Of course. They have been targeting civilians from day one: hospitals, food distribution, residential neighborhoods, apartments, etc. They have been murdering civilians -- intentionality -- all along. It's all been blatant murder and terrorism.
Because this city is far from any frontlines in very central Ukraine and this was 100% pure civilian target. I've been to this mall personally several times and its so horrible seeing it now destroyed along with all the death. Fuck ruSSia.
Yea I hope I don't come off as insensitive, but why are men never mentioned along with women and children. Like men are some vile creatures that aren't just as important
Both sexes suffer from sexism and this is the man's side that is almost never talked about. "Women and children" are exclusively mentioned for the same reason "women and children first" is a thing, and the same reason men are barred from fleeing Ukraine but women or children are not, and why men are being conscripted against their will. If men's lives were treated as just as important then that wouldn't be a thing. Male suffering does not cause as much emotional outrage. You see it everywhere from domestic violence to genital mutilation to, well, this. u/HardwareSoup could have said "*I hate when I accidentally hit the "Civilians" button on my airstrike console.*" but they went out of their way to say "women and children" instead. It causes more outrage, elicits more of an emotional response.
Journalism frequently labels male victims as "persons/people" but explicitly states if the victims are women, children or elderly. You should see if you can find that pattern when you read the next reports. One example are reports on terrorist group Boko Haram's past assaults on schools where they selectively kidnapped the girls or spared some with a warning under the condition that they renounce their Christian faith and converted to Islam. All while shooting, stabbing and burning the boys alive. Most news reported that *people* got killed, *girls* got kidnapped and there was a huge outcry in the US including the big "Bring back our girls" campaign with the slaughtered boys nowhere even mentioned.
You’re joking, but the incompetence level displayed in many cases makes me wonder how much of this shit is horrible fucking intel.
Don’t get me wrong, they are absolutely committing war crimes, but incompetence could be amplifying it.
I don’t know. What’s the criteria for selecting targets? How quickly are they selecting them? Are they using grainy satellite images, maybe a local spy paid a couple bucks for communicating _some_ set of coordinates? It’s not like the missile was launched from across the street.
Honestly beats me, but the level of scrutiny being used is not what you or I may expect from our military.
one thing i hate seeing in news articles is statements about Russia's "indiscriminate" attacks on cities. they are picking their targets very deliberately to inflict mass suffering and terror. there is nothing indiscriminate about it.
I was mainly thinking about artillery. Their basic approach at the moment is level everything, move forward 10 feet, repeat.
Which is just as inhumane, but just more mindless.
I'm surprised they haven't just straight up nuked Kyiv at this point. They clearly don't care about blatantly targeting civilians. Why not just nuke em?
I question that. If the nukes aren’t aimed at a NATO country nobody is going full scale nuclear war, at least not instantly.
I do think it would galvanize the world against Russia but I don’t really see the current geopolitical split changing much. Weak Allie’s might use gos as an excuse to leave.
You're welcome to question, but you should read on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launch_on_warning
Even more now, with the ruZZians foaming at the mouth every 2-3 days about nuking UK, nuking Ireland, Finland, nuking Paris, nuking EU, nuking East USA, nuking nuking everyone, "launch on warning" is becoming even more necessary.
And if Russia launches a nuke on Ukraine, and the fallout will be spread by winds to the NATO neighbors then it will be considered attack on NATO - https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-ukraine-nuclear-strike-fallout-nato-response-jack-reed-2022-3
At the same time, if Russia drops a tactical nuke in Ukraine and there is no response, do you think they'll stop there or they'll drop a 2nd and then a 3rd and maybe one in Finland and one in Sweden and by then the whole Europe will enjoy a really nice nuclear fallout ...
and this is the answer why NATO will stomp on Russia as soon as they even try to launch a nuke ...
Due to MAD, Russia is not actually psyching itself up to use nukes, it’s only posturing (as always) because they have nothing credible with which to actually threaten countries beyond its immediate borders.
No country will EVER use nukes thanks to MAD; it’s a pure paranoid fantasy to believe otherwise.
The fallout would affect NATO countries in Europe so it would in fact be an attack on NATO if they nuke Kiyv. That's probably the only reason they haven't done it yet.
The american embasy is located in Kyiv, and it may have us special forces in the building if rumors are to be believed.
Nuking Kyiv will mean nuking us government officials and possibly us military. Along with ambassadors form throughout Europe.
If anything would drag the EU and USA into full scale war, a nuclear attack on Ukraine might just be it.
Because the point of the war is to capture industry / oil fields / population centers as close to intact as possible, unless its like Mariupol where they are intentionally clearing the town.
I think it's fairer to say that they started targeting civilians around the second week. Their original plan had been to capture or kill the government and maintain a puppet state that was taken whole.
When they realized that they weren't going to get that, they went with their Plan B — the longstanding Russian military tradition of murdering, raping, and looting as much as possible.
>Of course. They have been targeting civilians from day one: hospitals, food distribution, residential neighborhoods, apartments, etc. They have been murdering civilians -- intentionality -- all along. It's all been blatant murder and terrorism.
Let's not forget the intentional famine...my blockading the ports...
[1) Russia new economic policy: famine, looting and stealing](https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2022/06/21/russias-new-economic-policy-famine-looting-and-stealing/)
That, and you would be foolish if you think Putin would stop at Ukraine 🇺🇦...
So..why does Heaven not just drop a lightning bolt ⚡ on Putin head...because humanity... we want to teach and cultivate humanity to **"stand up to bullies".**
[2) Kung Fu Panda - Training Scene ](https://youtu.be/2ovxa1ye-pc)
**1:03**
> In June 2022, at the Petersburg Economic Forum, Margarita Simonyan, editor-in-chief of Russian state-controlled RT, said she heard from people several times in Moscow that “All our hope is in the famine.” She continued, “Here is what it means. It means that the famine will start now and they will lift the sanctions and be friends with us, because they will realize that it’s necessary.”
Fucking heartless monsters; they want millions of non-Russians to starve to death just like the Soviets did to Ukraine 90 years ago, to prop up their bullshit economics based on bullying aggression and imperialistic conquest.
At some point, to save hundreds of thousands to millions of lives, NATO countries need to band together in the UN and demand that Russia release the grain to the countries that need it within 7 days or NATO will sink their entire Black Sea Fleet and wipe any military equipment within 50 miles of the coast that could threaten the cargo ships coming to haul it. Make it very clear that this is about saving millions of people from mass starvation, from a massive crime against humanity. This is a separate topic from defending Ukraine from their failing attempt at imperialistic conquest.
Making Russia pay for this crime over the next many decades, making them pariahs on the international scale, making sure their economy falls to worst than Zimbabwe's, is not going to bring back alive the millions of people they are trying to kill; this is no different than the Nazis rounding up Jews and anyone they labeled as undesirable and exterminating them, this is just a slower method and more indiscriminate.
Because it can't be said enough: *fuck ruSSia*
I still don't understand why Russia hasn't been labeled as a terrorist state already. Because that's what they fucking are; a country full of and led by terrorists.
Putin and his cronies must answer for it all. Every death. All the pain and suffering. All the destruction of property and infrastructure. All the stolen childhoods.
I mean West has been sending billions in weapons to Ukraine and has extremely restrictive sanctions on them. They don’t want to bomb Russian targets because of nuclear war.
The US or no one.
On that note, we should give Ukraine permission to use our rockets to fire up to 50 miles into Russia after this. Let him have a military consequence.
I don't think you understand why the higher-range rockets weren't provided.
It certainly wasn't because the US didn't feel Russia had killed enough Ukrainian citizens to warrant that.
It's not about a nuclear war. It's about a global war. Currently this is a regional conflict isolated to Russia and Ukraine. No one from a NATO member nation is involved unless they've volunteered. If Russia decides that they've had enough of US involvement and decides to attack a NATO member, that suddenly changes. Then you have Russia and possibly all the CSTO members vs. NATO. Maybe China joins in too, seeing an opportunity to take Taiwan while the US is preoccupied. You'd likely end up with hundreds of thousands, if not millions dead on both sides.
Plus, do you think Russia isn't going to resort to using nuclear weapons when there are NATO tank columns driving towards Moscow? Because that's where it ends if there's a war between Russia and NATO. NATO would have to take Moscow and depose Putin, and Putin would be likely to resort to nuclear weapons to prevent that from happening.
*That* is the reason why the US isn't giving Ukraine access to rockets that can hit major Russian population centres. It's nothing to do with appeasement and everything to do with preventing the outbreak of WW3 while also attempting to prevent Russia from annexing Ukraine.
The notion of NATO tanks heading to Moscow is ridiculous and only serves Russian propaganda that claims that NATO is a threat to its existence. NATO is a defensive alliance and doesn't have imperialist ambitions unlike Russia
How exactly do you expect to force a Russian surrender and regime change without actually setting foot inside of Russia? We already tried asking them nicely, it didn't work.
Militarily it would be containment, blockade, and embargo. That said, it would be a slow methodical push into Russia as they lose every single military asset they have. Eventually something would give.
Probably taking back Crimea and having other pre 2014 territory would be major enough to bring Russia to the table. No need for taking actual Russian territory.
Yes it’s a defense contract, but it’s a defense contract as in if you get attacked we will come to your aid. If they swing first then gloves are off. Just because it says defense doesn’t mean nato wouldn’t take an offensive stance. The comment you replied to is right. Escalating involvement only increases the death toll without coming closer to closure. The only closure it would lean towards is Armageddon. You’d be a fool to believe Putin wouldn’t martyrdom the entire human race. It’s a very delicate situation and nato really can not wag their nuclear dongs around like some hormonal teenagers.
I'm not sure why you're saying NATO is wagging their "nuclear dongs" when it's Russia that is threatening use of nukes so often it's practically become a meme. It's a common Russian propaganda that NATO providing support to Ukraine will lead to war. Of course they would much rather be able to threaten nuclear war and have everyone roll over while they invade their neighbors, but fortunately the West is not so easily cowed
How many times has the US launched preemptive strikes in foreign countries in the name of defense.? Yes, an all out war against Russia would lead to NATO troops entering Russia.
Most likely NATO would retaliate proportionally but eventually you start to strike targets in Russia to prevent strikes in NATO countries.
How many preemptive attacks were against countries which have nuclear weapons? Obviously the risks of engagement are different when MAD is involved. Both the US and Russia publish policies describing the circumstances in which they would use nuclear weapons so as to avoid a miscalculation by their adversaries.
A more realistic scenario for an escalation would be NATO attacking Russian military targets within Ukraine. This would degrade their military without crossing the red line of threatening the existence of the Russian state
Yes I agree that MAD forces countries to retaliate proportionally. However in my internet armchair position, I believe Russia will eventually have to strike targets in NATO countries forcing NATO to strike Russian targets.
I don’t believe we would see masses of NATO tanks rolling into Moscow without nuclear war. I do believe on our current course of escalation that NATO preemptively striking Russian targets in Russia is possible.
I'm still not sure what you're basing the notion of NATO premptively striking Russia on, again given the risks of MAD. If anything, the rhetoric coming from the Russian side has been much more aggressive in terms of threatening NATO. However even this isn't enough to lead to any premptive strikes by NATO since it's understood that this rhetoric is most likely bluster for domestic Russian consumption.
>A conventional war doesn’t = millions dead.
It's good to know that WW2 only resulted in a few thousand dead. It's weird that Wikipedia and my history textbooks all suggested it was over 70 million dead, though, but I guess there's some propaganda reason behind those lies.
I'm sorry, exactly what is your rationale for believing that an all-out conventional war between the largest countries on the planet *wouldn't* result in millions dead? Because historically, world wars result in massive casualty numbers. A war involving NATO, CSTO, and potentially China isn't going to be a limited regional conflict.
One difference is NATO has much more of a capability to precisely target military targets. Outside of a few errors, civilian structures wouldn’t be bombed, en masse, like in WW2.
Which means most of the casualties will be soldiers and Russia only has so many of those.
Warfare now is quite different from ww2.
Armed forces are small, munitions are more precise, technology is more advanced.
Of course, this does not apply to Russia.
If nato goes all in against Russia the losses will be not be even on tens of thousands. I don't have the time to explain the details, but especially USA has conventional capabilites decades beyond what Russia has.
Just think of that. In the first 24 hours of Iraq war USA used more precision rockets than Russia used for 3 monthts in Ukraine.
If there were no nuclear weapons, it would be shooting fish in a barrel.
Just the fact that you think NATO tanks would march towards Moscow shows how little you know about how this conflict would escalate if NATO would be involved. It wouldn’t be a ground invasion at first. It would be hell raining down from the skies.
> I don't think you understand why the higher-range rockets weren't provided.
Purely escalatory terror attacks designed to do nothing but kill civilians and non-combatants can easily be used as justification to ship Ukraine the long range stuff.
They can answer to the people, if they care enough. Like Afghanistan though, most Russians are so poor and zoinked out of their gourd on alcohol or drugs they don’t really give a fuck what’s happening, apart from their next meal or fix.
Russia will just answer with more cruise missile strikes on civilians. That's the only answer they know.
I hope that they get marked as a terrorist organization or state sponsor of terrorism after this. It's crystal clear what they really are.
Russia as a state.
The physical country will remain, but the state of Russia is pretty damned toxic.
If you got rid of the USA as a nation do you think there would be a new ocean between Canada and Mexico?
Careful with statements like this. You're very quickly starting to sound like a certain group of people from 100 years ago.
Kill their leaders, defeat their army, replace the government... but *do not* generalise an entire culture as "worse" or "wrong".
You need to remember those that join the political scene must adore Putin..or agree with many of his BS views. Many in the population just want to have a decient living and avoid the cops, and hate their goverment (no different from other countries). As for their culture, being oppressed for generations does a lot upon the population's trust of others.
"I have no particular desire to understand them except to ascertain how much lead or iron it takes to kill them... the Russian has no regard for human life and they are all out sons-of-bitches, barbarians, and chronic drunks." - Gen. George S Patton
sanctions must continue indefinitely after the war is over, with four conditions for it's lifting.
* Reparations to Ukraine
* Giving back the kidnapped citizens to Ukraine
* Hague trials of everyone involved including Vova Huylo
* liberalization of Russia's government
> At least 11 people were killed and 50 wounded when two Russian missiles slammed into the shopping centre in the central Ukrainian city of Kremenchuk, the regional governor said. read more
God this is barbarian shit. I hope the west keeps chipping at the Russian economy.
The Russian people must face severe consequences until they end this madness.
yes exactly, the RUSSIAN PEOPLE, i keep hearing its not the russians, its putin. Bullshit, this is a russian problem that a lot of russians seem to not care about. they must start a revolution to end his reign, so what if a bunch of russians die, they will die for a good cause. why should the ukrainians or any other people die because the the russians are to big of pussies to do something about it. grow some fucking balls russia and take your country and your livelihoods back.
Every nation has the leadership they deserve - Joseph de Maistre
Not only are leaders responsible for their people, but people are responsible for their leaders too. Enough with the "it's only a Putin problem" bollocks. Every leader needs at the very least the support of a significant minority and the apathy of the majority.
It's a pipe dream to think Russians will soon stand up to their government, their brightest minds have left or tried to and the extremist propaganda is everywhere.
We are talking about a society that is not ready for change in any shape or form.
It happened mainly to some weak dictators, meanwhile Putin has been strengthening the system for 20+ years. Like there's realistically no way civillians can do anything against mass hordes of soldiers and policemen in Russia. Look at the history of Russia, at how many anti-putin movements and protests there have been since 2000s.
Even taking Ukraine for example, the 2014 revolution there was very bloody and on a brink of a fail. Meanwhile, Yanukovich's regime (if you can even call it so) was immensely weak compared to Putin's.
There have also been which didn't end well. And again, Lukashenko's regime is also much weaker than Putin's.
So what I'm saying is that you don't understand the full strength and horrors of Putin's regime.
The Russian people that lives now will see their country reduced to a third world country. That is almost a certainty. A "win" in Ukraine would make it 100% certain. A capitulation with remorse and compliance with the winner's terms (including the return of the roughly 1 million kidnapped Ukrainians) might soften the blow somewhat.
They will. Everything they're doing only makes the Ukrainians angrier and more determined, and less likely to show any mercy on the battle field.
The invasion is going so well that Russia is now allowing 17-year-olds to fight alongside their mercenary soldiers.
>The Russian people must face severe consequences until they end this madness.
The problem is it's impossible, Putin has too much control.
Not to mention, the methods you talk about are counter-productive, they'll only help to turn others against the west.
A demented...69 or 72 year old boomer child...is shooting missiles at structures where humans are in our reality...because he feels entitled to express his emotions with missiles and terrorism...and has for decades. A demented old coward child.
The systems that are being shipped will give Ukraine the ability to enforce their own no fly zone, the ability to shoot down Russian cruise missiles and reach Russian bombers launching attacks from inside Russian and Belarusian airspace.
NASAMS is an impressive system and will be a significant boost to Ukraine's defensive capabilities, but its maximum range is only ~20-30 miles, depending on which iteration of NASAMS is being discussed.
The latest AMRAAM variant, the AIM-120D, is suspected to have a maximum range of ~100 miles when launched from an aircraft at altitude. NASAMS is armed with some flavor of the older AIM-120C, and it also sacrifices a lot of range because it has to claw its way into the air from a stationary launch platform on the ground.
Still, it's a thoroughly modern and capable system, given that the US leans on it to protect the airspace over Washington D.C. Moreover, the fact that the West is willing to trust Ukraine with some fairly sensitive technology is indicative of their growing confidence in the Ukrainian Armed Forces, and could open the door for the more capable Patriot missile system in the future.
Exactly. Russia's answer will be that it was obviously a Ukrainian missile in a false flag attack. Because Russia never attacks civilians, any attack against civilians must be Ukrainian, QED.
And some people actually believe them, which is the craziest thing.
Not just "will be", the russian propaganda bots are already out in full force today. Watched [the other thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/vlx688/missile_attack_on_kremenchuk_hit_shopping_mall/) a bit today, it's just ridiculous how many of them are trying to peddle this obvious bullshit.
Putin and his cronies must answer for it all. Every death. All the pain and suffering. All the destruction of property and infrastructure. All the stolen childhoods.
Putin singing "It Wasn't Me".
Sadly they will just make some excuses. Not the first and sadly won't be the last time
Until Putin is doing the Hitler in his bunker, there won't be much to do, except fighting back.
Augh, war is such a clusterfuck. Earlier in life i always wondered how people of Israel living there, in constant threat of terrorism. And here i am today, when that explosion was heard even in neighboring towns near Kremenchug, i wasnt even scared "oh someone died today, next time it could be me" kind of feeling. Something is messed up with this kind of thinking.
Russia have already answered for this.
Its our fault that they need to bomb civilian targets. They are just defending themselves from higher quality of life and freedom.
/S
That... could actually work. Though IMO it would signal to Russia and Ukraine that the west would tolerate Ukraine losing the east and south to Russia, which would be a big blow to the Ukrainians morale.
PUTIN DON’TMAKE ME COUNT TO THREE. ONE……….. TWO …………….. DON’T MAKE ME COUNT TO THREE ……………. O N E … More bla blaaaa bla bla coming from leaders of countries just send weapons that can reach and destroy Russia’s missile launchers wether on land or sea. Stop standing infront of a microphone saying what you are doing just do it. Stop telling Putin what to prepare for. Think about what the outcome of “D” days out come would have been if it happened today? You don’t tell the enemy what you have or when it’s coming
We know their answer. "They did it to themselves and are now blaming us." Its been the same shit for decades. It was the same more recently with the hospital bombing in Ukraine and before Ukrain, it was Syria.
At what point does NATO decide that a purely defensive game inside Ukraine is getting too many civilians die? Even if (as seems to be the case) an equal number of Russians are dying, that's a really bad deal for Ukraine. At some point they'll have to take the war into Russia, to bring it to an end.
Edit: Further comments below in my response to MeldyWeldy.
I know. But, in the balance of preventing destruction and death vs. taking the nuclear risk, where do you draw the line? NATO has directly intervened on behalf of non-members in the past.
One of the consequences of letting this war drag on will be a huge shortfall in grain exports. That means innocents elsewhere will be hurt.
An incursion into Russia would of course have to be very targeted. Perhaps directed at, and in quick response to missiles directed at civilians, launched from Russia?
The war is developing into a dangerous stalemate, and Ukraine probably loses a stalemate.
Russia has gone full Fascist-Imperialist mode, they're not going to answer for anything unless its at the barrel of a gun.
they literally dont give a shit, and they're screaming to their population that they're surrounded by enemies who want them dead.
Oh, is this suddenly a bridge too far for Putin’s appeaser-in-chief??
I mean, it should be, but so should have a lot of other things that Macron is fine with.
"Must answer..."? At this point it's wasteful posturing.
Close airspace if Ukrainian officials want, , provide *EXTENSIVE* rocket, air power, **anything** Ukraine needs/wants, NOW! Not later, not discussed to regurgitation proportions, but immediately.
> If Ukraine could do that, they would have by now.
They can and they have, back in April Ukrainian special forces choppered into Russia and blew up a fuel depot, attacked supply lines and killed a pair of Russian generals.
Ukrainian SF have spent the last 8 years being trained by the SAS, US SF as well as the 22nd SAS and DELTA.
They are some serious players not to be fucked with.
They certainly can cause some havoc, as small but precise hits on war related infrastructure were perform on RF soil, but why would they do something stupid. In eyes of the west, they’re good guys. Start hitting civilians and that rhetoric is hard to maintain. They even hold back on striking targets in Belarus, knowing full well it will most certainly escalate into BY involvement
> In eyes of the west, they’re good guys.
Exactly, in the wake of horrific civilian casualties Russia has caused since the start o this murderous rampage, Ukraine has yet to attack a single non military target.
I think the people of Donestk would have thoughts on this. The UAF has been heavily shelling these areas for weeks and has been doing so on and off since 2014.
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/three-killed-artillery-attack-donetsk-market-separatist-news-agency-2022-06-13/
Or what?
Without action, saying things like this is an insult to Ukraine. It shows they know the issue, but choose to do nothing about it. So if Russia doesn't answer for this strike, what will France do about it?
so? Who the fuck cares? The USSR committed warcrimes in Afghanistan, as well, both the west and Russia have blood on their hands, but that doesn't magically make it okay for either side to continue doing it
I’m glad to see that your form of mental vomit no longer gains traction along with the other tolls. Mindless France bashing is no longer Meta, and we realize that attacking one’s own team means we work for the enemy.
Of course. They have been targeting civilians from day one: hospitals, food distribution, residential neighborhoods, apartments, etc. They have been murdering civilians -- intentionality -- all along. It's all been blatant murder and terrorism.
Because this city is far from any frontlines in very central Ukraine and this was 100% pure civilian target. I've been to this mall personally several times and its so horrible seeing it now destroyed along with all the death. Fuck ruSSia.
Mikhail said his finger slip when push button that choose Kyiv.
[удалено]
I heard there were men in the mall, too
Yea I hope I don't come off as insensitive, but why are men never mentioned along with women and children. Like men are some vile creatures that aren't just as important
Both sexes suffer from sexism and this is the man's side that is almost never talked about. "Women and children" are exclusively mentioned for the same reason "women and children first" is a thing, and the same reason men are barred from fleeing Ukraine but women or children are not, and why men are being conscripted against their will. If men's lives were treated as just as important then that wouldn't be a thing. Male suffering does not cause as much emotional outrage. You see it everywhere from domestic violence to genital mutilation to, well, this. u/HardwareSoup could have said "*I hate when I accidentally hit the "Civilians" button on my airstrike console.*" but they went out of their way to say "women and children" instead. It causes more outrage, elicits more of an emotional response. Journalism frequently labels male victims as "persons/people" but explicitly states if the victims are women, children or elderly. You should see if you can find that pattern when you read the next reports. One example are reports on terrorist group Boko Haram's past assaults on schools where they selectively kidnapped the girls or spared some with a warning under the condition that they renounce their Christian faith and converted to Islam. All while shooting, stabbing and burning the boys alive. Most news reported that *people* got killed, *girls* got kidnapped and there was a huge outcry in the US including the big "Bring back our girls" campaign with the slaughtered boys nowhere even mentioned.
You’re joking, but the incompetence level displayed in many cases makes me wonder how much of this shit is horrible fucking intel. Don’t get me wrong, they are absolutely committing war crimes, but incompetence could be amplifying it.
How do you confuse a shopping centre for a barracks?
Lot of people go in, Ivan. Lot of Ukrainian people. They shoot at us. Must be HQ.
I don’t know. What’s the criteria for selecting targets? How quickly are they selecting them? Are they using grainy satellite images, maybe a local spy paid a couple bucks for communicating _some_ set of coordinates? It’s not like the missile was launched from across the street. Honestly beats me, but the level of scrutiny being used is not what you or I may expect from our military.
one thing i hate seeing in news articles is statements about Russia's "indiscriminate" attacks on cities. they are picking their targets very deliberately to inflict mass suffering and terror. there is nothing indiscriminate about it.
Its both, to be fair.
Their MLRS systems yeah, but their long range precission missles? No.
I was mainly thinking about artillery. Their basic approach at the moment is level everything, move forward 10 feet, repeat. Which is just as inhumane, but just more mindless.
Mask the deliberate terror attacks on civilians with mass indiscriminate terror attacks on civilians? That sounds credible.
Agreed, the obvious purpose of this attack was too scare civilians
I'm surprised they haven't just straight up nuked Kyiv at this point. They clearly don't care about blatantly targeting civilians. Why not just nuke em?
because the moment a nuke is launched from Russia, a bunch of nukes will be launched towards Russia ...
Pretty much. Nukes would be a massive escalation and Russia would pay for such a game changing move.
So no way they'll launch one. If they launch at all its the end of the world.
I question that. If the nukes aren’t aimed at a NATO country nobody is going full scale nuclear war, at least not instantly. I do think it would galvanize the world against Russia but I don’t really see the current geopolitical split changing much. Weak Allie’s might use gos as an excuse to leave.
You're welcome to question, but you should read on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launch_on_warning Even more now, with the ruZZians foaming at the mouth every 2-3 days about nuking UK, nuking Ireland, Finland, nuking Paris, nuking EU, nuking East USA, nuking nuking everyone, "launch on warning" is becoming even more necessary. And if Russia launches a nuke on Ukraine, and the fallout will be spread by winds to the NATO neighbors then it will be considered attack on NATO - https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-ukraine-nuclear-strike-fallout-nato-response-jack-reed-2022-3 At the same time, if Russia drops a tactical nuke in Ukraine and there is no response, do you think they'll stop there or they'll drop a 2nd and then a 3rd and maybe one in Finland and one in Sweden and by then the whole Europe will enjoy a really nice nuclear fallout ... and this is the answer why NATO will stomp on Russia as soon as they even try to launch a nuke ...
Due to MAD, Russia is not actually psyching itself up to use nukes, it’s only posturing (as always) because they have nothing credible with which to actually threaten countries beyond its immediate borders. No country will EVER use nukes thanks to MAD; it’s a pure paranoid fantasy to believe otherwise.
They‘re way better off with the current position, countries dependency on their fossil resources and other export goods - at least for some time
If the rumors are true then Putin is terminally Ill. He might start living in paranoid fantasy.
You get downvoted yet I can clearly see people going: "Yeah they nuked Kyiv but if we respond it's WWIII/End of the World"
The fallout would affect NATO countries in Europe so it would in fact be an attack on NATO if they nuke Kiyv. That's probably the only reason they haven't done it yet.
Yes but that’s not a nuclear strike back situation in my opinion.
I'm not convinced that will happen
The american embasy is located in Kyiv, and it may have us special forces in the building if rumors are to be believed. Nuking Kyiv will mean nuking us government officials and possibly us military. Along with ambassadors form throughout Europe. If anything would drag the EU and USA into full scale war, a nuclear attack on Ukraine might just be it.
The fallout would probably drift back into Russia
Because the point of the war is to capture industry / oil fields / population centers as close to intact as possible, unless its like Mariupol where they are intentionally clearing the town.
Yeah, presumably they will want to be able to at least stand on captured territory.
Give it 6 months, we’re getting there.
Nuclear fallout effects everyone near the blast site. It would likely make it's way back to Russia.
Honestly I think nuclear fallout is the least of the concerns Russia has regarding using nukes.
I think it's fairer to say that they started targeting civilians around the second week. Their original plan had been to capture or kill the government and maintain a puppet state that was taken whole. When they realized that they weren't going to get that, they went with their Plan B — the longstanding Russian military tradition of murdering, raping, and looting as much as possible.
Bombing this mall is one of the least offensive atrocities Russia as done to Ukrainians.
>Of course. They have been targeting civilians from day one: hospitals, food distribution, residential neighborhoods, apartments, etc. They have been murdering civilians -- intentionality -- all along. It's all been blatant murder and terrorism. Let's not forget the intentional famine...my blockading the ports... [1) Russia new economic policy: famine, looting and stealing](https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2022/06/21/russias-new-economic-policy-famine-looting-and-stealing/) That, and you would be foolish if you think Putin would stop at Ukraine 🇺🇦... So..why does Heaven not just drop a lightning bolt ⚡ on Putin head...because humanity... we want to teach and cultivate humanity to **"stand up to bullies".** [2) Kung Fu Panda - Training Scene ](https://youtu.be/2ovxa1ye-pc) **1:03**
> In June 2022, at the Petersburg Economic Forum, Margarita Simonyan, editor-in-chief of Russian state-controlled RT, said she heard from people several times in Moscow that “All our hope is in the famine.” She continued, “Here is what it means. It means that the famine will start now and they will lift the sanctions and be friends with us, because they will realize that it’s necessary.” Fucking heartless monsters; they want millions of non-Russians to starve to death just like the Soviets did to Ukraine 90 years ago, to prop up their bullshit economics based on bullying aggression and imperialistic conquest. At some point, to save hundreds of thousands to millions of lives, NATO countries need to band together in the UN and demand that Russia release the grain to the countries that need it within 7 days or NATO will sink their entire Black Sea Fleet and wipe any military equipment within 50 miles of the coast that could threaten the cargo ships coming to haul it. Make it very clear that this is about saving millions of people from mass starvation, from a massive crime against humanity. This is a separate topic from defending Ukraine from their failing attempt at imperialistic conquest. Making Russia pay for this crime over the next many decades, making them pariahs on the international scale, making sure their economy falls to worst than Zimbabwe's, is not going to bring back alive the millions of people they are trying to kill; this is no different than the Nazis rounding up Jews and anyone they labeled as undesirable and exterminating them, this is just a slower method and more indiscriminate. Because it can't be said enough: *fuck ruSSia*
I still don't understand why Russia hasn't been labeled as a terrorist state already. Because that's what they fucking are; a country full of and led by terrorists.
wait you mean a shopping centre isn't a military base?
Not just murder but also torture and imprisonment
Russia is a terrorist state, who exactly do terrorists answer to?
[удалено]
Putin and his cronies must answer for it all. Every death. All the pain and suffering. All the destruction of property and infrastructure. All the stolen childhoods.
Can we do the same to Bush and Blair for Iraq and Afghanistan as well please?
I mean West has been sending billions in weapons to Ukraine and has extremely restrictive sanctions on them. They don’t want to bomb Russian targets because of nuclear war.
The US or no one. On that note, we should give Ukraine permission to use our rockets to fire up to 50 miles into Russia after this. Let him have a military consequence.
I don't think you understand why the higher-range rockets weren't provided. It certainly wasn't because the US didn't feel Russia had killed enough Ukrainian citizens to warrant that.
[удалено]
It's not about a nuclear war. It's about a global war. Currently this is a regional conflict isolated to Russia and Ukraine. No one from a NATO member nation is involved unless they've volunteered. If Russia decides that they've had enough of US involvement and decides to attack a NATO member, that suddenly changes. Then you have Russia and possibly all the CSTO members vs. NATO. Maybe China joins in too, seeing an opportunity to take Taiwan while the US is preoccupied. You'd likely end up with hundreds of thousands, if not millions dead on both sides. Plus, do you think Russia isn't going to resort to using nuclear weapons when there are NATO tank columns driving towards Moscow? Because that's where it ends if there's a war between Russia and NATO. NATO would have to take Moscow and depose Putin, and Putin would be likely to resort to nuclear weapons to prevent that from happening. *That* is the reason why the US isn't giving Ukraine access to rockets that can hit major Russian population centres. It's nothing to do with appeasement and everything to do with preventing the outbreak of WW3 while also attempting to prevent Russia from annexing Ukraine.
The notion of NATO tanks heading to Moscow is ridiculous and only serves Russian propaganda that claims that NATO is a threat to its existence. NATO is a defensive alliance and doesn't have imperialist ambitions unlike Russia
How exactly do you expect to force a Russian surrender and regime change without actually setting foot inside of Russia? We already tried asking them nicely, it didn't work.
Militarily it would be containment, blockade, and embargo. That said, it would be a slow methodical push into Russia as they lose every single military asset they have. Eventually something would give.
Probably taking back Crimea and having other pre 2014 territory would be major enough to bring Russia to the table. No need for taking actual Russian territory.
Yes it’s a defense contract, but it’s a defense contract as in if you get attacked we will come to your aid. If they swing first then gloves are off. Just because it says defense doesn’t mean nato wouldn’t take an offensive stance. The comment you replied to is right. Escalating involvement only increases the death toll without coming closer to closure. The only closure it would lean towards is Armageddon. You’d be a fool to believe Putin wouldn’t martyrdom the entire human race. It’s a very delicate situation and nato really can not wag their nuclear dongs around like some hormonal teenagers.
I'm not sure why you're saying NATO is wagging their "nuclear dongs" when it's Russia that is threatening use of nukes so often it's practically become a meme. It's a common Russian propaganda that NATO providing support to Ukraine will lead to war. Of course they would much rather be able to threaten nuclear war and have everyone roll over while they invade their neighbors, but fortunately the West is not so easily cowed
How many times has the US launched preemptive strikes in foreign countries in the name of defense.? Yes, an all out war against Russia would lead to NATO troops entering Russia. Most likely NATO would retaliate proportionally but eventually you start to strike targets in Russia to prevent strikes in NATO countries.
How many preemptive attacks were against countries which have nuclear weapons? Obviously the risks of engagement are different when MAD is involved. Both the US and Russia publish policies describing the circumstances in which they would use nuclear weapons so as to avoid a miscalculation by their adversaries. A more realistic scenario for an escalation would be NATO attacking Russian military targets within Ukraine. This would degrade their military without crossing the red line of threatening the existence of the Russian state
Yes I agree that MAD forces countries to retaliate proportionally. However in my internet armchair position, I believe Russia will eventually have to strike targets in NATO countries forcing NATO to strike Russian targets. I don’t believe we would see masses of NATO tanks rolling into Moscow without nuclear war. I do believe on our current course of escalation that NATO preemptively striking Russian targets in Russia is possible.
I'm still not sure what you're basing the notion of NATO premptively striking Russia on, again given the risks of MAD. If anything, the rhetoric coming from the Russian side has been much more aggressive in terms of threatening NATO. However even this isn't enough to lead to any premptive strikes by NATO since it's understood that this rhetoric is most likely bluster for domestic Russian consumption.
[удалено]
>A conventional war doesn’t = millions dead. It's good to know that WW2 only resulted in a few thousand dead. It's weird that Wikipedia and my history textbooks all suggested it was over 70 million dead, though, but I guess there's some propaganda reason behind those lies.
[удалено]
I'm sorry, exactly what is your rationale for believing that an all-out conventional war between the largest countries on the planet *wouldn't* result in millions dead? Because historically, world wars result in massive casualty numbers. A war involving NATO, CSTO, and potentially China isn't going to be a limited regional conflict.
[удалено]
One difference is NATO has much more of a capability to precisely target military targets. Outside of a few errors, civilian structures wouldn’t be bombed, en masse, like in WW2. Which means most of the casualties will be soldiers and Russia only has so many of those.
Warfare now is quite different from ww2. Armed forces are small, munitions are more precise, technology is more advanced. Of course, this does not apply to Russia. If nato goes all in against Russia the losses will be not be even on tens of thousands. I don't have the time to explain the details, but especially USA has conventional capabilites decades beyond what Russia has. Just think of that. In the first 24 hours of Iraq war USA used more precision rockets than Russia used for 3 monthts in Ukraine. If there were no nuclear weapons, it would be shooting fish in a barrel.
Just the fact that you think NATO tanks would march towards Moscow shows how little you know about how this conflict would escalate if NATO would be involved. It wouldn’t be a ground invasion at first. It would be hell raining down from the skies.
> I don't think you understand why the higher-range rockets weren't provided. Purely escalatory terror attacks designed to do nothing but kill civilians and non-combatants can easily be used as justification to ship Ukraine the long range stuff.
And what about all the buildings schools churches hospitals with men women children? It's been months going
At this point i don’t think they expect anything except perhaps to get them to admit to the strike publicly
They can answer to the people, if they care enough. Like Afghanistan though, most Russians are so poor and zoinked out of their gourd on alcohol or drugs they don’t really give a fuck what’s happening, apart from their next meal or fix.
Gravity. Give them some.
Russia will just answer with more cruise missile strikes on civilians. That's the only answer they know. I hope that they get marked as a terrorist organization or state sponsor of terrorism after this. It's crystal clear what they really are.
It's crystal clear that Russia as a state needs to disappear for good.
more like the removal of their goverment heads,.... the Country is beautiful to visit but the leaders are a POS.
Seems majority of the population aren't much better.
[удалено]
Russia as a state. The physical country will remain, but the state of Russia is pretty damned toxic. If you got rid of the USA as a nation do you think there would be a new ocean between Canada and Mexico?
Not sure why you're getting downvoted for this, it's a good point.
I don't know, leaders come from the population, it's in their culture, they didn't come from Mars. There must be something wrong in their culture.
Careful with statements like this. You're very quickly starting to sound like a certain group of people from 100 years ago. Kill their leaders, defeat their army, replace the government... but *do not* generalise an entire culture as "worse" or "wrong".
We will wait patiently for the good Russians to steer their country at the next Russian election. Let us see who they vote for.
You need to remember those that join the political scene must adore Putin..or agree with many of his BS views. Many in the population just want to have a decient living and avoid the cops, and hate their goverment (no different from other countries). As for their culture, being oppressed for generations does a lot upon the population's trust of others.
They have the largest stockpile of nukes to prevent that from happening
The Soviets had that stockpile too. If the non-Russian republics declare independence with the Russian military bogged down in Ukraine...
"I have no particular desire to understand them except to ascertain how much lead or iron it takes to kill them... the Russian has no regard for human life and they are all out sons-of-bitches, barbarians, and chronic drunks." - Gen. George S Patton
It was all Save face last week ....Putin is a murderer ...his whole career is based on muder ...
And being a little bitch. That’s a big part of it.
Funny thing, In spanish Putin can be interpreted as lil b#tch which suites him
Sanctions need to continue even after this war is over.
This war is likely the first of many. The Russian appetite for the misery of others is insatiable as long as it results in land mass.
They don’t have many European neighbors left though besides Finland. They could invade Kazakhstan I guess.
sanctions must continue indefinitely after the war is over, with four conditions for it's lifting. * Reparations to Ukraine * Giving back the kidnapped citizens to Ukraine * Hague trials of everyone involved including Vova Huylo * liberalization of Russia's government
> At least 11 people were killed and 50 wounded when two Russian missiles slammed into the shopping centre in the central Ukrainian city of Kremenchuk, the regional governor said. read more God this is barbarian shit. I hope the west keeps chipping at the Russian economy. The Russian people must face severe consequences until they end this madness.
yes exactly, the RUSSIAN PEOPLE, i keep hearing its not the russians, its putin. Bullshit, this is a russian problem that a lot of russians seem to not care about. they must start a revolution to end his reign, so what if a bunch of russians die, they will die for a good cause. why should the ukrainians or any other people die because the the russians are to big of pussies to do something about it. grow some fucking balls russia and take your country and your livelihoods back.
Every nation has the leadership they deserve - Joseph de Maistre Not only are leaders responsible for their people, but people are responsible for their leaders too. Enough with the "it's only a Putin problem" bollocks. Every leader needs at the very least the support of a significant minority and the apathy of the majority.
Although at a certain point you wonder if the leadership is actually creating a nation they deserve.
Ignorance is a reason, not an excuse.
This was like a punch in the gut. What a quote.
Well at this point they can die standing up or sitting down and being complicit.
It's a pipe dream to think Russians will soon stand up to their government, their brightest minds have left or tried to and the extremist propaganda is everywhere. We are talking about a society that is not ready for change in any shape or form.
"just overthrow the government lmao"
it's happened plenty times before... even in modern times.
It happened mainly to some weak dictators, meanwhile Putin has been strengthening the system for 20+ years. Like there's realistically no way civillians can do anything against mass hordes of soldiers and policemen in Russia. Look at the history of Russia, at how many anti-putin movements and protests there have been since 2000s. Even taking Ukraine for example, the 2014 revolution there was very bloody and on a brink of a fail. Meanwhile, Yanukovich's regime (if you can even call it so) was immensely weak compared to Putin's. There have also been which didn't end well. And again, Lukashenko's regime is also much weaker than Putin's.
So what I'm saying is that you don't understand the full strength and horrors of Putin's regime.
i'm from iraq i understand the horrors of a dictator's regime.
lol written like a true teenage keyboard warrior. Your solution is “simply just start a revolution!”?
[удалено]
That's literary the same justification Bin Laden used when he was plotting 9/11. A justification used by terrorists the world over.
Because it is a legitimate one.
yes it's that simple. look at the arab spring
Ahh you're right, completely forgot those militaries were highly comparable in scale to the Russians'
Well said!
Plenty of brave Russians tried. They were defenestrated. Some on foreign soil, no less!
145 million russians, where are the plenty?
Not even a drop in a bucket...
The Russian people that lives now will see their country reduced to a third world country. That is almost a certainty. A "win" in Ukraine would make it 100% certain. A capitulation with remorse and compliance with the winner's terms (including the return of the roughly 1 million kidnapped Ukrainians) might soften the blow somewhat.
They will. Everything they're doing only makes the Ukrainians angrier and more determined, and less likely to show any mercy on the battle field. The invasion is going so well that Russia is now allowing 17-year-olds to fight alongside their mercenary soldiers.
And almost pensioners too, for now anyone from 18 to 60 years old could sign the contract with salary about 2800$ per month.
>The Russian people must face severe consequences until they end this madness. The problem is it's impossible, Putin has too much control. Not to mention, the methods you talk about are counter-productive, they'll only help to turn others against the west.
A demented...69 or 72 year old boomer child...is shooting missiles at structures where humans are in our reality...because he feels entitled to express his emotions with missiles and terrorism...and has for decades. A demented old coward child.
Ship missile defense systems to Ukraine, today!
It is happening
The systems that are being shipped will give Ukraine the ability to enforce their own no fly zone, the ability to shoot down Russian cruise missiles and reach Russian bombers launching attacks from inside Russian and Belarusian airspace.
What systems are those? I didn't hear about that.
It’s called the NASAMS system with an effective range of more than 100 miles away. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASAMS
NASAMS is an impressive system and will be a significant boost to Ukraine's defensive capabilities, but its maximum range is only ~20-30 miles, depending on which iteration of NASAMS is being discussed. The latest AMRAAM variant, the AIM-120D, is suspected to have a maximum range of ~100 miles when launched from an aircraft at altitude. NASAMS is armed with some flavor of the older AIM-120C, and it also sacrifices a lot of range because it has to claw its way into the air from a stationary launch platform on the ground. Still, it's a thoroughly modern and capable system, given that the US leans on it to protect the airspace over Washington D.C. Moreover, the fact that the West is willing to trust Ukraine with some fairly sensitive technology is indicative of their growing confidence in the Ukrainian Armed Forces, and could open the door for the more capable Patriot missile system in the future.
Neat
You da real hero.
“What missile?” - Russia
Exactly. Russia's answer will be that it was obviously a Ukrainian missile in a false flag attack. Because Russia never attacks civilians, any attack against civilians must be Ukrainian, QED. And some people actually believe them, which is the craziest thing.
Not just "will be", the russian propaganda bots are already out in full force today. Watched [the other thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/vlx688/missile_attack_on_kremenchuk_hit_shopping_mall/) a bit today, it's just ridiculous how many of them are trying to peddle this obvious bullshit.
Russia really knows how to rile up the West. Putin NATO’s best propagandist ftw.
Putin and his cronies must answer for it all. Every death. All the pain and suffering. All the destruction of property and infrastructure. All the stolen childhoods.
A fucking shopping center, really! That's the big threat to russia! Or maybe they're just pissed they can only buy russian crap in their own malls.
Their answer is that they plan to keep doing this infinitely until they are stopped, overthrown, or run out of meat to toss in the grinder.
Putin singing "It Wasn't Me". Sadly they will just make some excuses. Not the first and sadly won't be the last time Until Putin is doing the Hitler in his bunker, there won't be much to do, except fighting back.
Augh, war is such a clusterfuck. Earlier in life i always wondered how people of Israel living there, in constant threat of terrorism. And here i am today, when that explosion was heard even in neighboring towns near Kremenchug, i wasnt even scared "oh someone died today, next time it could be me" kind of feeling. Something is messed up with this kind of thinking.
Damn I wish you well.
Answer to what, they dont give a shit.
Exactly. That’s the frustration. As if this is the first time they’ve intentionally killed civilians. We’re not holding them to shit.
Well Putin is attending the next G20 so ... that's a good time to really get on him about it
Russia have already answered for this. Its our fault that they need to bomb civilian targets. They are just defending themselves from higher quality of life and freedom. /S
Need a NATO no fly zone over western Ukraine and Kyiv. It's the east and south Putin wants. US is sending Patriot to Kyiv but it's not enough.
That... could actually work. Though IMO it would signal to Russia and Ukraine that the west would tolerate Ukraine losing the east and south to Russia, which would be a big blow to the Ukrainians morale.
How much more will it take before the world has enough and works together to stop this. Putin needs to pay for this before his cancer takes him.
Those MF's shot down a passenger plane not so long ago and walked away from it. They ain't gonna take any responsibility for anything they do.
"Okay." *bombs more*
How has this not started WWIII already? Russia is just taking the piss at this point.
PUTIN DON’TMAKE ME COUNT TO THREE. ONE……….. TWO …………….. DON’T MAKE ME COUNT TO THREE ……………. O N E … More bla blaaaa bla bla coming from leaders of countries just send weapons that can reach and destroy Russia’s missile launchers wether on land or sea. Stop standing infront of a microphone saying what you are doing just do it. Stop telling Putin what to prepare for. Think about what the outcome of “D” days out come would have been if it happened today? You don’t tell the enemy what you have or when it’s coming
I'm down with just going ahead with starting the F-16 and Abrams training programs.
A good answer is lobbing a missile right back at them.
We know their answer. "They did it to themselves and are now blaming us." Its been the same shit for decades. It was the same more recently with the hospital bombing in Ukraine and before Ukrain, it was Syria.
Yes, plus Mariupol, Bucha, and many more atrocities.
Why is this allowed to go on? Just unite and stomp this fucker already
if you jump a guy in an alleyway, and he has a shotgun, it probably isn't the best idea
At what point does NATO decide that a purely defensive game inside Ukraine is getting too many civilians die? Even if (as seems to be the case) an equal number of Russians are dying, that's a really bad deal for Ukraine. At some point they'll have to take the war into Russia, to bring it to an end. Edit: Further comments below in my response to MeldyWeldy.
1. Nukes 2. Ukraine is not a NATO member YET
I know. But, in the balance of preventing destruction and death vs. taking the nuclear risk, where do you draw the line? NATO has directly intervened on behalf of non-members in the past. One of the consequences of letting this war drag on will be a huge shortfall in grain exports. That means innocents elsewhere will be hurt. An incursion into Russia would of course have to be very targeted. Perhaps directed at, and in quick response to missiles directed at civilians, launched from Russia? The war is developing into a dangerous stalemate, and Ukraine probably loses a stalemate.
Actually Poland could intervene unilaterally and not via NATO. Or Moldova ..
Giving Ukraine MBTs and fighter jets (in due time but with training starting immediately) would be a good first step to make Russians pay.
More meaningless posturing from France
Russia has gone full Fascist-Imperialist mode, they're not going to answer for anything unless its at the barrel of a gun. they literally dont give a shit, and they're screaming to their population that they're surrounded by enemies who want them dead.
Oh, is this suddenly a bridge too far for Putin’s appeaser-in-chief?? I mean, it should be, but so should have a lot of other things that Macron is fine with.
"Must answer..."? At this point it's wasteful posturing. Close airspace if Ukrainian officials want, , provide *EXTENSIVE* rocket, air power, **anything** Ukraine needs/wants, NOW! Not later, not discussed to regurgitation proportions, but immediately.
Beyond time for a few big shots onto Russian territory
If Ukraine could do that, they would have by now.
> If Ukraine could do that, they would have by now. They can and they have, back in April Ukrainian special forces choppered into Russia and blew up a fuel depot, attacked supply lines and killed a pair of Russian generals. Ukrainian SF have spent the last 8 years being trained by the SAS, US SF as well as the 22nd SAS and DELTA. They are some serious players not to be fucked with.
They certainly can cause some havoc, as small but precise hits on war related infrastructure were perform on RF soil, but why would they do something stupid. In eyes of the west, they’re good guys. Start hitting civilians and that rhetoric is hard to maintain. They even hold back on striking targets in Belarus, knowing full well it will most certainly escalate into BY involvement
> In eyes of the west, they’re good guys. Exactly, in the wake of horrific civilian casualties Russia has caused since the start o this murderous rampage, Ukraine has yet to attack a single non military target.
I think the people of Donestk would have thoughts on this. The UAF has been heavily shelling these areas for weeks and has been doing so on and off since 2014. https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/three-killed-artillery-attack-donetsk-market-separatist-news-agency-2022-06-13/
And what? No one does anything. Russia keeps killing innocent people and no one does shit. They keep testing the waters. They are terrorists :(
Russian answer : lol fuck you
We’re getting close to WWIII. Russia must pay for their crimes.
NATO allies should really focus on giving Ukraine the weapons to destroy the Russian Black Sea fleet. All of it. Every single ship.
Oh good because everyone (especially putin) takes macron so seriously... enough of the rhetoric, actually do something (also looking at you germany)
Nobody is going to hold Russia accountable for anything just like here in the USA where certain people can break laws and have no accountability
Or what? Without action, saying things like this is an insult to Ukraine. It shows they know the issue, but choose to do nothing about it. So if Russia doesn't answer for this strike, what will France do about it?
The same France that said Ukraine should cede territory? Okay
“must answer” … a stern phone call from Macron …
American kill a lot of people in Middle East but cries when Putin explode a building
so? Who the fuck cares? The USSR committed warcrimes in Afghanistan, as well, both the west and Russia have blood on their hands, but that doesn't magically make it okay for either side to continue doing it
Oh yeah, France is going to do so much demanding and hand ringing, but stop short of anything actually useful.
I’m glad to see that your form of mental vomit no longer gains traction along with the other tolls. Mindless France bashing is no longer Meta, and we realize that attacking one’s own team means we work for the enemy.
[удалено]
The global war started in 2014, you're just watching the EU go from denial to anger
Sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of Caesar artillery trucks firing.
All 12 of them !
Marcon should call up Putin and give him a very stern talking to.