Russia's invasion of Ukraine: Part 5

I just hope the Ukrainians don't forget to pour out some water for those who abandoned Snake Island, ensuring they never have any reason to set foot there again.

Paul Thomas46 said:I don't think that's really the reason—they have those massive desks regardless, and they would've used them even if COVID hadn't happened.

It’s all about projecting grandeur and power—you know, using high-end polished wood.
Honestly, it's enough to make you want to dive into some Freudian analysis...

It reminds me of that certain type of guy—you know the one, balding with a gut—who buys a Toyota Land Cruiser or a Cadillac Escalade just to slap a "vanity" plate on it like "Vova20cm," lights up a cheap, pungent cigar, cranks some trashy pop music to max volume, and cruises through the city with all the windows rolled down. 🤣

Melissa Rivera5 said:Not just hard, it’s actually impossible. Like, Lavrov was dead serious when he claimed they hadn't even attacked Ukraine, so why would they attack anyone else? I mean, these FBI trolls here are clearly on the payroll, but the people who actually swallow this crap... maybe they need some psychiatric help. 🙂

did you see what Elvisap👍said, 🤔so
what's the verdict?

Henry Sullivan4 said:did you see what Elvisap👍said, 🤔so
what's the verdict?

Popović sends his regards and says you'll never be a true communist 👎

BBC: Why Ukraine’s win on Snake Island matters for everyone else

Larry Walker24 said:BBC: Why Ukraine’s win on Snake Island matters for everyone else

☕Long-range missiles are starting to fly—soon things are gonna get real hot over Crimea, and that bridge? It’s gonna be shaking from all those hits...

Justin Mendoza16 said:☕Long-range missiles are starting to fly—soon things are gonna get real hot over Crimea, and that bridge? It’s gonna be shaking from all those hits...

Keep it coming. Honestly, the sooner they take that bridge down, the better.

Jeremy Peterson4 said:Keep it coming. Honestly, the sooner they take that bridge down, the better.

If that bridge goes down, Crimea’s gonna be totally cut off.

Justin Mendoza16 said:☕Long-range missiles are starting to fly—soon things are gonna get real hot over Crimea, and that bridge? It’s gonna be shaking from all those hits...

We’re going to have to tread a bit more carefully with that approach, aren't we? After all, any strike on Crimea Russia is viewed by them as an assault on their own sovereign soil. We really shouldn't be handing them any excuses to escalate things further, especially at a time when some Russian lunatic seems to be threatening us with nuclear weapons every other day. Does sending missiles toward Crimea actually provide much strategic value right now? Perhaps it would be wiser to focus our efforts on reclaiming Kherson and securing that corridor leading toward Crimea instead.

hollowdriver13 said:It’s honestly tough to tie such a massive pile of blatant lies together into one coherent story when they're being dumped on us so fast. Even the Russian propagandists are having a hard time keeping up lately—they're totally tripping over themselves. 🕺😬

It seems as though every fresh fabrication is greeted not merely as an obvious falsehood, but as some sort of inevitable, undeniable truth.

They’re going to need several dozen extra dimensions just to house all that cognitive dissonance.

steelheron25 said:We’re going to have to tread a bit more carefully with that approach, aren't we? After all, any strike on Crimea Russia is viewed by them as an assault on their own sovereign soil. We really shouldn't be handing them any excuses to escalate things further, especially at a time when some Russian lunatic seems to be threatening us with nuclear weapons every other day. Does sending missiles toward Crimea actually provide much strategic value right now? Perhaps it would be wiser to focus our efforts on reclaiming Kherson and securing that corridor leading toward Crimea instead.

Targeting the ports where frigates, corvettes, and submarines launch their cruise missiles makes perfect strategic sense. As far as military installations go, Crimea is practically overflowing with them.

steelheron25 said:We’re going to have to tread a bit more carefully with that approach, aren't we? After all, any strike on Crimea Russia is viewed by them as an assault on their own sovereign soil. We really shouldn't be handing them any excuses to escalate things further, especially at a time when some Russian lunatic seems to be threatening us with nuclear weapons every other day. Does sending missiles toward Crimea actually provide much strategic value right now? Perhaps it would be wiser to focus our efforts on reclaiming Kherson and securing that corridor leading toward Crimea instead.

That’s exactly why they need to hit them—precisely because of those threats.
From my perspective, Ukrainians face a fundamentally different dilemma here. See, Crimea is Ukraine. It isn't easy for them to decide to demolish infrastructure within their own borders—essentially destroying their own property—even if that property sits on occupied land. The Russians hold the psychological advantage here; they know they are occupiers, and they feel no hesitation about tearing through Ukraine. But necessity dictates action. It isn't a hard choice, particularly when you understand the nature of the occupier. You know that at the end of the day, they will likely just destroy everything in their path before they ever consider showing "goodwill."

https://www-gazeta-ru.translate.goog..._x_tr_pto=wapp

So, get this—some 62-year-old guy over in Volgograd just got slapped with an administrative fine for "discrediting" the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. Apparently, that's what the Telegram channel for the Joint Press Service of the Volgograd Region Court is reporting.

The whole thing went down back in May 2022. This older gentleman was cruising around the Traktorozavodsky District in a Kamaz truck, shouting anti-Russian slogans right at the military commissioner for the Traktorozavodsky and Krasnooktyabrsky Region. Can you imagine? Just driving around yelling at officials while behind the wheel of a heavy truck.

According to the regional court's press release, the guy basically "publicly undermined trust and discredited" the use of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and its citizens—who are supposedly out there "maintaining international peace and security," if you believe the official line regarding the special military operation in Ukraine as authorized by that February 22, 2022, decree from the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation. Yeah, sounds about right, doesn't it?

When he finally sat down for his hearing, the retiree actually admitted he did it and said he was sorry. The court weighed the "social danger" of his actions against his age and how much money he actually has to his name. In the end, they decided to let him off with a $15,000 ruble fine. Not exactly a life sentence, but hey, I guess it's enough to sting a little.

Nancy Gomez26 said:That’s exactly why they need to hit them—precisely because of those threats.
From my perspective, Ukrainians face a fundamentally different dilemma here. See, Crimea is Ukraine. It isn't easy for them to decide to demolish infrastructure within their own borders—essentially destroying their own property—even if that property sits on occupied land. The Russians hold the psychological advantage here; they know they are occupiers, and they feel no hesitation about tearing through Ukraine. But necessity dictates action. It isn't a hard choice, particularly when you understand the nature of the occupier. You know that at the end of the day, they will likely just destroy everything in their path before they ever consider showing "goodwill."

Man, tell me about it. I met some Russians back before 2014 around Crimea, and to them, it was never Ukraine—it was always Russia.

Melissa Rivera5 said:Man, tell me about it. I met some Russians back before 2014 around Crimea, and to them, it was never Ukraine—it was always Russia.

I’m certain there are Russians who hold that view, but there are also Ukrainians who insist Crimea belongs to Ukraine.
To me, the situation in Crimea is a matter of fundamental principle. If it remains under the control of the Russian Federation, it sets a dangerous precedent—it serves as a reward for launching an invasion and acts as a green light for any other nation looking to seize territory. It might even be seen as an invitation for the Russian Federation to resume its military campaigns in Ukraine down the road. Right now, they need to withdraw completely from Ukraine. That means retreating from everything they previously occupied.

Nancy Gomez26 said:I’m certain there are Russians who hold that view, but there are also Ukrainians who insist Crimea belongs to Ukraine.
To me, the situation in Crimea is a matter of fundamental principle. If it remains under the control of the Russian Federation, it sets a dangerous precedent—it serves as a reward for launching an invasion and acts as a green light for any other nation looking to seize territory. It might even be seen as an invitation for the Russian Federation to resume its military campaigns in Ukraine down the road. Right now, they need to withdraw completely from Ukraine. That means retreating from everything they previously occupied.

It would be pretty wild if China just decided to grab pieces of Russia the same way, and then Japan does it, and a few other countries follow suit. Imagine a scene where both China and the West just totally isolate them. 🙂Man, Russia would basically turn into a new North Korea.

Melissa Rivera5 said:Man, tell me about it. I met some Russians back before 2014 around Crimea, and to them, it was never Ukraine—it was always Russia.

Nancy Gomez26 said:I’m certain there are Russians who hold that view, but there are also Ukrainians who insist Crimea belongs to Ukraine.
To me, the situation in Crimea is a matter of fundamental principle. If it remains under the control of the Russian Federation, it sets a dangerous precedent—it serves as a reward for launching an invasion and acts as a green light for any other nation looking to seize territory. It might even be seen as an invitation for the Russian Federation to resume its military campaigns in Ukraine down the road. Right now, they need to withdraw completely from Ukraine. That means retreating from everything they previously occupied.

I find myself in partial agreement with both of them, though I can't quite bring myself to commit to either side entirely.
Back during that stretch between 1991 and 2014, the folks living there mostly behaved a lot like South Tyroleans might in their own way. They held onto this deep sense of being Russian at heart, yet they weren't exactly disloyal to Ukraine, if you catch my drift; it was more of a complex, quiet coexistence than anything else, wouldn't you say?
A true, intense awakening finally hit the public once that absolute disaster of an individual had his little wet dream after fleeing from Kyiv to Rostov—supposedly via Crimea, if you can believe the story. Then came the invasion by those Mars inhabitants, followed by those laughable "referendums," and ever since then, the whole situation has been more or less set in stone.
If the Ukrainian armed forces were to launch any kind of bombardment against Crimea, I honestly don't see how that wouldn't just solidify the current situation even further; if anything, it would only serve to cement things in an even more disastrous direction. It’s almost too obvious to point out, isn't it? That any attempt at a military liberation of Crimea in the near or medium term would likely fall squarely within the domain of either a mad heartbreaker or Alice on the other side of the looking glass.
Crimea belongs to Ukraine, and if we're being honest about the principle of the matter, it really ought to be returned to Ukrainian control—but let’s face it, achieving that through anything other than military force is going to be an uphill battle.

Nancy Gomez26 said:I’m certain there are Russians who hold that view, but there are also Ukrainians who insist Crimea belongs to Ukraine.
To me, the situation in Crimea is a matter of fundamental principle. If it remains under the control of the Russian Federation, it sets a dangerous precedent—it serves as a reward for launching an invasion and acts as a green light for any other nation looking to seize territory. It might even be seen as an invitation for the Russian Federation to resume its military campaigns in Ukraine down the road. Right now, they need to withdraw completely from Ukraine. That means retreating from everything they previously occupied.

Well, Crimea *is* Ukraine.

Nancy Gomez26 said:That’s exactly why they need to hit them—precisely because of those threats.
From my perspective, Ukrainians face a fundamentally different dilemma here. See, Crimea is Ukraine. It isn't easy for them to decide to demolish infrastructure within their own borders—essentially destroying their own property—even if that property sits on occupied land. The Russians hold the psychological advantage here; they know they are occupiers, and they feel no hesitation about tearing through Ukraine. But necessity dictates action. It isn't a hard choice, particularly when you understand the nature of the occupier. You know that at the end of the day, they will likely just destroy everything in their path before they ever consider showing "goodwill."

Sixteen without a rudder, a true optimist.

Crimea matters because of Sevastopol and the Black Sea Fleet—it carries way more weight than somewhere like Luhansk, for instance.