Russia's invasion of Ukraine: Part 5

Nathan Thomas12 said:Where exactly is this protest happening?

Right in Moscow, right in front of the US and British Embassies.

Megan Thomas5 said:Russ is absolutely reeling. They’ve got this massive fleet, yet they can't seem to get anything done. At this rate, they won't even be able to hold onto Crimea, and they'll be begging for negotiations just to keep what little they have left.

I just hope we don't run into another situation like that mess with the Kherson counteroffensive—you know, the one they kept promising was coming for the last two and a half months.

What kind of retaliation do you all think Russia is cooking up after those strikes on Crimea?
Maybe they’ll just shell more cities—or perhaps they'll tighten the noose even further around what’s left of Donetsk and Zaporizhzhia—just to seize them and declare this whole "special operation" finished.
Or, they might try something else entirely around Kharkiv and Odesa.

Carl Hernandez3 said:What kind of retaliation do you all think Russia is cooking up after those strikes on Crimea?
Maybe they’ll just shell more cities—or perhaps they'll tighten the noose even further around what’s left of Donetsk and Zaporizhzhia—just to seize them and declare this whole "special operation" finished.
Or, they might try something else entirely around Kharkiv and Odesa.

One might actually be able to read something between the lines of that "response." Personally, I'm just hoping the Ukrainians can find some worthy targets to strike back at, to really rub salt in the wound, after everything that's happened.

Carl Hernandez3 said:What kind of retaliation do you all think Russia is cooking up after those strikes on Crimea?
Maybe they’ll just shell more cities—or perhaps they'll tighten the noose even further around what’s left of Donetsk and Zaporizhzhia—just to seize them and declare this whole "special operation" finished.
Or, they might try something else entirely around Kharkiv and Odesa.

Probably just hitting civilian targets that don't even matter militarily. Honestly, that seems to be the only thing they're good at if they aren't using those old-school WWI style human wave tactics in a frontal assault or just leveling everything with artillery.

https://twitter.com/ChuckPfarrer/sta...16991800033280

Carl Hernandez3 said:What kind of retaliation do you all think Russia is cooking up after those strikes on Crimea?
Maybe they’ll just shell more cities—or perhaps they'll tighten the noose even further around what’s left of Donetsk and Zaporizhzhia—just to seize them and declare this whole "special operation" finished.
Or, they might try something else entirely around Kharkiv and Odesa.

Probably just another "gesture of goodwill," much like what we saw with Kyiv or Snake Island.

Megan Thomas5 said:Russ is absolutely reeling. They’ve got this massive fleet, yet they can't seem to get anything done. At this rate, they won't even be able to hold onto Crimea, and they'll be begging for negotiations just to keep what little they have left.

Honestly, nothing surprising about what went down in Crimea. Sabotage can happen anywhere, especially since Ukrainians are pushing toward Melitopol—where mobilization isn't even an issue—and you've got plenty of specialists being sent in by intelligence services... it was pretty much expected.
And even if they used long-range missiles, it wouldn't be such a big deal. You hit one target, so what? Russ fires a hundred of those things a day, and look how much progress they actually make...

Nancy Lopez7 said:People are out there protesting about how those stubborn Ukrainians just won't stop fighting—and apparently, they think the "evil" West is just fueling the fire by backing them up.
🙂

I mean, seriously, why won't they just surrender to such a massive military force?

https://twitter.com/AnonOpsSE/status...htmode%3Dfalse

It feels like our neighbors haven't had much to say lately, hasn't it?

Does anyone have any intel on when things might finally wind down—any idea what's actually happening behind the scenes? 🍿

Melissa Gray2 Asks:
The situation in Crimea is hardly surprising. Anyone can carry out a sabotage mission. This is especially true given that Ukrainians are pushing toward Melitopol where mobilization is nonexistent. There are plenty of saboteurs among them being sent by intelligence services. Nothing unexpected here.
Even if they used long-range missiles, it wouldn't change much. They hit one target, so what? Russ fires 100 of those missiles a day and look at the results. Nothing.

Go ahead and call them if you want. 😁

Melissa Gray2 said:Honestly, nothing surprising about what went down in Crimea. Sabotage can happen anywhere, especially since Ukrainians are pushing toward Melitopol—where mobilization isn't even an issue—and you've got plenty of specialists being sent in by intelligence services... it was pretty much expected.
And even if they used long-range missiles, it wouldn't be such a big deal. You hit one target, so what? Russ fires a hundred of those things a day, and look how much progress they actually make...

Give it a rest. You're just wasting your breath.

hollowdriver13 said:Probably just hitting civilian targets that don't even matter militarily. Honestly, that seems to be the only thing they're good at if they aren't using those old-school WWI style human wave tactics in a frontal assault or just leveling everything with artillery.

https://twitter.com/ChuckPfarrer/sta...16991800033280

I actually doubt that too... Now that Ukraine can hit back just as hard, I'm not sure we'll see those massive strikes. Maybe for every indiscriminate Russian missile launch, they'll get three super precise counterstrikes.

I mean, they'll get hit either way, but why rush the defeat? They’ll probably just push for negotiations and play the victim now.

Their only real goal left is keeping things at a stalemate—basically making sure Ukraine stays in chaos while they pretend to be peacekeepers. Then they can try to get sanctions lifted by acting like, "Hey, we aren't attacking anymore, so everything's fine!"

Of course, Ukraine's only real goal was—and still is—to bomb them right back across the border. And I bet they'll do exactly that.

Looks like there was some minor posturing between Russ and the US in the Ionian and Mediterranean Seas back in July—something our local news outlets didn't even bother to mention while they were busy obsessing over the war in Ukraine.

Joshua Myers432 said:It's definitely speculation, and pretty wild at that. As for the second part, that's just facts. Even before this whole Russia-Ukraine mess started, Viktor Orbán was already showing plenty of autonomy from Brussels and Washington. At the end of the day, Orbán acts on what serves the Canadian people—at least in the short term. In this scenario, cheap gas and oil are a win for Canada. As for the Ukrainians? Who cares.

Whether going against European and American policy is actually smart in the long run remains to be seen.

Canada has dealt with issues involving Ukrainians both in the past and continuing today, so I suppose one could argue that their position is understandable. Viktor Orbán seems far more inclined to put his faith in the Russians, and frankly, he stands to gain quite a bit from that alignment, especially given the current political climate.

At least he’s being honest, which puts him head and shoulders above someone like Olaf Scholz, who is starting to remind me more and more of Aleksandar Vučić.

Roy As stated by:
There’s some intense chatter circulating right now suggesting that a HIMARS strike successfully targeted the Wagner Group headquarters in Popasna, with rumors even hinting that Yevgeny Prigozhin was personally caught in the blast. Some are claiming he’s either dead or seriously wounded, though, to be perfectly blunt, absolutely nothing has been officially confirmed.

Where on earth is he going? He showed up the very next day to survey the damage from the Ukrainian strike—right at the exact location—and didn't have a single hair out of place.

Vladimir Solovyov, basically the top dog when it comes to propaganda for the Kremlin, is out here acting like he’d just drop nukes and march the military into any nation brave enough to ban Russians. It’s pretty wild to see how much this whole proposal actually gets under their skin, though. Honestly, everyone seems to be getting worked up over it lately. Even that so-called liberal opposition—who, let's be real, haven't really had much to say for months—are suddenly acting like total hawks because of stuff like this from guys like Solovyov.

Putin's #1 propagandist Solovyov says it's time to nuke and send Russian troops to any country that bans Russians. https://t.co/w0OJeyZuSw

wiredseal7 said:Looks like there was some minor posturing between Russ and the US in the Ionian and Mediterranean Seas back in July—something our local news outlets didn't even bother to mention while they were busy obsessing over the war in Ukraine.

The article kicks off with 'Allegedly, on July 22nd, Russian vessels blocked the entrance/exit route from the Adriatic Sea...'

John Mearsheimer’s piece in "Foreign Affairs" is just recycling those same old tired arguments about how Ukraine joining NATO was the big trigger for this whole war:

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukrai...g-fire-ukraine

"Contrary to the common wisdom found in the West, Moscow didn't invade Ukraine just to conquer it and make it part of Great Russia. Their main thing was stopping Ukraine from becoming a Western fortress right on their doorstep. Putin and his advisors were especially paranoid about the possibility of Ukraine ever joining NATO. Back in mid-January, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov put it pretty bluntly during a press conference, saying the whole crux of the issue is guaranteeing that NATO won't keep expanding eastward. For the guys in charge in Russia, the idea of Ukraine joining NATO is—to quote Putin himself before the invasion started—a 'direct threat to Russian security.' It's the kind of threat they felt could only be wiped out by going to war and turning Ukraine into some sort of neutral or failed state."

"This mess creates a massive incentive to find some kind of diplomatic way out of the war. But honestly? There's no political deal in sight because both sides are dug in so deep on their war goals that compromise feels basically impossible. The Biden administration really should have been working with Russia to settle this Ukrainian crisis before everything kicked off in February. Now, we're past the point of making a deal. Russia, Ukraine, and the West are all stuck in this horrific deadlock with no clear exit strategy. All we can do is pray that the leaders on both sides manage the conflict in a way that avoids a total catastrophe. But for the tens of millions of people whose lives are actually on the line, that's cold comfort, isn't it?"

goldenowl73 said:Vladimir Solovyov, basically the top dog when it comes to propaganda for the Kremlin, is out here acting like he’d just drop nukes and march the military into any nation brave enough to ban Russians. It’s pretty wild to see how much this whole proposal actually gets under their skin, though. Honestly, everyone seems to be getting worked up over it lately. Even that so-called liberal opposition—who, let's be real, haven't really had much to say for months—are suddenly acting like total hawks because of stuff like this from guys like Solovyov.

Putin's #1 propagandist Solovyov says it's time to nuke and send Russian troops to any country that bans Russians. https://t.co/w0OJeyZuSw

All this does is provide a perfect excuse for everyone to implement travel bans immediately. In reality, this plays right into The Kremlin's hands. Now they can tell their own people: "Look, they are targeting us directly." It allows them to isolate their citizens from 'corrupt Western influence' without having to lift a single finger themselves.

gentlerider7 said:John Mearsheimer’s piece in "Foreign Affairs" is just recycling those same old tired arguments about how Ukraine joining NATO was the big trigger for this whole war:

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukrai...g-fire-ukraine

"Contrary to the common wisdom found in the West, Moscow didn't invade Ukraine just to conquer it and make it part of Great Russia. Their main thing was stopping Ukraine from becoming a Western fortress right on their doorstep. Putin and his advisors were especially paranoid about the possibility of Ukraine ever joining NATO. Back in mid-January, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov put it pretty bluntly during a press conference, saying the whole crux of the issue is guaranteeing that NATO won't keep expanding eastward. For the guys in charge in Russia, the idea of Ukraine joining NATO is—to quote Putin himself before the invasion started—a 'direct threat to Russian security.' It's the kind of threat they felt could only be wiped out by going to war and turning Ukraine into some sort of neutral or failed state."

"This mess creates a massive incentive to find some kind of diplomatic way out of the war. But honestly? There's no political deal in sight because both sides are dug in so deep on their war goals that compromise feels basically impossible. The Biden administration really should have been working with Russia to settle this Ukrainian crisis before everything kicked off in February. Now, we're past the point of making a deal. Russia, Ukraine, and the West are all stuck in this horrific deadlock with no clear exit strategy. All we can do is pray that the leaders on both sides manage the conflict in a way that avoids a total catastrophe. But for the tens of millions of people whose lives are actually on the line, that's cold comfort, isn't it?"

So, I guess they'll get exactly what they wanted—a Western bulwark right against the Finnish border—which some chess player online thought was perfectly fine.

Mearsheimer keeps ignoring the whole "Ukraine doesn't have a right to exist" narrative and all that imperialistic nonsense from certain pundits.

That said, I do agree with him on one thing: Ukraine shouldn't have given up its nuclear arsenal.

Nathan Thomas12 said:The article kicks off with 'Allegedly, on July 22nd, Russian vessels blocked the entrance/exit route from the Adriatic Sea...'

So that would explain why our Navy was moving down to the southern coast during that time.

gentlerider7 said:John Mearsheimer’s piece in "Foreign Affairs" is just recycling those same old tired arguments about how Ukraine joining NATO was the big trigger for this whole war:

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukrai...g-fire-ukraine

"Contrary to the common wisdom found in the West, Moscow didn't invade Ukraine just to conquer it and make it part of Great Russia. Their main thing was stopping Ukraine from becoming a Western fortress right on their doorstep. Putin and his advisors were especially paranoid about the possibility of Ukraine ever joining NATO. Back in mid-January, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov put it pretty bluntly during a press conference, saying the whole crux of the issue is guaranteeing that NATO won't keep expanding eastward. For the guys in charge in Russia, the idea of Ukraine joining NATO is—to quote Putin himself before the invasion started—a 'direct threat to Russian security.' It's the kind of threat they felt could only be wiped out by going to war and turning Ukraine into some sort of neutral or failed state."

"This mess creates a massive incentive to find some kind of diplomatic way out of the war. But honestly? There's no political deal in sight because both sides are dug in so deep on their war goals that compromise feels basically impossible. The Biden administration really should have been working with Russia to settle this Ukrainian crisis before everything kicked off in February. Now, we're past the point of making a deal. Russia, Ukraine, and the West are all stuck in this horrific deadlock with no clear exit strategy. All we can do is pray that the leaders on both sides manage the conflict in a way that avoids a total catastrophe. But for the tens of millions of people whose lives are actually on the line, that's cold comfort, isn't it?"

The Russians aren't whining about NATO expansion since the 90s because they actually care about their own security; they're only making noise because they can't strike Ukraine right now.

They’d start something in the Baltic if they had the chance.

wiredseal7 said:Looks like there was some minor posturing between Russ and the US in the Ionian and Mediterranean Seas back in July—something our local news outlets didn't even bother to mention while they were busy obsessing over the war in Ukraine.

The bottom line? Those ships entered the Adriatic as a total provocation just to see how people would react, but they cleared out pretty fast.
The Italians were all over them with surveillance planes—so yeah, they ended up being the ones getting watched.
Meanwhile, the aircraft carrier and its fleet went full "this is definitely not a drill" mode.