuclear status of our state — we’re ready to do that. That’s the most important point … they started the war because of it.”
if russia withdrew its troops
i saw that
that was in 2022
And Russia was WILLING to withdraw its troops in 2022. Sadly, Ukraine won't get that offer any longer.
they were! this is news to me!
March 16, 2022. Russia and Ukraine announce significant progress towards a peace agreement mediated by Turkey and Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett. As reported in the press, the basis of the agreement includes: “a ceasefire and Russian withdrawal if Kyiv declares neutrality and accepts limits on its armed forces.”
If that really is news to you then you are only listening to propaganda organs. Had Zelensky agreed to neutrality and no NATO, and allowed autonomy to the Donbas, there never would have been an invasion. Had he agreed after the start of the invasion, when Russia withdrew from the approaches to Kiev, the war could have ended then.
It's funny that you post prolifically on this site yet never seem to have read any of the many, many, many columns on this very subject posted to this same site.
WE WERE never going to be neutral! Wanna know why? Because if Putin had his way, then neutrality would mean Russian lynchpin.
Talk to a real Ukrainian
NO TRUE SCOTSMAN !
Anyone who has this Fallacy on their "Christian Bob Vila Fallacious Arguments" BINGO card, mark this one off !
huh
You committed a classic logical fallacy known as “No True Scotsman” :
Angus : “No Scotsman puts brown sugar on his porridge.”
Montgomery : “I’M a Scotsman and I put brown sugar on my porridge.”
Angus: “Well, you see, no TRUE Scotsman puts brown sugar on his porridge .”
You fallaciously negated a Ukrainian’s position on a Ukrainian issue by arbitrarily (re)defining who or what a “Ukrainian” is.
Arguments incorporating logical fallacies cannot lead to a true conclusion.
Ah thanks. English is my second language and I still don’t know all the idioms just yet (I’m almost there)
Start with logical fallacies. Complete lists with examples are pretty easy to find, especially from university websites, and knowing of fallacies is the best way to avoid using them AND avoid bad arguments based on them.
Thanks
It’s pretty funny that you’re attempting to school anyone on logical fallacies while your every reply to me has been one long string of logical fallacies. You might want to follow your own advice of looking up a few of those lists and applying the lessons to your own posts.
False. Give me examples of alleged fallacies I have committed.
If you intend to start with Argument From Authority I’ll head you off right now. The links (multiple) I provided are not true because experts said what they said. The experts said what they said because what they said is true, factual, and supported by evidence they hold in greater supply than I do. (And this is not Circular Reasoning, try again)
Appeal to popularity welded appeal to authority. Begging the question. Either or fallacy.
That was just one post.
Saying it was only 6 months of training when it was closer to 24 months is just lying. Conspiracy theories are just a broken brain problem.
You’re not Air Force – maybe a yoga instructor ? You’re really stretching to make those accusations.
None fit, by the way. And you didn’t even pay enough attention to not-stumble into a fallacy I pre-debunked, the authority argument. And “in one post” ? I posted links. To content that isn’t mine.
I’m asking for evidence – and I’ll accept relevant personal experience – that the circumstances (including the 6-months figure that is a fact cited by multiple sources) make it even possible that the “official story” of ace pilots pulling off amazing feats is true.
I pose – not as fact but as conjecture – that absent evidence to prove the Ukrainian story, I do not believe it.
And I am more inclined to believe that NATO pilots, more likely (but not certain) to be able to display such mastery of these vehicles.
Why aren’t you proving the story to me, if you want me to believe it ?
I don’t claim it’s impossible. I simply don’t believe your narrative over one that seems more plausible.
You posted no links to me. Just because you realized you used appeal to authority after being called on it does not mean you get to say it isn’t appeal to authority and therefore you can’t be called out on it.
You made the claim it had to be NATO pilots. It’s on you to prove that claim.
Oh s**t, I have my wires crossed, I thought I was responding to the thread about the USA midwifing a coup and favorable regime change in Kiev where I posted a series of links. Good Hells if this isn’t a metaphor for my life – in six places at once but in none of them ever.
Sorry about that, as I’m lost in conversations I’m going to withdraw from this / these one(s) and try to focus better in the future.
Again, sorry for the confusion.
Christian Vila Idiot doesn't trust Neutrals – he never knows where they stand…
Wrong, Ukraine must come to its senses or it will be buried, maybe like it deserves to be, but I hope that is not so as I do not wish the evils of war on anyone. The 3 greatest triumphs of the evil one are war, abortion and pornography. USA seems to worship all 3, at least the DC GHOULS do.
abortion is not an evil
and im sure people like you watch порноґрафй all the time
Well U just told me all I need to know about you! 🙁
i’m sorry? Not my fault your a degenerate Trumpist
You are mistaken, I think Trump is a P.O.S. but may very well make a great one term POTUS. Harris is FAR worse for the future of this country, my country, the USA. My first choice would have been RFK and Tulsi, or ViVek and Tulsi. Actually nothing is going to stop the USA from turning into the Soviet Union of old, if cackling Harris and Freaky, Loony, Walz are elected.
Trump is already a one-term POTUS. If he’s elected again, he’ll be a two-term POTUS.
Thomas, he can only serve one more term, that is what I meant, sorry U did not understand that. LOL. In his first term the demoncrats and DEEP STATE, with great skill and cunning, blocked almost all he wanted to accomplish, either through Courts, impeachment, etc., etc. I am also sure a lot of Republicratz were also in on the scheme,,Russia, Russia, on and on. Hellz a comin..
DEEP STATE ISNT REAL
Deep State : "Of course we aren't. Carry on."
who’s Tulsi?
City in Oklahoma. But that's not important right now.
Oh that it TulsA
I’ve just never heard of the city TulsI but oh well
There’s also a Tacoma.
Decent truck, too.
Tulsa’s a fun place. I lived a few hours away when I was younger and sometimes roadied for a local band when they played down there.
Oh fun! So in Oklahoma City or somewhere its called?
Tulsa and Oklahoma City are two different cities. They’re both located in the state (think oblast) of Oklahoma.
Oh OK
You display age & ignorance by seeing Communists and Communism behind every hedge, in 2024.
Tell me the distinction between Socialism and Communism, JH.
Find out on your own accord, it is easy to do if you were not so lazy and used to being spoon fed. 🙂
I used to own a Civic, not an Accord. 3 Civics over the years. Still want an MR2. 85 to 87, gen 1 or 2.
I ask because I’m 99.98% sure a) you don’t know and b) you’d get it wrong if you said what you think it is – instead of ducking and dodging the question that would instantly display your ignorance.
I also had 2 Civics over the years, the last a loaded S VTECH, amazing cars, still would like to get another but there are no dealers nearby any more. Always wanted a yellow S-2000. In 2005, I had always owned performance motorcycles, but paused riding until my last child graduated HS and we had all the money put away for their college, all 3 of them. I was going to buy a HD Sportster R and cam it all up etc. but the Dealer was also a Yamaha dealer and had this red one of 2000 made 20th anniversary VMAX, I fell head over heels with that machine! I cut a deal and bought the VMAX and told no one. As I pulled up into the driveway my wife came out and was pissed, she said she had just put a hold on a new yellow S2000 as a surprise for me, now NO S2000. 🙁 I would have taken the S2000,, it would have been a great experience, but the VMAX, over the years of ownership, gave me many mystical rides that I could have never duplicated in a car. 🙂
My neighbor is a mechanic who will work on pretty much anything, but who has a local reputation among the Honda street racing types for tuning Hondas. He works on all my stuff, and I go over and help him with heavy lifting stuff that doesn’t require a great deal of mechanical knowledge. He took me for a ride in a car he’d just installed a nitrous rig in and that was quite fun.
As for motorcycles, I just upgraded from a 50cc scooter to a 150cc Chinese clone of the Honda Navi. Picked it up today. Fun bike — not yet broken in, but tops out at 56 mph if I don’t tuck in and lean forward. I’m planning to maintain it well and upgrade things over time to get it up to 55 cruising speed, 65-70 top speed, then hopefully sell it for close to what I paid for it (minus the performance replacement parts) in a couple of years, then get a nice big cruiser. Based on what’s out there on the used market at a reasonable price, I’m thinking Harley Iron 883, but if I’m not comfortable with that much power, maybe a Honda Rebel 500.
Good for U Thomas. 🙂
WAY cool ! The S2000 was indeed gorgeous tech, but glad you got so much satisfaction from the VMAX !
That Vila, dim and cowardly as he may be, at least respects bodily autonomy ?
You DO understand, Jay Hall & Oates, that a government that has the "legal authority" to override bodily autonomy and force a woman to stay pregnant, is also a (following) government empowered to force women to have abortions, right?
Do you see that bodily autonomy, when violated by fiat, is a weapon used in any direction ?
How are abortion and pr0noe "evil" ?
And answer without citing an undemonstrated god's opinion in an old storybook.
Ask that on your death bed, because you dying will not be your end, you will have to answer for your deeds.
That’s an assertion absent any evidence.
If there is a deity and an afterlife, the odds are precisely the same that She will ascend me to Sha Ka Ree BECAUSE I supported womens’ reproductive rights and enjoyed the hott girl-girl stuff She made available to all humans.
Aren’t you afraid, Hall & Oates, that you’ll have to answer for your flagrant disbelief in Ahura Mazda, or Ra, or Krishna – and your willful failure to keep THEIR tenets ?
How? How did the US overthrow the Ukrainian government?
Show your work please.
You can't be this ignorant.
Lay it out. Step by step.
You have the information so it shouldn’t be that hard to share it
https://original.antiwar.com/?p=2012348004
You owe me the 5 seconds it took to find this.
https://original.antiwar.com/edward_lozansky/2024/03/07/mother-of-maidan-to-resign/
https://news.antiwar.com/2024/03/05/victoria-nuland-notorious-russia-hawk-resigning-from-state-department/
Her m.f.ing PHONE CALL…
https://youtu.be/MSxaa-67yGM?si=Dw6ntVYO7q5klx5t
Could you try a reality based explanation. Name names. Provide details instead of vague accusations. Explain how the US did it.
Washington is doing everything it possibly can to prolong the war. They admitted their motive long ago. They don't give a shit about your Ukraine.
They give more of a shit than the fascist Rusotards in the Kremlin ever will
And we still have our loyal allies in Poland, the Baltics, the Netherlands, Finland and France
germany is ok I guess. More tanks?
Dream on little boy or girl. Go sign up and fight and stop running your mouth. 🙂
I AM IN COLLEGE I WILL BE ABLE TO IN A YEAR
MAYBE MORE OF YOU KEEP URGING ME TO
Disgusting, just as I thought, safe and comfortable with a big, brave mouth.
i’,m not safe there
i could be bombed to death
i could be missiled to death
in a year i come back and you can see me in military?
And somehow that reinforces what you said about the US doing nothing to stop peace in your Ukraine? Try again.
It's amazing how Washington tricked the Russians into invading and keep further tricking the Russians into continuing the war. So are the Russian stupid or incompetent to be tricked like that? Or maybe both?
And that means Washington isn't trying to prolong the war?
The only one prolonging the war is Russia. It was always their war of choice and they could choose to stop at any time.
Russia was willing to stop the war before it began but the US dismissed diplomacy. "Out of hand" I believe were Blinken's words. Russia was willing to withdraw from Ukraine in the spring of 2022 and Ukraine could have remained whole. But the stated goal of the west (US) was to weaken Russian and as Mitt Romney and others said, it was a good investment. But those things and all the provocations that went on for 30 plus years following the cold war were just figments of my imagination.
Yeah, yeah. Russia had to respond to “30 years if provocation” by the West by invading Ukraine. Invading a completely different nation is how that’s done.
Yeah, the US forced Russia to invade Ukraine because the the US didn’t negotiate. Ukraine never seems to factor into it. You know, the country Russia should have been negotiating with. In your telling Russia didn’t bother to ask the Ukrainians ask all. If they did they might have known the Ukrainians just aren’t into them.
I’d ask you for links to prove your claims, but last time you provided Russian mouthpieces, and conspiracy theorists, so I won’t bother. Judging by that, I’d say “yes”, most of those things are in fact figments of your imagination.
Which brings us back to my original question. Is Russia too stupid or too incompetent to notice they were being manipulated as you claim?
And that proves Washington isn't "doing nothing to stop peace"? That was the subject until you brought up your strawman bullshit.
You don’t know what a strawman is. Not surprising. Once again, when asked to go deeper than the approved talking point, you’re flailing around because you repeat what you’re told to repeat with no thought involved.
Your entire premise is Russia is was forced to invade and is currently being forced to continue to fight in Ukraine because of US magic or mind control or something because Russia has no agency in any of this. They’re being manipulated.
So are they stupid or incompetent to not only fall for it to start a war but to continue to fall for it by prolonging a war.
Sure I do. The "approved" talking point was whether the US was doing "nothing to stop peace" and then you did this:
an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument
You are really bad at this.
You’re entire premise is the US is failing to negotiatewith Russia. Except Russia invaded and is at war with Ukraine. The Ukrainians are perfectly capable of negotiating with Russia. Maybe the Russians should try that.
Perhaps they’re too stupid or incompetent to understand which country they’re attempting to colonize right now.
I'm bad at this? Jesus, that's humorous. You must be the naivest clown on the planet to think Ukraine is acting independently and without being led around by their nose.
And you have spent days claiming the US is leading Russia around. Forcing them to invade another neighbor. Forcing them to continue waging war. Not allowing Russia to have a peace agreement.
I’d ask exactly how the US is forcing the Ukrainian people to fight and die for something they don’t believe in, but you’ve already established that the US is magic and can just do that kind of thing.
So yeah. You’re really bad at this.
There you go again. Trying to read something into what I said that wasn't there. Not once did I say the US forced Russia into invading Ukraine. Nor did I say they were forcing Russia to continue waging war. I said there was 30 years of provocations that led to the invasion and anyone with an ounce of objectivity can't deny that.
And to top yourself you do the same thing again with my claim that the US is using Ukraine as fodder by saying I said Ukraine was forced into doing so. To the contrary, they willingly hopped into bed with the US. But that doesn't change the fact that they are being used as fodder and being led around by their nose. The two aren't mutually exclusive
You have yet to explain why the US needs to negotiate with Russia at all. The US didn’t invade Russia. The US us not at war with Russia. Russia invaded Ukraine. You keep leaving the Ukrainians out of it for some reason.
Almost like no one other than the US has any agency at all.
So if Russia wasn’t forced or tricked into invading Ukraine it’s their war of choice and they are chosing to continue on with it, correct?
How can I take you seriously when you ignore the elephant in the room? You keep leaving the US out of the equation as if the 30 years after the end of the cold war never happened. Poor USA, so misunderstood. I care about the Ukrainians, the US doesn't. I recall the summer offensive when the US readily admitted they wouldn't have done without air support. They also called the Ukrainians "casualty adverse" for bitching about their troops getting killed by mines because they didn't have adequate mind clearing equipment. But that's probably me just imagining that too.
And yes, it's Russia's war of choice. And yes, Russia was provoked. Those two aren't mutually exclusive either.
So it is a war of choice. They weren’t tricked into it. They weren’t forced into it. We make progress.
Now you can explain how “30 years of provocation” by the West, mostly the US in your telling, necessitated an invasion of Ukraine in a blatant colonial, imperialistic land grab in violation of the treaties Russia signed is not all on Russia. It’s a war of choice after all.
You ask how 30 years of provocations could lead to war. Doesn't that answer itself? Obviously, Russia took the bait. Not hard to figure out. Do you need that explained to you?
Sure. 30 years of provocation caused them to invade a country not involved with those provocations. Much like invading Chechnya, twice, and Georgia. I guess they were part of those provocations too, yes?
None were EU or NATO, do it only follows that provocations by the EU and NATO required invading all three for… reasons.
Right, and Ukraine getting in bed with the US/NATO was another figment of my imagination. Ukraine was just an innocent bystander.
Her's a blast from the past:
February 1, 2008. US Ambassador to Russia William Burns sends a confidential cable to U.S. National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, entitled “Nyet means Nyet: Russia’s NATO Enlargement Redlines,” emphasizing that “Ukraine and Georgia’s NATO aspirations not only touch a raw nerve in Russia, they engender serious concerns about the consequences for stability in the region.”
So they invaded Ukraine in 2014 and again in 2022 because of 2008? IDK. Seems like wagging the dog. Seems like post facto justification.
They invaded Ukraine in contradiction to the treaties Russian itself signed that allowed Ukraine the choice of which direction to go.
It’s just amazing how many of the former Soviet states, the ones brutalized by the USSR, which was a Russian empire, don’t want to go back under the Russian boot and don’t want the Russians involved in their government or lives anymore.
Both countries in the cable had to be invaded
You keep talking like I'm backing Russia when all I'm doing is pointing out things that led to their invasion. But I get it. Anyone doing that must automatically be a Russian propagandist or a Putin stooge. I'm neutral. I back neither corrupt shithole.
Yeah. Neutral. You just happen to parrot every single Russian justification for invading yet another neighbor. Completely neutral.
Are you knowingly spouting Russian propaganda? I don’t know, nor do I care. You either can’t see it for what it is, really want to believe it’s true, truly believe it, or are knowingly pushing propaganda. In any case you’re still pushing the propaganda.
I gave you reasons why Russia invaded Ukraine. Not once did I say their invasion was justified.
They took the bait.
Back to the original question. Is Russia stupid or incompetent?
That wasn't the original question. That was you deflecting from my comment about the US "doing nothing to stop peace in our Ukraine".
So are the Russians stupid or incompetent?
Irrelevant. So, are you stupid or incompetent?
They fell for what you are claiming was a ruse. Stupid or incompetent?
Could they not see it coming or did they not understand what they were seeing?
What's the difference whether I think it's stupidity or incompetence? How is that relevant to anything I've said?
Was the war predicated on Russian stupidity or incompetence?
Not relevant and I don't care.
Unless Sully gets off his ass and lets his opinions start flowing from it again, Shy Beekeeper here is going to bump him out of the Idiot Top 5 on this site.
Also, was it stupidity or incompetence on the part of Russia to be tricked into going to war? Is it stupidity or incompetence that they are being tricked into prolonging it?
Are they just dancing on the end of US strings? Just a puppet with no agency at all?
Whatever. It doesn't change the fact that the US wasn't interested in peace before the war or after it started. And that after all, was what I replied to. That Washington wasn't doing anything to stop peace in Ukraine. That is complete nonsense.
Stupidity or incompetence?
What's the difference? Your strawman arguement is irrelevant.
It makes a difference.
You claim Russia was forced to invade Ukraine. By the US.
The US is at fault in your telling. So why didn’t the Russians see that they were being manipulated? Why are they still prosecution a war they were forced into by the US?
Stupidity or incompetence? We all know Russian corruption played a huge part so that’s not in question.
"Washington is doing nothin to stop peace in our Ukraine"
That's what I commented on. And nothing could be more obvious than the US doing the complete opposite. They are doing everything they can to prolong the war. Now try to comment on that.
How? How is Washington doing that?
Show your work.
I know what your claim is. You should probably prove it.
Please refrain from citing paid Russian mouthpieces and conspiracy theorists.
I brought up Blinken's reply to Russia wanting diplomacy before the invasion ever happened. I brought up Romney and his "good investment" commnent. He wasn't alone. I could tell you about Lloyd Austin's comment regarding "weakening Russia" but what good would it do? You must think I'm "rooting" for Russia or I'm a "Putin stooge" or some other stupid bullshit that is bought up every time someone wants to mention the inconvenient facts about the US' STATED intentions. If we truly cared about the fate of Ukraine that would be different but that would also be a pipe dream. We are using them as fodder and it's as obvious as Joe Biden's balls hanging down to his knees.
And despite all that. Despite all the clear signs you claim, Russia still invaded Ukraine. Just as the US apparently intended.
So… stupid or incompetent?
If you don’t want to be seen as a Putin stooge don’t use paid Putin propagandists to prove your point. Don’t parrot the approved Russian talking points. Don’t use statements out of context to make Russia out to be the victim in all of this.
Like I said, irrelevant. I gave you reasons as to why the US has shown no interest in peace. And me quoting US officials is using "approved" Russian talking points? How about you refute what I said and tell me how the US isn't a detriment to peace and tell me what steps they have taken to achieve said peace.
You quoting out of context is the approved talking points. But you know that.
How about you explain to me exactly how the US is the detriment to peace by not negotiating in a war the US is not involved in? Is the US just supposed to carve up Ukraine? Make decisions for Ukraine regarding its path forward in the world with no input from the Ukrainians? How does that work?
US policy is nothing for Ukraine without the Ukrainians. If they decide to keep fighting they’ll be supplied. If they decide to lay down arms and surrender, it’s their choice. If they decide yo negotiate with Russia they will be supported in that too.
Who did I quote out of context?
The US isn't involved in a war that they are providing the weaponry and intelligence necessary to wage? Are you fucking serious?
Ditto for your last paragraph. Are you fucking serious? Are you one of those who relies on the MSM for your info? It would seem so.
The US isn’t involved in the war. Full stop. Not a single boot on the ground. Technical you didn’t actually quote anyone. You just invoked Blinken’s name as proof the US wasn’t negotiating with Russia. While failing to explain how the US is supposed to negotiate for Ukraine in opposition to Ukrainian wishes.
I get my information from various sources. Apparently you get yours from paid Russian mouthpieces and conspiracy theorists judging by the links you used and the names you dropped. Yet you seem to think relying on paid propaganda and conspiracy leaves you with a cleared eyed, unbiased view don’t you?
You do understand that the longer you go on with this, the longer you flail around out of your depth, the more anyone reading ar this point realizes you’re clueless, yes? 8 don’t mean the Russian bots, tankies, or vatnicks because they’re posting the exact same talking points as you, but anyone else.
Right. First you use the criteria that leaves out supplying the weapons and intelligence that are a necessity to wage war and then you have yourself proof that the US isn't involved in the war. Good one. Blinken said what he said. It's common knowledge. Same with what Romney and Austin said. Ukraine doesn't have a functioning government without US funding. They couldn't wage war without US funding and intelligence. And you think the US has no say in negotiations? That's cute.
What names did I drop and what links did I give that lead you to believe I'm using paid Russian propaganda and conspiracy theorists? Or did you just pull that out of your ass?
Your last paragraph gave me a chuckle. Never mind that the majority of people here would agree with what I say, it's only because they agree with me. And you say I'm clueless?
I was wrong about you dropping the names. That was someone else making the exact same arguments. You can see where the confusion comes in when you may as well be using cut and paste statements.
Supplying weapons or intelligence is not waging war. That’s why it’s not part of the criteria. If we go with your criteria Iran and North Korea are at war in Ukraine too since they’re supplying Russia with arms, yes? The EU and the other NATO members have supplied far more to Ukraine than the US, but you already knew that, right? But then again, the US pulls all the strings so it’s really the US supplying Ukraine.
Blinken said what he said. You do know it’s cherry picking to pull half a sentence out and claim it means something without context, yes? Same for the others.
The US is sending equipment, material, not cash. Not sure how that funds the Ukrainian government, but I’m sure you have the exact same talking point as the rest, something, something, black market.
I get it. You were wrong but it was my fault.
The war wouldn't be being waged without the US. Period. You can try and try but you know you're a damn liar if you deny that. The lag in weapons being sent when Ukraine was being used as a political football by our congress roves that Ukraine is totally dependent on the US.
How does one saying the Russian demands were out of hand and refusing diplomacy based on that taking something out of context? And since the war started Blinken has acted like an arm of the Defense Department instead of acting like our top diplomat.
This from early on.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/exclusive-us-send-45-billion-more-ukraine-budget-needs-2022-08-08/
I was wrong. The cut and paste arguments you use led me astray.
So by your criteria Iran and DPRK are now waging war in Ukraine correct? They’re supplying weapons and munitions to Russia. China is involved too as theyre supplying other material to Russia.
Or do we pretend the standards you made up only applies to the US? You didn’t think any of this through did you?
So, you were wrong but it was my fault. You already said that.
Are you actually comparing the support Ukraine is receiving to what Russia is receiving? Willfully ignorant or stupid?
The US is supplying munitions and equipment to Ukraine therefore the US is involved in the war. Iran and DPRK are supplying munitions and equipment to Russia but they aren’t involved in the war. You don’t see any inconsistency there?
It’s just like decrying a US base in a country that’s invited to be there, falls under the law in accordance with a SOFA as imperialism while ignoring actual imperialism.
So weird how it happens like that.
If both countries had no outside support Ukraine would be crushed. Quite simple. And not once did I say those supporting Russia weren't involved in the war.
Are you going to keep spinning this? You’re beclowning yourself at this point.
Did you not claim, multiple times, that the US supplying weapons means the US is at war with Russia? Yes. Yes, you did. Did you not cry that I left that off of my criteria when explaining how the US is not in fact at war? Yes. Yes, you did.
But… somehow Iran and DPRK supplying weapons doesn’t mean they’re at war with Ukraine.
Explaine how that works. I suspect you don’t know because you didn’t think about it because that’s not part of what you’re told to say. So, lay out your criteria, the rules you’re using to make this kind of determination.
You said the US wasn't involved. I said they were involved. They are. Did I say Iran and North Korea weren't INVOLVED? No, I didn't. Stop putting words in my mouth. But comparatively speaking, well there is no comparison.
You’re flailing now. I can see how applying your own criteria is bad for you.
Also, you forgot China. By your criteria they’re at war with Ukraine to since they’re supplying Russia too.
If you’re going to be comparatively speaking, you need to lay out the rules your using to make those comparisons. You clearly have some sort of cut off where material support doesn’t qualify for being involved. Care to say what that is?
Probably not. You clearly haven’t thought much beyond your talking points.
So, you completely ignored what I said. You're the one who said the US wasn't involved. I didn't say Iran, North Korea OR China WEREN'T involved. How many times do I have to say that before it sinks in? And you are the one that set the criteria for what "involvement" means by saying the US wasn't involved since they didn't have boots on the ground. It's like you're arguing with yourself. So, willfully ignorant or stupid, which is it?
You insisted on supplying arms or intelligence as proof of involvement. You whined because of didn’t include it. You also unaccountablely failed to mention the countries doing the same for Russia when laying blame for prolonging the war.
Your criteria, your error, your lie of omission
Now you're just making shit up. You said the US wasn't involved in the war ("Full stop") because they didn't have boots on the ground. We were talking about involvement of the US and that was what I specifically replied to. I didn't unaccountably omit anything.
"show your work"
How a Commenter illustrates they haven't read any of antiwar.com's content for the past 15+ years.
Beekeeper may as well just say "sum up this site's information for me – doing my own work & paying attention is HARD."
This is analogues to US saying they working night and day to achieve ceasefire in Gaza… But they keep sending weapons to Israel…!
Israel is, by law, a "major non-NATO ally". So, why be surprised the US is sending them weapons, when they are being attacked by several nations simultaneously (Iran sent drones and missiles to attack Israeli cities; so does Yemen and Lebanon, which just killed 12 kids in a playground in Israel).
What's your solution – abandon our ally? That usually works.
As for the cease fire, how about asking Hamas to surrender? That would have ended the war months ago and saved countless lives. After all, Hamas is not even a legitimate government. They had a civil war with the legal government – the PA – and now illegally occupy Gaza. Hamas should surrender their weapons, release all hostages, and stop occupying Gaza.
But your complaint is that the US is helping an ally that is being bombed daily.
Another thing to consider is that if the US did abandoned its ally, Israel would join other alliances. If they were to work with Russia/China/Iran, it means they would dominate the Middle East – then US fuel costs were skyrocket immediately, crushing the US economy and wiping out home and stock prices and retirement funds.
It's nice to dream once in a while…!
Yes, the Israelis dreamed that Hamas would use the billions in aid it received to build a peaceful, prosperous society in Gaza. Instead, they spent years buying guns, grenades, bombs, rockets, vests, night goggles and building tunnels, for their attack on their neighbor.
You do have a non-western evidence link… don’t you…?!
Evidence of what? None of the facts are in dispute.
1. Gaza had been a center for Jewish learning for centuries.
2. After 2005, Israel left Gaza, which was an exclusive territory for Palestinians.
3. The recognized government of Gaza – by Accord – was the Palestinian Authority (PA). The PA and Hamas disputed the results of an election, and Hamas illegally occupied Gaza, killing PA officials. There have been no elections since then. Hamas does not have international recognition as the government of Gaza.
4. When Hamas did not attack and murder Israelis, Israel had no reason to attack Hamas. They even allowed billions of dollars of aid to reach Gaza. If Hamas wanted to, they could have created a prosperous territory. However, their goal was to destroy Israel and take over their country.
So, what part of this narrative do you question?
“We should not forget about the moral and psychological factor of the Russian civilian population,” he said. “Our operation was planned both tactically and as a move to demoralize the enemy.”
Right. And maybe, just maybe, it pissed a whole bunch of them off and they'll start demanding their government take some of those 6,000 + nukes out of mothballs.
I'm not convinced Western intelligence has been involved regarding Ukraine at any point since 2012 or so.
Western Intelligence, yes. Actual intelligence, or wisdom, or forethought, or reasonable extrapolation – definitely not.
that's allowable, it is necessary to share important information about troop movements and locations in a war with your allies.
That only matters if both sides think it's "allowable".
lol
What was funny about what I said? Something being "allowable" in war isn't allowable if both sides don't agree that it's allowable.
OKÉ
No one really cares what Russia thinks about it. If they don't want the Ukrainians using western intelligence, they could leave Ukraine and allow Ukraine to keep Kursk as a buffer zone.
Right. Never mind if Russia doesn't agree that Ukraine using western intelligence is allowable. They base everything on what the west and people commenting on antiwar.com think. More brilliance.
If Russia doesn’t like it, they could always leave Ukraine. Then they won’t have to worry about Ukranian troops using western intelligence to kill Russian troops.
Let me see if I understand your position on this. Russia hasn’t agreed to allow the Ukranians the use of western intelligence therefore said use is illegal. Do I understand that correctly? Brilliant.
Here’s the thing. I’m pretty sure Ukraine didn’t agree to allow Russia to invade its sovereign territory in a blatant imperialistic land grab. That didn’t stop Russia though did it?
I commented on Christian Villa saying the use of western intelligence was "allowable". To whom? Ukraine, sure. Russia, obviously NO. So, if both combatants don't think it's allowable, then what anyone else thinks doesn't fucking matter. And I didn't say it was my position that the use of western intelligence is illegal only that if Russia does, then what's allowable to Christian Villa or you or me doesn't mean a pinch of shit. Are you that dense?
I’m pretty sure in Russia’s view it’s not “allowable” that Ukrainians are fighting back instead of just happily being absorbed into the Russian empire again. If your weird idea of “allowable” which seems to boil down to both sides have to agree to a thing, I’m pretty sure the Ukrainians wouldn’t think is was “allowable” that they’re being invaded by a colonizing, imperialistic neighbor.
No one cares what the Russians think is “allowable” or not.
I guess you are THAT dense. It doesn't matter if I THINK IT'S ALLOWABLE. It matters only to the sides involved in the war. Now whether I agree with Russia is completely irrelevant. It is they who will retaliate if they don't think it's allowable.
Yes, no one cares if Russia thinks it's allowable or not. Other than Russia.
How is Russia going to retaliate? By invading Ukraine? Already done. Threatening nuclear war again? No one really cares anymore since they threaten to use nukes almost weekly. Lodge a complaint with the UN? No one cares.
Not Better Late Than Never….! Putin was already reelected before Kursk Invasion…!
US intel is used both in Ukraine and Gaza wars. Why wouldn't it be?
Maybe it should not be used because the majority of the USA citizen and taxpayer want no part of these horrors!!!
most Ukrainians don't want to be under the specter of the Russian but I guess we don't matter to you
Like the hoi poloi has anything to say about it. . .
Well Duhhhh, OF COURSE the US was involved in the planning; whether it be the Pentagon or the CIA. As an operation, it bears all the hallmarks of US military incompetence and operational cluelessness; an offensive to nowhere, bound to bog down, whether it captures 50 square miles or 500 square miles of mostly empty fields and tiny villages. The question for Ukraine's "professional military advisors" is, what now? Having taken those miles of potato fields at a run, they are now bogged down and under intensive artillery and air bombardment. Whether their invasion force is 10,000 or 20,000 men, they are nowhere near enough density (at best, 40 men per square mile) to hold 500 square miles of territory, and as even the ISW admits, they have lost much/most of their armored vehicles, so it seems unlikely they will be able to withdraw in the face of Russian fire superiority.
I would have thought – hoped – that after the Krynky fiasco (another stupid and pointless offensive to nowhere, occupying mud flats instead of potato fields) the Ukrainians would have learned NOT to listen to "US Military Experts".
This statemnt about the hoped for impact on Russian civilian population could have only come from an American military planners. They are divorced from reality — and know nothing about Russia and Russians.
And how is Kursk doing? Silence in Western media does not mean everything is going peachy. Ukrainians are getting annihilated. And they just gave Russia an opportuunity to enter Summy region, providing another access to Kharkiv Region.
All news talk about the prgress of Russia in Donetsk is just avoiding duscussion about Kursk. Sure it will take time to kill Ukrainian military. And as per usual, Zelensky has ordered no retreat. Keep positions even after all hope for keeping territory is long since disappeared. Same thing happened to Mariupol, Bakhmut, Avdeevka or now Pokrovsk. Soldiers are not allowed to withdraw orderly, and set up new defenses. Zelenski must hate not just Russians but Ukrainians as well.
Because he and his global cult have just one goal — damage Russia. Obsession still alive since time immemorial. Drang nach osten is very much under way. Sad thing is — the same manipulators who envisaged Ukrainians and Russia kill each other, are salivating at the prospect of throwing in one more populous Slavic nation into the couldron,
Not the first time in history that attemp us made ti kill or push behind Urals most of Slavic populationz.
Colonial urges in the West have been rejuvenated. Israel is leading the way in demonstrating that if you want to achieve military goals — destroy civilians.
ukraine………………… gave russia.. and oppurtinity………. to invade Sumy? KURSK borders SUMYY
And our leader does not hate us. And lastly, yes, we hate Russia. They are idiots who deserve to be broken up into oblasts or as a weak ethnostate without siberia or the caucases or karelia or tatarstan
You seem to be concerned about colonialism and imperialism. How do you justify the Russian colonialism, imperialistic invasion of Ukraine to begin with?
As for the rest? You do know people have access to near real time satellite images, yes? We can see what's going on in both Kursk and Donbass. Nothing in your claim is true.
and you know nothing about ukraine or ukrainians
Of course it was. More exposition of the obvious.
Retarded children playing with matches.
Russia will soon be pistol whipping a blind kid called Joey Biden!
For those of you who forgot, the idiot Joey Biden is still in the White House and his unelected minions are still running amuck!
“Western intelligence was used” The west hasn’t been intelligent for quite some time now. Hitler try to take Kursk with even greater force. These guys will get cut off and die or surrender.
https://english.nv.ua/nation/ukraine-kursk-incursion-has-run-its-course-its-time-to-retreat-argues-ukraine-war-expert-50447449.html
So now even the Ukrainian propaganda organs (New Voice of Ukraine) acknowledge it's time to withdraw from Kursk. So an incursion to nowhere that cost them thousands of casualties among their best combat units, a disproportionate loss of armored vehicles (as estimated by the very pro-Ukrainian David Axe and the ISW) and captured a bunch of empty fields and MAYBE a few hundred conscripts and border guards "accomplished its mission" (not my words, the New Voice of Ukraine's) so it's "time to go".
But they're not being "chased out". Oh No. They are "withdrawing proudly with their head high". Good Luck with that when you try doing it under Russian air and artillery fire; just saying.
More and More this incursion absolutely looks like a "plan" that only a committed of 3 and 4 star west point generals could have dreamt up.