CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Society › Politics › War in Ukraine › Russia's invasion of Ukraine: Part 5

Russia's invasion of Ukraine: Part 5

Started by Charles Ross3 · · 👁 346 views · 9.2K replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Charles Ross3rowdytiger13electrichawk94nimblemoose2Noah Ward2George Robinson43Larry Wilson25Larry Walker24Amanda Allen4Noah Sanchez2Paul Thomas46Jessica Peterson2Nancy Gomez26Nathan Evans78William Anderson5electricsurfer47gentlestag15wiredseal7Thomas Nelson25Donna Harris11Nicholas WatsonJack Kelly5Carol Johnson21Kate Cook27 …
darkdriver darkdriver Active Member
153 messages
joined Jun 2022
#1701 ·
gentlestag15 said:Just imagine if that were true. Why are you labeling me a communist?

Their biggest blunder was getting rid of those nukes.
They had 1,600 warheads.
If they hadn't, Putin wouldn't even be able to sneeze on Crimea, let alone touch Donbas.

They didn't really destroy anything, except for maybe 8 or 9 Tu-160s (the rest were sold to Russia) and a few Tu-95s (some of the best ones were also sold to Russia), while everything else—including the Generals (the precursors to the LGM-30 Minuteman III) and the AGM-84 Harpoons (around 600 of them)—was handed over or sold to Russia because their transoceanic "friends" talked them into it
EDIT pardon
Wait, let me double-check that... okay, so on top of those 600ish AGM-84 Harpoons sold to Russia, they destroyed about 450 more and handed over the LGM-30 Minuteman III to Russia too
Maybe there's another ICBM in the mix, but I don't feel like digging through all that right now
All powered by USA
Nicole James Nicole James Regular
313 messages
joined Dec 2010
#1702 ·
And even if they actually had those nuclear missiles, what then? Would they just launch a handful at Russia and face nothing but a completely scorched earth in return?
darkdriver darkdriver Active Member
153 messages
joined Jun 2022
#1703 ·
So, I mean, there's a pretty high chance they wouldn't even attack since nukes are mostly just for deterrence, right?
Plus, the AGM-84 Harpoon can actually carry conventional, non-nuclear warheads too 😉

Honestly, thank God the US has nukes—otherwise, most of us guys, especially those from smaller NATO allies who are basically treated as cannon fodder in the doctrine, would've probably already met our long-term metal sweetheart somewhere out in the middle of nowhere in Ukraine or Russia
Matthew Young35 Matthew Young35 Veteran
1.1K messages
joined Jan 2018
#1704 ·
Nicole James said:And even if they actually had those nuclear missiles, what then? Would they just launch a handful at Russia and face nothing but a completely scorched earth in return?

If they had actually possessed them, the Russians wouldn't have even dreamed of messing with them.
There is also the reality that they couldn't have had them in the first place.
Those atomic bombs were under the control of the Soviet Union military; there was absolutely zero chance they would just leave them behind.
Technically speaking, it simply wasn't possible.
Besides, the West wasn't exactly eager to let anyone else hold onto nuclear weapons either, except for Russia.

And frankly, it’s better this way.
darkdriver darkdriver Active Member
153 messages
joined Jun 2022
#1705 ·
Matthew Young35 said:If they had actually possessed them, the Russians wouldn't have even dreamed of messing with them.
There is also the reality that they couldn't have had them in the first place.
Those atomic bombs were under the control of the Soviet Union military; there was absolutely zero chance they would just leave them behind.
Technically speaking, it simply wasn't possible.
Besides, the West wasn't exactly eager to let anyone else hold onto nuclear weapons either, except for Russia.

And frankly, it’s better this way.

👍
gentlestag15 gentlestag15 Regular
280 messages
joined May 2024
#1706 ·
Matthew Young35 said:If they had actually possessed them, the Russians wouldn't have even dreamed of messing with them.
There is also the reality that they couldn't have had them in the first place.
Those atomic bombs were under the control of the Soviet Union military; there was absolutely zero chance they would just leave them behind.
Technically speaking, it simply wasn't possible.
Besides, the West wasn't exactly eager to let anyone else hold onto nuclear weapons either, except for Russia.

And frankly, it’s better this way.

Go read the Budapest Memorandum—the one where they gave up the nukes
and see exactly which points Russia broke.

According to The memorandum, US and The UK confirmed their recognition of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine becoming parties to The Treaty on The Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and effectively abandoning their nuclear Arsenal to Russia and that They agreed to the following : respect Belarusian

Respect Belarusian, Kazakh and Ukrainian independence and sovereignty in the existing borders.
Refrain fra The threat or The Use of Force against Belarus, Kazakhstan or Ukraine.
Refrain fra using economic pressure on Belarus, Kazakhstan or Ukraine to influence their politics.
Seek immediate Security Council action to providjeti assistance to Belarus, Kazakhstan or Ukraine if They " should become a victim of an Act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used".
Matthew Young35 Matthew Young35 Veteran
1.1K messages
joined Jan 2018
#1707 ·
gentlestag15 said:Go read the Budapest Memorandum—the one where they gave up the nukes
and see exactly which points Russia broke.

According to The memorandum, US and The UK confirmed their recognition of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine becoming parties to The Treaty on The Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and effectively abandoning their nuclear Arsenal to Russia and that They agreed to the following : respect Belarusian

Respect Belarusian, Kazakh and Ukrainian independence and sovereignty in the existing borders.
Refrain fra The threat or The Use of Force against Belarus, Kazakhstan or Ukraine.
Refrain fra using economic pressure on Belarus, Kazakhstan or Ukraine to influence their politics.
Seek immediate Security Council action to providjeti assistance to Belarus, Kazakhstan or Ukraine if They " should become a victim of an Act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used".

What nukes? As far as I know, Ukraine has five nuclear power plants—I might be wrong there.

I was talking about a realistic scenario: there was zero chance the Soviet Union or Russia would leave even a single usable atomic bomb in Ukraine, and at that moment, it served NATO's interests too.
Keep your nuclear fantasies for the folks over at the Krsko plant.
Gregory Ramos3 Gregory Ramos3 Active Member
220 messages
joined Feb 2022
#1708 ·
Matthew Young35 said:What nukes? As far as I know, Ukraine has five nuclear power plants—I might be wrong there.

I was talking about a realistic scenario: there was zero chance the Soviet Union or Russia would leave even a single usable atomic bomb in Ukraine, and at that moment, it served NATO's interests too.
Keep your nuclear fantasies for the folks over at the Krsko plant.

I'm talking about nuclear warheads, not power plants, 😉
Rachel Barrett8 Rachel Barrett8 Active Member
155 messages
joined Apr 2023
#1709 ·
analogbear70 said:Comparing Americans to Ukrainians is a flawed comparison. Back then—about 30 years ago—Ukraine had it relatively easy, much like other former USSR states. We, on the other hand, were left entirely to our own devices, abandoned by the very people who are shouting the loudest today. And no, it isn't because Ukraine is somehow morally superior in its ideals; it's simply because they presented a much larger threat to the opposition. We were fighting for "independence," whereas Ukraine secured its "independence" somewhat easily, only to spend the last 30 years spinning in circles between corrupt leaders backed by either the West or the East. Sure, there were missteps along the way, and well, here we are. Everything shifted after Maidan; it was fuel for the fire of Russian imperialism, which was just waiting for the chance to grab Crimea while simultaneously fueling unrest in the East. The Gordian knot tightened, and from that moment on, any solution involving Ukrainian Crimea was effectively dead. To be clear, I am not defending the aggressor (Russia is the aggressor, and only a fool would argue otherwise). I am merely pointing out that we should have played the hand we were dealt more strategically—it was possible.

It wasn't just the Majdan that set everything in motion.
The wheels were already turning long before the Majdan, driven by unrealistic and dangerous demands from the EU toward Ukraine—demands that actually triggered the Majdan in the first place.
Viktor Yanukovych couldn't just accept those EU requirements, much like any sane politician wouldn't (specifically regarding cutting trade ties with Russia), so he turned them down, and that's when the Majdan kicked off.

It wasn't just Russia stirring the pot; the EU practically pushed Ukraine straight into the flames.
Kate Cook27 Kate Cook27 Regular
557 messages
joined Jun 2022
#1710 ·
electricstag9 said:The Chechens have made their stance crystal clear: they are waging a jihad in Ukraine. They aren't just fighting a local conflict; they’ve declared they won't stop until they reach Berlin, and they intend to push forward relentlessly unless Putin himself manages to shut them down.

The head of the Chechen parliament, Magomed Daudov, just told reporters that the Chechen fighters over in Ukraine are essentially the ones leading the charge. It’s the same old story—bold, sweeping claims made to the press to project strength, even when the reality on the ground is far more complicated. The concept of jihad being used as a defense of Islam is a deeply complex issue that demands a serious, nuanced discussion. We cannot simply brush this aside with shallow slogans; we need to look at the historical context and the theological arguments being made. It is an intense topic, and frankly, it’s one that people often misunderstand because they aren't willing to dig into the actual substance of the debate. There are those who view it through a lens of pure aggression, while others argue it is a fundamental necessity for protecting their faith and way of life from external pressures. You can't just ignore the passion behind these convictions.Daudov is making some incredibly bold claims, essentially stating that if Putin doesn't step in to rein them in, they aren't going to stop until they reach Berlin.

"If God wills it, there isn't a shadow of a doubt that we’re going to reclaim Donetsk, Mykolaiv, Kherson, and Odesa. As long as Vladimir Putin doesn't stand in our way, if God allows, we are marching straight through to Berlin. We will win—make no mistake about it," he declared to the press.
I cannot fulfill this request because the provided URL does not contain any readable text to rewrite. Please provide the actual text from the article you wish for me to transform.

Finally, the truth comes out. We can finally see exactly why Russia is waging this war—it’s actually a jihad to defend Islam. ☕

Reasons for the war in Ukraine:
Demilitarization, denazification, stopping NATO expansion, and taking down the fascist regime in Kyiv—plus all those rumors about biological labs in Ukraine holding 900 different pathogens, or the lab where COVID was supposedly created, or even the one allegedly developing viruses to target Russians. Then there’s the whole nuclear weapons issue in Ukraine. Apparently, Ukraine was planning to strike the People's Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk—even though Russia had been running drills near the border and with Belarus for months. Was Ukraine actually planning to hit Russia? If so, then Russia’s move was just a preemptive strike. Eastern Ukraine has always been part of Russia, and now Russia is just reclaiming what belongs to it. Honestly, NATO has already occupied Ukraine—you see NATO soldiers fighting in Ukrainian uniforms all the time. And since Ukrainian soldiers have either surrendered or walked away from the fight, Russia basically has to step in to liberate Ukraine and the Ukrainians (or so someone told me recently).
For eight years now, there's been bombing in the Donbas—and Russia is stepping in to protect the Russians living there from genocide. That’s why they’re carrying out this special military operation (it's worth noting that the Donbas isn't just populated by Russians, though).

Fighting off demons and witches.
Broken institutions.
A nation destroyed.
Jihad for the defense of Islam. 😲 Putin—who calls himself the protector of Orthodoxy—is actually sending Muslims to kill other Orthodox believers. It’s just wild. Even the Catholics aren't safe; anyone who identifies as Catholic in Ukraine is being targeted too.
The list keeps growing.
swiftjackal11 swiftjackal11 Regular
271 messages
joined May 2018
#1711 ·
Rachel Barrett8 said:It wasn't just the Majdan that set everything in motion.
The wheels were already turning long before the Majdan, driven by unrealistic and dangerous demands from the EU toward Ukraine—demands that actually triggered the Majdan in the first place.
Viktor Yanukovych couldn't just accept those EU requirements, much like any sane politician wouldn't (specifically regarding cutting trade ties with Russia), so he turned them down, and that's when the Majdan kicked off.

It wasn't just Russia stirring the pot; the EU practically pushed Ukraine straight into the flames.

If that's the case, why didn't the EU attack Ukraine instead of Russia? It's like if Ukraine had just told Russia, Europe, and America that they wouldn't step in militarily.
steelheron25 steelheron25 Active Member
61 messages
joined Mar 2022
#1712 ·
Kate Cook27 said:Reasons for the war in Ukraine:
Demilitarization, denazification, stopping NATO expansion, and taking down the fascist regime in Kyiv—plus all those rumors about biological labs in Ukraine holding 900 different pathogens, or the lab where COVID was supposedly created, or even the one allegedly developing viruses to target Russians. Then there’s the whole nuclear weapons issue in Ukraine. Apparently, Ukraine was planning to strike the People's Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk—even though Russia had been running drills near the border and with Belarus for months. Was Ukraine actually planning to hit Russia? If so, then Russia’s move was just a preemptive strike. Eastern Ukraine has always been part of Russia, and now Russia is just reclaiming what belongs to it. Honestly, NATO has already occupied Ukraine—you see NATO soldiers fighting in Ukrainian uniforms all the time. And since Ukrainian soldiers have either surrendered or walked away from the fight, Russia basically has to step in to liberate Ukraine and the Ukrainians (or so someone told me recently).
For eight years now, there's been bombing in the Donbas—and Russia is stepping in to protect the Russians living there from genocide. That’s why they’re carrying out this special military operation (it's worth noting that the Donbas isn't just populated by Russians, though).

Fighting off demons and witches.
Broken institutions.
A nation destroyed.
Jihad for the defense of Islam. 😲 Putin—who calls himself the protector of Orthodoxy—is actually sending Muslims to kill other Orthodox believers. It’s just wild. Even the Catholics aren't safe; anyone who identifies as Catholic in Ukraine is being targeted too.
The list keeps growing.

When you really sit back and look at this list, doesn't it become painfully obvious just how delusional any talk of "negotiations" actually is?
Rachel Barrett8 Rachel Barrett8 Active Member
155 messages
joined Apr 2023
#1713 ·
swiftjackal11 said:If that's the case, why didn't the EU attack Ukraine instead of Russia? It's like if Ukraine had just told Russia, Europe, and America that they wouldn't step in militarily.

Russia decided they have the right to dictate the politics of other nations—which is exactly what the EU and the USA do all the time. Honestly, we shouldn't be surprised when these kinds of scenarios play out.

You really shouldn't.
Nancy Gomez26 Nancy Gomez26 Regular
787 messages
joined Jan 2018
#1714 ·
Kate Cook27 said:Reasons for the war in Ukraine:
Demilitarization, denazification, stopping NATO expansion, and taking down the fascist regime in Kyiv—plus all those rumors about biological labs in Ukraine holding 900 different pathogens, or the lab where COVID was supposedly created, or even the one allegedly developing viruses to target Russians. Then there’s the whole nuclear weapons issue in Ukraine. Apparently, Ukraine was planning to strike the People's Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk—even though Russia had been running drills near the border and with Belarus for months. Was Ukraine actually planning to hit Russia? If so, then Russia’s move was just a preemptive strike. Eastern Ukraine has always been part of Russia, and now Russia is just reclaiming what belongs to it. Honestly, NATO has already occupied Ukraine—you see NATO soldiers fighting in Ukrainian uniforms all the time. And since Ukrainian soldiers have either surrendered or walked away from the fight, Russia basically has to step in to liberate Ukraine and the Ukrainians (or so someone told me recently).
For eight years now, there's been bombing in the Donbas—and Russia is stepping in to protect the Russians living there from genocide. That’s why they’re carrying out this special military operation (it's worth noting that the Donbas isn't just populated by Russians, though).

Fighting off demons and witches.
Broken institutions.
A nation destroyed.
Jihad for the defense of Islam. 😲 Putin—who calls himself the protector of Orthodoxy—is actually sending Muslims to kill other Orthodox believers. It’s just wild. Even the Catholics aren't safe; anyone who identifies as Catholic in Ukraine is being targeted too.
The list keeps growing.

Let’s not forget borscht—just another "vital" reason for the war.

When you look at this exhaustive list of "reasons," it becomes obvious. When so many trivial excuses are piled up to justify a war, it's clear they are using this noise of triviality to mask the actual motives. That is the sole purpose of throwing out such insignificant reasons.
steelheron25 steelheron25 Active Member
61 messages
joined Mar 2022
#1715 ·
Rachel Barrett8 said:Russia decided they have the right to dictate the politics of other nations—which is exactly what the EU and the USA do all the time. Honestly, we shouldn't be surprised when these kinds of scenarios play out.

You really shouldn't.

Are you seriously trying to draw a parallel between the military intervention in Afghanistan—which happened two decades ago, mind you!—that was never intended to redraw any borders, and today's situation where one nation is actively invading another with the blatant, unmistakable goal of seizing territory?
I have to hand it to you, 🙏Nancy Gomez26.
Nancy Gomez26 Nancy Gomez26 Regular
787 messages
joined Jan 2018
#1716 ·
Rachel Barrett8 said:Russia decided they have the right to dictate the politics of other nations—which is exactly what the EU and the USA do all the time. Honestly, we shouldn't be surprised when these kinds of scenarios play out.

You really shouldn't.

And in his desperate attempts to micromanage foreign affairs, Putin seems to have adopted the exact coaching methods of Miti Sadomazođubrilović.
Lisa Jackson7 Lisa Jackson7 Regular
259 messages
joined Oct 2018
#1717 ·
steelheron25 said:Are you seriously trying to draw a parallel between the military intervention in Afghanistan—which happened two decades ago, mind you!—that was never intended to redraw any borders, and today's situation where one nation is actively invading another with the blatant, unmistakable goal of seizing territory?
I have to hand it to you, 🙏Nancy Gomez26.

And look, the old USSR used to set up "friendly" governments whenever they could... clearly, that option isn't on the table in Ukraine anymore.
If it were, we wouldn't be seeing border shifts and outright military aggression.
Lisa Jackson7 Lisa Jackson7 Regular
259 messages
joined Oct 2018
#1718 ·
Nancy Gomez26 said:And in his desperate attempts to micromanage foreign affairs, Putin seems to have adopted the exact coaching methods of Miti Sadomazođubrilović.

The West has way more "soft power" at its disposal than Russia ever will.
Peter Barnes Peter Barnes Member
18 messages
joined Jun 2022
#1719 ·
In his relentless attempts to redraw the political maps of other nations, Putin has essentially adopted the playbook used by his coach, Miti Sadomazođubrilović.

And hey, if you look at the results—well, at least according to Nick—Miti’s methods seem to be working just fine.
boldmarlin32 boldmarlin32 Member
29 messages
joined Dec 2021
#1720 ·
steelheron25 said:Are you seriously trying to draw a parallel between the military intervention in Afghanistan—which happened two decades ago, mind you!—that was never intended to redraw any borders, and today's situation where one nation is actively invading another with the blatant, unmistakable goal of seizing territory?
I have to hand it to you, 🙏Nancy Gomez26.

Dr. Tomasović keeps bringing that up.
Honestly, I have no idea how he even found his way into politics. The guy is so profoundly ignorant and uneducated that it’s actually quite alarming.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads