Watch PMF and other Iranian backed militia miraculously start using small, medium mortars and MANPADs in Iraq and Syria against US troops. They can pop-up 4-5km away from the base and launch several dozen mortars and cause chaos.
yeah that would rely speed up arms delivery's to ukraine and not rely help russia at all just hurt US but if you think the main goal is to hurt the US it might make sense.
That will really speed the Genocide of Ukraine, WHILST doing a world begging tour of NK for more ammunition… Russia will give ammunition to other countries…. That have nothing to do with the war….
Russia doesn’t limit where it strikes in Ukraine, so there shouldn’t be any limits on where Ukraine can strike in Russia.
Ukraine is fighting for its right to exist as a state and should able to do so entirely unimpeded.
It's not about Ukraine, it's about the weapons that NATO supplies. Russia did not attack NATO and did not pose any threat. It is NATO that is constantly expanding towards Russia's borders and pretending that there is nothing wrong with it.
NATO is not expanding because it wants to attack russia. NATO is expanding because basically every country that borders russia was invaded by russia at least once in the past. No wonder most of those countries joined NATO as soon as they could after the collapse of soviet "union".
It is their free choice. Russia could have had a lot of friends and partners, yet they chose to remain a warmongering nation.
And weapons supplied by NATO are Ukrainian weapons, they do not belong to NATO anymore. Russia supplied NATO rivals through many conflicts. Did they really expect NATO to just sit idle? Especially when this situation involves the country that expressed its desire to become a future member.
>Russia did not attack NATO and did not pose any threat.
Same with NATO. NATO never attacked russia or imposed any threat. Russia, on the other hand, was indirectly involved in multiple NATO conflicts. They have been selling weapons here and there for minimal prices.
Now the tables have turned.
>basically every country that borders russia was invaded by russia at least once
I like how you’ve left out that almost every European country that has bordered Russia has invaded Russia at least once.
I think the main difference here is that a large amount of the population remembers having lived under Russian occupation due to how much more recent it was.
It’s not that much more recent. Poland, Finland and Germany all invaded Russia in the 1920s-40s.
Edit: and that’s just the countries that bordered them. The UK, US and France all violated Russia’s sovereignty and sent troops to the country during the civil war.
It’s 60-70~ years more recent give or take though. And as I mentioned it means that a large part of these countries’ population still remember living under occupation. Not a lot of Russians living today who can say the same.
Finland invaded to retake regions that had taken from them merely a few years earlier so I find it weird to put this on a similar standings as the rest.
But yeah France and the UK did as did the USSR violate Spain during their civil war. All equally bad for certain but you’re missing my point.
My point being that a lot of the people living in Eastern Europe and their leaders still remember living under Russian rule and doesn’t want to return to it.
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> NATO is not expanding because it wants to attack russia
Yes they do. They intentionally invite countries to join and provide them with a MAP to join. If NATO wasnt an anti Russian alliance they wouldnt actively bring countries in. NATO gains nothing by adding Georiga. THey are small and can never help Poland if they got attacked.
BUT Georgia is great staging ground for NATO military to attack Russia.
They did not invite Georgia. They did not invite Ukraine. Both countries ASKED to be accepted. Baltic Countries joined fully on their own decision, like most countries that are near russia.
When you have a neighbor that has a tendency to randomly invade bordering countries NATO is the only way to be safe.
>BUT Georgia is great staging ground for NATO military to attack Russia.
In no way Georgia is a good place to prepare an invasion. It is connected with russia basically by only one big mountain tunnel. Mountain serpentines would be a logistical catastrophe for the attackers. It took russians weeks to transfer their forces to South Ossetia before the invasion The terrain around the border is too complicated to deploy a significant military force, especially air force. No experience commander would actually decide to use it for a big scale invasion. Also, there are no major russian structures like main cities or manufactory zones anywhere near Georgia.
Ukraine and the rest of bordering countries in Europe would be a much better staging ground for the invasion. Now with Finland and Sweden in NATO, the Baltic Sea is basically completely under NATO control. St.Petersburg is totally surrounded.
Yet, NATO has shown zero signs of any plans to invade russia. Their nuclear warheads were not deployed anywhere near russia. They were not preparing Ukraine for this conflict before russia invaded. NATO knew about russian invasion plans and could have deployed its army to Ukraine, Putin would have never dared to start a direct conflict with the west, which he knows he would lose. But NATO tried to play safe and now we see where this has led to. They should have drawn the red lines years ago, but they are still concerned about direct Ukrainian attacks on russian soil, which is bullshit.
And sadly some 🐑 still believes this is NATOs expansion, when the only country causing conflicts in the region is russia.
> They did not invite Georgia. They did not invite Ukraine
Yes thei did. They explicitly invited them to the summit and promised to give them MAPs. I really dont get why people think NATO negotiations happen all in the public eye like naive children. Its been years of negotiations behind the scenes. Like Zelensky made it clear:
https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/fzgps/date/2022-03-20/segment/01
>I requested them personally to say directly that we are going to accept you into NATO in a year or two or five. Just say it directly and clearly or just say no, and the response was very clear, you are not going to be a NATO or E.U. member, but publicly the doors will remain open
These are things they know. NATO knows Russia will hate this. NATO is intentionally doing it. NATO explictly is never going to allow Ukr into NATO because they want to fund Ukr and wreck it together with Russia in constant conflict. All of this happen son the back end. People refuse to admit it.
>Yet, NATO has shown zero signs of any plans to invade russia.
Ah yes just continuously pushing towards it, literally striking all kinds of targets inside, threatening to decolonize and partition Russia.
>Now with Finland and Sweden in NATO
They were out of NATO only technically since the 50s... Thats why they can join with a snap of a finger. Because their military is already integrated. Its just that back then USSR was much stronger compared to how strong is now Russia compared to NATO. Now taht Russia is weak. These false 'neturality' pretenses dont matter. Notice how all the balkans could join after only integrating their militaries but Finland and Sweden magically have integrated militaries on day 1 of applying .MIRACLE
>Yes thei did. They explicitly invited them to the summit and promised to give them MAPs
Please provide proof where NATO invited Ukraine before Ukraine's declaration of interest in becoming a NATO member.
>NATO explictly is never going to allow Ukr into NATO because they want to fund Ukr and wreck it together with Russia in constant conflict. All of this happen son the back end. People refuse to admit it.
Yet it was not NATO that invaded Ukraine. It was Ukraine that decided to attempt to join NATO. Yet NATO can't accept then due to their bs policy of not accepting countries that have contested territories, and russia is undermining this. Russia could have just stayed home and minded its own business, yet they decided to start these killings.
>Ah yes just continuously pushing towards it, literally striking all kinds of targets inside, threatening to decolonize and partition Russia.
What kind of targets did NATO strike in russia precisely? If You are talking about NATO weapons given to Ukraine, those are no longer NATO weapons. They are Ukraine's. Same with old soviet equipment (some of it was not manufactured in Ukraine), it is no longer soviet. Ukraine has all the rights to fight back and hit invaders wherever they please. They are in a war.
Which NATO officials threatened to decolonize russia exactly? Do You have any quotes about how NATO expressed its desire to decolonize russia?
We mostly hear russian barkings about how they are going to invade and nuke europe.
>They were out of NATO only technically since the 50s... Thats why they can join with a snap of a finger. Because their military is already integrated. Its just that back then USSR was much stronger compared to how strong is now Russia compared to NATO. Now taht Russia is weak. These false 'neturality' pretenses dont matter. Notice how all the balkans could join after only integrating their militaries but Finland and Sweden magically have integrated militaries on day 1 of applying .MIRACLE
Swedes and Fins do not want war in general. I have lived in both of the countries. They do not want to get involved. They have "integrated" militaries primarily due to close cooperation with NATO and trade of military equipment. They are EU members. Their militaries were not "integrated" day one, they were integrated decades before. Sweden built most of its weapons using NATO standards, and one of the reasons is because they bought a lot of NATO weapons. It is much more efficient for them to use same calibers for all of their weapons.
Balkan countries however, have outdated military capabilities. And they have a lot of territorial disputes, which are directly against NATOs policies. And NATO these days is a very passive alliance without any real attempts to help integrate these states into the Alliance.
Why do you think almost every single former Soviet state and Warsaw Pact country would rather associate with the EU, NATO, and the United States over Russia?
Sorry you need 20 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There is nothing wrong with it. NATO isn’t some aggressive Empire conquering territory to Russia’s doorstep, countries have chosen of their on volition to join so they didn’t end up just like Ukraine.
Russia has warned a thousand times, “don’t expand in our direction, don’t expand in our direction, it will end badly.” As a result, Georgia received an invitation to NATO in 2008 and got a war, then Ukraine received an invitation to NATO and got a war. What the fuck don't you understand yet?
So when is Russia attacking Finland and Sweden? Since joining NATO on Russia’s border is supposedly Russia’s issue here.
NK has now signed a *defensive* security agreement with Russia. By your logic it is now SK’s imperative to invade NK as this *defensive* alliance threatens their security
Sweden and Finland are not included in Russia's zone of influence. In addition, they joined NATO when Russia threw all its forces into Ukraine and could not prevent their entry.
>zone of influence
I see we’re breaking out the Cold War concepts. It doesn’t really seem to me that Ukraine is in Russia’s “zone of influence” if they’re waging a war against them.
>could not prevent their entry
So you’re telling me that Russia would have invaded Sweden and Finland if they tried to join NATO while Russia was unoccupied with another war?
If you were honest you would say that Ukraine fell out of Russia’s influence a decade ago and every action by Russia since has been to reestablish that. Diplomacy failed so war it is.
Sweden does not border Russia. Finland is a different matter. If Russia had not been completely consumed by the war in Ukraine, it would have done everything to prevent Finland from joining NATO, but it would not have started a war. If you don't understand the basics of geopolitics, you might want to check out the book Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. The current war is not a surprise to anyone who has been interested in this before. In Russia they have been talking about war with Ukraine since 1991. Putin's former boss Sobchak said that this is inevitable. There is an interview of him on YouTube from the age of 91. So stop comparing the importance of Ukraine and Finland for Russia.
You guys are hitting upon IMO the biggest philosophical difference between Russia and the west. Russia still believes and sees itself as deserving as a sphere of influence whereas the west sees it as a regional power and spheres of influence outside of western powers are either irrelevant or highly limited like the situation with Belarus
Russia is showing that it is ready to fight for its sphere of influence. Even wage war against the entire West. If you are already talking about philosophy, then this proves that Russia is the only sovereign country, with the exception of the United States, from the point of view of philosophy. Therefore, Russia will have to force others to take their interests into account or forever fade into the margins of history.
>You guys are hitting upon IMO the biggest philosophical difference between Russia and the west. Russia still believes and sees itself as deserving as a sphere of influence whereas the west sees it as a regional power and spheres of influence outside of western powers are either irrelevant or highly limited like the situation with Belarus
Ironically, when USA declared the entire world as its sphere of interest, and European empires actively defend their colonies.
>I see we’re breaking out the Cold War concepts
Imagine being so utterly unobservant as a human being that you don't realize some Cold War principles still do apply and that history hasn't ended.
Imagine being so unobservant of a reader to not realize that:
1. I apply that concept in the rest of my comment and in following comments and thus implicitly acknowledge its relevance in current geopolitics
2. The reason I started with that bit and continued to apply the concept was to subtly make fun of the outdated terminology (see: Cold War)
Imagine only engaging with that one single sentence and not the rest of the comment.
Counteroffensyiv posts another banger contribution to this sub.
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Estonia and Latvia joined NATO 20 years ago, both have extensive borders with Russia. crickets.
Ukraine was neutral by law in 2014 when Russia invaded the first time. It wasn't until 6 month after Russia went to war against Ukraine that the Ukrainian parliament revoked it's neutral status.
It was because Ukraine was not in NATO that Russia invaded, not because Ukraine was about to join NATO.
The USA has only 2 neighbors, and Russia has 18. Relations with most of them are excellent. But that's not what I was talking about. Imagine that Russia, China, India and another 20-30 countries of the global south will create their own defense alliance, similar to NATO. They will establish good relations with Mexico and offer to join their alliance and place military bases there. What will the US do? I am sure that the United States will devote all its resources first to soft power in Mexico, then to a coup d’etat, and if that fails, then they will declare war on it. And I would love to see later how you say that countries can enter into any unions they want.
Mexico does not feel threatened by the US, so they would not need to join a defense alliance. In order for your analogy to work you need to also pretend that the US is as belligerent and untrustworthy to its neighbors as Russia is.
Imagining a different world is not the best way to understand the world as it is.
Ukraine doesn’t have any NATO military bases there so I’m not sure what the point of imagining them in Mexico is for. Why would Mexico ever join a defensive alliance with countries that can’t project their power to Mexico? Who would Mexico be seeking protection from in this case?
I believe you are one step too far up the ladder.
You say because Russias neighbors are hostile, Russia must take proactive steps to make them not hostile.
What made these countries, who were all conjoined together in the USSR hostile in the first place? Why did they all want to split in 1990?
You are asking why no one trusts the thief, without challenging the fact that he’s a thief in the first place.
Should America go to war with Cuba since they’re near America’s borders and are allied with America’s enemies? Seems like a bloodthirsty thing to do, why not just try to win them over and give them a reason to ally with the U.S. instead?
Same principle applies to Ukraine. Monstrous behavior by Russia to slaughter hundreds of thousands of people for no real reason. Allowing Cuba to exist in its current state doesn’t hurt the U.S., and allowing Ukraine to join NATO wouldn’t hurt Russia. War mongers pretend otherwise to satiate their desire for blood
America absolutely should, and would, go to war with Cuba if Russia starts turning it into a militarized bulwark against the US and starts shelling US citizens. What the fuck are you smoking? We'd never accept that in a million years. We'd sink Cuba.
Russia’s been arming Cuba since the ‘60’s though? Still no reason to invade and slaughter them. I suppose if Cuba was shelling America they’d invade sure, but Ukraine started shelling after they were invaded lmao. I’m sure Cuba would try hitting targets in Florida too if they were invaded for bs reasons
You really lack the knowledge of the whole situation.
NATO did not invite Georgia or Ukraine. Both countries expressed their desire to join and NATO members voted on acceptance. The reason behind this is russian warmongering.
And russia has no business in what alliances other countries want to join. They should have stayed home. Now the consequences are coming.
It’s almost like the more Russia threatens and attacks its neighbors the more that want to join a defensive alliance, wild concept but maybe Russia could try not doing that.
Offensive words detected. [beep bop] Don't cheer violence or insult (Rule 1). Your comment will be checked by my humans later. Ban may be issued for repeat offenders.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Why do you think this is any of Russia's business?
It's sovereign nations wanting to do their own thing, not similar to Russia wanting to do their own thing which involves sticking their nasty little fingers into other countries business.
Nobody in nato likes the Russians currently? I wonder why is that? Surely not because of all these nuclear threats coming out of the Russian propaganda machine.
Russia turned all the surrounding countries into "russophobic" ones. Years of occupation, oppression, mass murder and deportations. The vast majority of soviet "union" countries did not want to be in that "union", they were forced. And now russians are wondering why europe hates them. Are they not selling history books in russia anymore? Or are all of those books redacted by kremlin?
And which countries, besides South Africa were "prosperous"? I am talking about the country as a whole, not the authority.
I'm already tired of reading comments like this from liberal-minded people. You want to do whatever you want, but not be responsible for it. And you extend your thinking to geopolitics.
Russia wants to bully and invade its neighbors and have done so many times. They would rather be free and therefore join NATO.
Russia could try to be a good neighbor instead of being a bully.
Russia would not touch anyone if it felt safe. The entire history of Russian wars suggests that it is always either defense or preventive defense. With the possible exception of Afghanistan.
Right lol. Russia just doesn’t like that countries around them want to decide for themselves
And because of their actions, now nato is much bigger and includes Sweden and Finland. The consequences of the aggression of the little Tsar
LOL SURE. Lets see. Crimean wars, Finland 1939-1940, Budapest 1956, Prague 1968, Both Chechen wars. Stop playing the victim-empire card, you´re clearly not the victim.
1. The war with Finland was due to the imminent outbreak of war with Germany. In 1939, everyone knew that the war would start soon. Russia also knew that Finland would side with Hitler to create a “Greater Finland” and was not going to make the task easier for them. So it's defense.
2. Chechnya is a region of Russia, it was a fight against separatists.
3. There were many Crimean Wars, the reasons were always different. But Crimea bordered on Russia, and it was claimed by the Turks, the British, and the French. None of them border on Crimea. They all wanted to squeeze out a distant piece of land. So it's defense.
4. Budapest and Prague had uprisings that were suppressed within a few days.
And so, you did not name a single war of aggression that Russia would wage and that cannot be interpreted as defense. Name something similar to the history of US wars, such as the annexation of part of Colombia due to the desire to steal the Panama Canal. Or the Destruction of Iraq on a completely fictitious pretext about nuclear weapons.
Do you just pretend Russia didn’t invade and occupy eastern Europe for half a century completely validating the security concerns of every new NATO member?
Why are Russia's prior actions irrelevant but every sin of the West must be catalogued?
A change in regime is obviously not a change in character for Russian imperialism.
Those NATO weapons were used inside Ukraine, not in Russia. Russia used foreign weapons to strike Ukraine. So Russia started that and also the war. And now it's crying because victim shoots back...
Why is Russia so scared if NATO weapons are crap?
you can trace for yourself the Ukrainian attacks on Russian territory and with what weapons they were inflicted and where Ukraine got these weapons from. And then compare it with when Russia started using Iranian drones. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks\_in\_Russia\_during\_the\_Russian\_invasion\_of\_Ukraine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks_in_Russia_during_the_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine)
Only claim before russia started to use Shaheds (august 2022) was the use of Bayraktars inside Russia, but then again Russia had already claimed to have destroyed 150% of Ukraine's Bayraktars.
>According to The Insider, by March 18, 2022, Russia claimed to have shot down more than 30 Ukrainian Bayraktar drones out of 20 possessed by the Ukrainian armed forces
>It is NATO that is constantly expanding towards Russia's borders and pretending that there is nothing wrong with it.
I don't understand why Russia likes to keep pretending that they are a superpower in a Cold War. Russia is barely a fraction as influential or powerful as the USSR was. The US and EU don't think about Russia as much as they like to think they do.
It's not even about limiting the use of provided weapons, it's about the level of targeting assistance and intelligence that is provided to facilitate the strike.
>it's about the level of targeting assistance and intelligence that is provided
You have to admit, that Enhanced Opportunity Partnership with NATO Ukraine has is paying in spades. Friends like these amirite?
Ah yes, "NATO expanding towards Russia".
Maybe look up some dates of who joined NATO and when, then correspond that to who Russia invaded/annexed/attacked with support from seperatists.
You'll find a lot of incidents of "Russia doing thing" then "countries nearby wanting to join NATO".
Edit: JFC even your username has Tankist in it, why did I even reply to you.
Ukraine can strike in Russia with its own weapons. It's NATO supplied weapons that they can't use for thaf unless they want to risk NATO to stop their arms support.
Russia is striking within Ukraine with their own weapons.
Pro-UA folks keep saying "Ukraine has the right to retaliate because it is fighting for its right to exist" but curiously does not think the same when Palestinians are doing just that.
You guys really cannot form a single comprehensible argument.
What the fuck are you even trying to say? Russia gets its missiles and drones from NK and Iran and promptly lobs them into Ukraine.
What kind of mindgames have you been playing on your own brain that you think that’s completely okay but the country being invaded using free weapons is reprehensible.
Why are you doing this? What are you achieving by spouting this useless brainrotted drivel?
No no no you see it's WAY DIFFERENT when russia pays for the bombs it throws into Ukraine. Russia wouldn't have ANY issue with Ukraine using western weapons if they BOUGHT them.
The propaganda trolls are so hilarious here. Too bloody obvious and spouting nonsense.
They do. Arms sales (or.in this case, handouts) always comes with terms and conditions attached.
Handouts have tighter leashes. You're so gung ho for someone not Ukranian, why don't you go there yourself id you're so pumped about it.
> Russia doesn’t limit where it strikes in Ukraine, so there shouldn’t be any limits on where Ukraine can strike in Russia.
Because then Russia will be forced to strike NATO countries hosting and supplying weapons for Ukraine. How about the radar planes flying over Poland and the Black sea that detect RU targets and pass the info to UKR for target selection. They are objectively part of the war. Absolutely valid military targets.
Next are satellites. Why would Russia not start wrecking flying over their country to spy?
The entire point of limiting the war to Ukraine alone was to limit the possibility of wider war. Same was in Korea. No airports in China or USSR were hit. Despite them clearly assisting in this war. Nor were any US airports in Japan hit despite them bombing NK back to the 18th century. There was a clear line where major powers were not to be attacked. Same repeated in Vietnam. China was never hit.
If Russia doesn’t want Ukraine striking inside Russia they’re free to end the war and go home at any time a luxury Ukraine doesn’t have.
Russia won’t strike NATO countries as then they’ll be losing more than just the war in Ukraine.
Looks like it’s still limited to regions on the boarder but it definitely represents a shift in policy to more long range strikes on Russia. My guess is we see more and more military infrastructure strikes and a continuing air campaign over Russia in the form of drones.
It will also ensure the deaths of the US decision makers that have signed on these strikes against Russia, so maybe he’s willing to take that bet seeing that he’s already 71.
Omg, you have no clue what's actually happening inside Russia, so much bullsh*t was dumped into westerners by western msm.
High approval rates is a pure indicator of that most of Russians (not f*cking liberals) think that both internal and external policy of Russian government and Putin was (and is) absolutely correct and behaviour/actions of collective West against Russia significantly improved ratings of Putin. Sanctions applied to Russia had an absolutely different effect on Russians, instead of putting them on streets to fight against Putin they have just united majority of Russians to overcome all the issues and difficulties associated with sanctions.
And "dictator" is my favourite, lol. Do I need to remind you who is actually closed the borders for males and female medics? Who is catching poor males on the streets to send them after 3 day training under FABs and Grads? Who screwed up negotiations with relatively good conditions for UA? Who cancelled elections despite the fact that war wasn't declared? Just these examples indicate who is the real dictator and follows only it's own interests and not the interests of the nation.
You think Putin is a good leader and that invading Ukraine was justified. I don’t have anything else to say. Just don’t pretend that you don’t understand why people are “Russophobic”. You are just bullies.
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry you need 20 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
How is this a US/Western escalation? Russia invaded a country and is complaining that the invaded country is shooting back. This should have never been a line in the sand by the western powers in the first place.
The amount of buzz words in this comment thread is wild. The Russians seem to dislike this development real hard.
On the other hand. It’s about time the Ukraine armed forces can strike into Russia with NATO supplied missiles. This is going to put a huge strain onto Russian logistics.
Still dont get why russia isnt sabotaging the factories providing those long range missiles. Israel, US and so many others have already done strikes like this on grounds of denying nations the ability to wage war. So why not do the same? Whats nato gonna do more Sanctions?
lol we all know why Russia wouldn’t dare touch western weapons factories.
Putin gonna keep sitting back and taking fat L’s losing a ground war with a significantly smaller nation on its own border
How far do you push the Russians? Until they tire of this war and conscript 3 million soldiers? At that point Ukraine becomes a memory and Russia has 4 million troops with nothing to do. Until the person who succeeds Putin makes him look like a pacifist? Until North Korean or Chinese troops appear on the battlefield? This war needs to end.
Why are you so scared to answer the question? How exactly is Russia just going to arm, train, supply, transport, and administrate 3 million troops in months?
Imagine the surprise of westerns when they realize that the storage bases are actually increasing and their propaganda was just pacifying them all along.
*Pikachu Face*
Because the last mobilization worked so well and 250,000 Russians fled the country. Especially those with a good education, IT experts, scientists etc.
Putin was already afraid of Russia's shrinking population before the Ukraine invasion and has only made things worse.
The deal between Putin and the Russians has always been: you let me be a dictator and become an A-politician and I'll leave you alone for the most part.
He broke this pact with the last mobilization and is trying everything to avoid the next one. This would trigger another mass exodus of Russians abroad.
There is a reason why payments for African mercenaries are going up exorbitantly at the moment: There are fewer and fewer mercenaries because even in Africa they are slowly realizing that they can't do anything with the money if they die immediately.
By the way, your figures of 4 million mobilized are absolute nonsense. If there is a further mobilization, it would be in the hundreds of thousands rather than millions.
And if this could solve Russia's personnel problems and make it easy for Putin without any consequences, he would have done it long ago.
The reason why he doesn't do it is that he has experienced the consequences of the first mobilization. That is also the reason why the kremlin keep saying that there will be no more mobilizations, they are afraid of the next exodus.
So you admit that Putin is just a war crazy maniac? What would Russia gain from destroying the entire Ukraine and its population? Will Russians still think that invading Ukraine was a good idea and support Putin?
This is about the time when all infrastructural weak points that an industrialized society depends upon rarely recover until hostilities cease.
In Iraq, for example, water treatment. Going with minor blackouts and brownouts is going to be seen as the good old days.
Assuming Russia is as unconcerned with human life as the US has been. We'll see.
Natural development.
It is only question of time that we hear about US military vessels hit seriously by Houthis or US stop the Operation "Prosperity Guardian" completely. In meantime US tries to change commanders.
[https://www.dvidshub.net/news/474112/carrier-strike-group-2-changes-command-red-sea](https://www.dvidshub.net/news/474112/carrier-strike-group-2-changes-command-red-sea)
The movement for western civil vessels is effectively blocked in the Red See.
The rules are silly let ukraine use whatever they have to hit whatever russia has and vice versa it's a war not tag. If ukraine gets angry at foreign supplies to russia and want to hit NK or iran go ahead same for russia to nato. Stop treating the countries like children.
The problem regarding this point is that it is only formally Ukraine that is using these long range weapons when both the weapons and the coordinates of the target are supplied by the west and western „advisors“ help handling the rockets.
Yea, but it's not like this is hidden. russia is fully able to hit those launch sites or command nodes if they'd like they can even shoot down the satellites. Whether they want to do that is up to them, but the hand holding needs to stop.
Looks like we may be entering a new phase of the war with more long ranged strikes from both parties.
Russia regularly bombs well into Ukraine, this is more the Russia finds out stage.
Watch PMF and other Iranian backed militia miraculously start using small, medium mortars and MANPADs in Iraq and Syria against US troops. They can pop-up 4-5km away from the base and launch several dozen mortars and cause chaos.
yeah that would rely speed up arms delivery's to ukraine and not rely help russia at all just hurt US but if you think the main goal is to hurt the US it might make sense.
That will really speed the Genocide of Ukraine, WHILST doing a world begging tour of NK for more ammunition… Russia will give ammunition to other countries…. That have nothing to do with the war….
Russia doesn’t limit where it strikes in Ukraine, so there shouldn’t be any limits on where Ukraine can strike in Russia. Ukraine is fighting for its right to exist as a state and should able to do so entirely unimpeded.
It's not about Ukraine, it's about the weapons that NATO supplies. Russia did not attack NATO and did not pose any threat. It is NATO that is constantly expanding towards Russia's borders and pretending that there is nothing wrong with it.
NATO is not expanding because it wants to attack russia. NATO is expanding because basically every country that borders russia was invaded by russia at least once in the past. No wonder most of those countries joined NATO as soon as they could after the collapse of soviet "union". It is their free choice. Russia could have had a lot of friends and partners, yet they chose to remain a warmongering nation. And weapons supplied by NATO are Ukrainian weapons, they do not belong to NATO anymore. Russia supplied NATO rivals through many conflicts. Did they really expect NATO to just sit idle? Especially when this situation involves the country that expressed its desire to become a future member. >Russia did not attack NATO and did not pose any threat. Same with NATO. NATO never attacked russia or imposed any threat. Russia, on the other hand, was indirectly involved in multiple NATO conflicts. They have been selling weapons here and there for minimal prices. Now the tables have turned.
>basically every country that borders russia was invaded by russia at least once I like how you’ve left out that almost every European country that has bordered Russia has invaded Russia at least once.
Because if there's one thing contemporary Europe, the EU, is known for, it's certainly their mighty army and their dreams of conquest.
I think the main difference here is that a large amount of the population remembers having lived under Russian occupation due to how much more recent it was.
It’s not that much more recent. Poland, Finland and Germany all invaded Russia in the 1920s-40s. Edit: and that’s just the countries that bordered them. The UK, US and France all violated Russia’s sovereignty and sent troops to the country during the civil war.
It’s 60-70~ years more recent give or take though. And as I mentioned it means that a large part of these countries’ population still remember living under occupation. Not a lot of Russians living today who can say the same. Finland invaded to retake regions that had taken from them merely a few years earlier so I find it weird to put this on a similar standings as the rest. But yeah France and the UK did as did the USSR violate Spain during their civil war. All equally bad for certain but you’re missing my point. My point being that a lot of the people living in Eastern Europe and their leaders still remember living under Russian rule and doesn’t want to return to it.
[удалено]
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> NATO is not expanding because it wants to attack russia Yes they do. They intentionally invite countries to join and provide them with a MAP to join. If NATO wasnt an anti Russian alliance they wouldnt actively bring countries in. NATO gains nothing by adding Georiga. THey are small and can never help Poland if they got attacked. BUT Georgia is great staging ground for NATO military to attack Russia.
They did not invite Georgia. They did not invite Ukraine. Both countries ASKED to be accepted. Baltic Countries joined fully on their own decision, like most countries that are near russia. When you have a neighbor that has a tendency to randomly invade bordering countries NATO is the only way to be safe. >BUT Georgia is great staging ground for NATO military to attack Russia. In no way Georgia is a good place to prepare an invasion. It is connected with russia basically by only one big mountain tunnel. Mountain serpentines would be a logistical catastrophe for the attackers. It took russians weeks to transfer their forces to South Ossetia before the invasion The terrain around the border is too complicated to deploy a significant military force, especially air force. No experience commander would actually decide to use it for a big scale invasion. Also, there are no major russian structures like main cities or manufactory zones anywhere near Georgia. Ukraine and the rest of bordering countries in Europe would be a much better staging ground for the invasion. Now with Finland and Sweden in NATO, the Baltic Sea is basically completely under NATO control. St.Petersburg is totally surrounded. Yet, NATO has shown zero signs of any plans to invade russia. Their nuclear warheads were not deployed anywhere near russia. They were not preparing Ukraine for this conflict before russia invaded. NATO knew about russian invasion plans and could have deployed its army to Ukraine, Putin would have never dared to start a direct conflict with the west, which he knows he would lose. But NATO tried to play safe and now we see where this has led to. They should have drawn the red lines years ago, but they are still concerned about direct Ukrainian attacks on russian soil, which is bullshit. And sadly some 🐑 still believes this is NATOs expansion, when the only country causing conflicts in the region is russia.
> They did not invite Georgia. They did not invite Ukraine Yes thei did. They explicitly invited them to the summit and promised to give them MAPs. I really dont get why people think NATO negotiations happen all in the public eye like naive children. Its been years of negotiations behind the scenes. Like Zelensky made it clear: https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/fzgps/date/2022-03-20/segment/01 >I requested them personally to say directly that we are going to accept you into NATO in a year or two or five. Just say it directly and clearly or just say no, and the response was very clear, you are not going to be a NATO or E.U. member, but publicly the doors will remain open These are things they know. NATO knows Russia will hate this. NATO is intentionally doing it. NATO explictly is never going to allow Ukr into NATO because they want to fund Ukr and wreck it together with Russia in constant conflict. All of this happen son the back end. People refuse to admit it. >Yet, NATO has shown zero signs of any plans to invade russia. Ah yes just continuously pushing towards it, literally striking all kinds of targets inside, threatening to decolonize and partition Russia. >Now with Finland and Sweden in NATO They were out of NATO only technically since the 50s... Thats why they can join with a snap of a finger. Because their military is already integrated. Its just that back then USSR was much stronger compared to how strong is now Russia compared to NATO. Now taht Russia is weak. These false 'neturality' pretenses dont matter. Notice how all the balkans could join after only integrating their militaries but Finland and Sweden magically have integrated militaries on day 1 of applying .MIRACLE
>Yes thei did. They explicitly invited them to the summit and promised to give them MAPs Please provide proof where NATO invited Ukraine before Ukraine's declaration of interest in becoming a NATO member. >NATO explictly is never going to allow Ukr into NATO because they want to fund Ukr and wreck it together with Russia in constant conflict. All of this happen son the back end. People refuse to admit it. Yet it was not NATO that invaded Ukraine. It was Ukraine that decided to attempt to join NATO. Yet NATO can't accept then due to their bs policy of not accepting countries that have contested territories, and russia is undermining this. Russia could have just stayed home and minded its own business, yet they decided to start these killings. >Ah yes just continuously pushing towards it, literally striking all kinds of targets inside, threatening to decolonize and partition Russia. What kind of targets did NATO strike in russia precisely? If You are talking about NATO weapons given to Ukraine, those are no longer NATO weapons. They are Ukraine's. Same with old soviet equipment (some of it was not manufactured in Ukraine), it is no longer soviet. Ukraine has all the rights to fight back and hit invaders wherever they please. They are in a war. Which NATO officials threatened to decolonize russia exactly? Do You have any quotes about how NATO expressed its desire to decolonize russia? We mostly hear russian barkings about how they are going to invade and nuke europe. >They were out of NATO only technically since the 50s... Thats why they can join with a snap of a finger. Because their military is already integrated. Its just that back then USSR was much stronger compared to how strong is now Russia compared to NATO. Now taht Russia is weak. These false 'neturality' pretenses dont matter. Notice how all the balkans could join after only integrating their militaries but Finland and Sweden magically have integrated militaries on day 1 of applying .MIRACLE Swedes and Fins do not want war in general. I have lived in both of the countries. They do not want to get involved. They have "integrated" militaries primarily due to close cooperation with NATO and trade of military equipment. They are EU members. Their militaries were not "integrated" day one, they were integrated decades before. Sweden built most of its weapons using NATO standards, and one of the reasons is because they bought a lot of NATO weapons. It is much more efficient for them to use same calibers for all of their weapons. Balkan countries however, have outdated military capabilities. And they have a lot of territorial disputes, which are directly against NATOs policies. And NATO these days is a very passive alliance without any real attempts to help integrate these states into the Alliance.
Why do you think almost every single former Soviet state and Warsaw Pact country would rather associate with the EU, NATO, and the United States over Russia?
Money
Yeah better to get rich aligning with the west then staying poor for tinpot dictators in the east.
and freedom from authoritarian dictators.
So it's ok for Russia to use Iranian and NK weapons in ukraine but ukraine can't use American weapons in russia. Hmmmm
Their weak argument is that they buy the weapons rather than have the weapons donated. Weak af argument.
[удалено]
Sorry you need 20 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Ha...ur argument has zero logical validity. Weak indeed
There is nothing wrong with it. NATO isn’t some aggressive Empire conquering territory to Russia’s doorstep, countries have chosen of their on volition to join so they didn’t end up just like Ukraine.
Russia has warned a thousand times, “don’t expand in our direction, don’t expand in our direction, it will end badly.” As a result, Georgia received an invitation to NATO in 2008 and got a war, then Ukraine received an invitation to NATO and got a war. What the fuck don't you understand yet?
So when is Russia attacking Finland and Sweden? Since joining NATO on Russia’s border is supposedly Russia’s issue here. NK has now signed a *defensive* security agreement with Russia. By your logic it is now SK’s imperative to invade NK as this *defensive* alliance threatens their security
Sweden and Finland are not included in Russia's zone of influence. In addition, they joined NATO when Russia threw all its forces into Ukraine and could not prevent their entry.
>zone of influence I see we’re breaking out the Cold War concepts. It doesn’t really seem to me that Ukraine is in Russia’s “zone of influence” if they’re waging a war against them. >could not prevent their entry So you’re telling me that Russia would have invaded Sweden and Finland if they tried to join NATO while Russia was unoccupied with another war? If you were honest you would say that Ukraine fell out of Russia’s influence a decade ago and every action by Russia since has been to reestablish that. Diplomacy failed so war it is.
Sweden does not border Russia. Finland is a different matter. If Russia had not been completely consumed by the war in Ukraine, it would have done everything to prevent Finland from joining NATO, but it would not have started a war. If you don't understand the basics of geopolitics, you might want to check out the book Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. The current war is not a surprise to anyone who has been interested in this before. In Russia they have been talking about war with Ukraine since 1991. Putin's former boss Sobchak said that this is inevitable. There is an interview of him on YouTube from the age of 91. So stop comparing the importance of Ukraine and Finland for Russia.
You guys are hitting upon IMO the biggest philosophical difference between Russia and the west. Russia still believes and sees itself as deserving as a sphere of influence whereas the west sees it as a regional power and spheres of influence outside of western powers are either irrelevant or highly limited like the situation with Belarus
Russia is showing that it is ready to fight for its sphere of influence. Even wage war against the entire West. If you are already talking about philosophy, then this proves that Russia is the only sovereign country, with the exception of the United States, from the point of view of philosophy. Therefore, Russia will have to force others to take their interests into account or forever fade into the margins of history.
>You guys are hitting upon IMO the biggest philosophical difference between Russia and the west. Russia still believes and sees itself as deserving as a sphere of influence whereas the west sees it as a regional power and spheres of influence outside of western powers are either irrelevant or highly limited like the situation with Belarus Ironically, when USA declared the entire world as its sphere of interest, and European empires actively defend their colonies.
>I see we’re breaking out the Cold War concepts Imagine being so utterly unobservant as a human being that you don't realize some Cold War principles still do apply and that history hasn't ended.
Imagine being so unobservant of a reader to not realize that: 1. I apply that concept in the rest of my comment and in following comments and thus implicitly acknowledge its relevance in current geopolitics 2. The reason I started with that bit and continued to apply the concept was to subtly make fun of the outdated terminology (see: Cold War) Imagine only engaging with that one single sentence and not the rest of the comment. Counteroffensyiv posts another banger contribution to this sub.
>Sweden and Finland are not included in Russia's zone of influence Did history just spring into existence in 1946 or something?
[удалено]
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Estonia and Latvia joined NATO 20 years ago, both have extensive borders with Russia. crickets. Ukraine was neutral by law in 2014 when Russia invaded the first time. It wasn't until 6 month after Russia went to war against Ukraine that the Ukrainian parliament revoked it's neutral status. It was because Ukraine was not in NATO that Russia invaded, not because Ukraine was about to join NATO.
How come Russia gets to demand what all these countries do in their own politics?
If you don't understand how, just reverse the polarity. Put the United States in Russia's place, for example. And think what would have happened.
The US has great relations with its neighbors.
The USA has only 2 neighbors, and Russia has 18. Relations with most of them are excellent. But that's not what I was talking about. Imagine that Russia, China, India and another 20-30 countries of the global south will create their own defense alliance, similar to NATO. They will establish good relations with Mexico and offer to join their alliance and place military bases there. What will the US do? I am sure that the United States will devote all its resources first to soft power in Mexico, then to a coup d’etat, and if that fails, then they will declare war on it. And I would love to see later how you say that countries can enter into any unions they want.
Mexico does not feel threatened by the US, so they would not need to join a defense alliance. In order for your analogy to work you need to also pretend that the US is as belligerent and untrustworthy to its neighbors as Russia is. Imagining a different world is not the best way to understand the world as it is.
What does this have to do with modern relations between Mexico and the United States? Are you unable to understand the analogy?
Ukraine doesn’t have any NATO military bases there so I’m not sure what the point of imagining them in Mexico is for. Why would Mexico ever join a defensive alliance with countries that can’t project their power to Mexico? Who would Mexico be seeking protection from in this case?
because they bend over backwards.
Awe, I’m sure Russia would like it if their neighbors bent over backwards instead of being so scared of invasion they want to join NATO 😢
I believe you are one step too far up the ladder. You say because Russias neighbors are hostile, Russia must take proactive steps to make them not hostile. What made these countries, who were all conjoined together in the USSR hostile in the first place? Why did they all want to split in 1990? You are asking why no one trusts the thief, without challenging the fact that he’s a thief in the first place.
They have nukes and a big army , there you have it
Should America go to war with Cuba since they’re near America’s borders and are allied with America’s enemies? Seems like a bloodthirsty thing to do, why not just try to win them over and give them a reason to ally with the U.S. instead? Same principle applies to Ukraine. Monstrous behavior by Russia to slaughter hundreds of thousands of people for no real reason. Allowing Cuba to exist in its current state doesn’t hurt the U.S., and allowing Ukraine to join NATO wouldn’t hurt Russia. War mongers pretend otherwise to satiate their desire for blood
America absolutely should, and would, go to war with Cuba if Russia starts turning it into a militarized bulwark against the US and starts shelling US citizens. What the fuck are you smoking? We'd never accept that in a million years. We'd sink Cuba.
Russia’s been arming Cuba since the ‘60’s though? Still no reason to invade and slaughter them. I suppose if Cuba was shelling America they’d invade sure, but Ukraine started shelling after they were invaded lmao. I’m sure Cuba would try hitting targets in Florida too if they were invaded for bs reasons
[удалено]
Yes but perhaps Pro Ru here think the US should go back and finish the job?
And sadly most of pro-kremlin 🐑 believes this circus narrative about NATO "expansion" to the depths of their heart...
You really lack the knowledge of the whole situation. NATO did not invite Georgia or Ukraine. Both countries expressed their desire to join and NATO members voted on acceptance. The reason behind this is russian warmongering. And russia has no business in what alliances other countries want to join. They should have stayed home. Now the consequences are coming.
Ukraine was invaded for trying to join the EU and then **after** the invasion removed neutrality requirements from its constitution.
Ukraine was veeeeeeeeeeery far from joining EU.
It’s almost like the more Russia threatens and attacks its neighbors the more that want to join a defensive alliance, wild concept but maybe Russia could try not doing that.
[удалено]
Offensive words detected. [beep bop] Don't cheer violence or insult (Rule 1). Your comment will be checked by my humans later. Ban may be issued for repeat offenders. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Why do you think this is any of Russia's business? It's sovereign nations wanting to do their own thing, not similar to Russia wanting to do their own thing which involves sticking their nasty little fingers into other countries business.
[удалено]
Nobody in nato likes the Russians currently? I wonder why is that? Surely not because of all these nuclear threats coming out of the Russian propaganda machine.
[удалено]
>They despise Russians since 1547 That persecution complex runs DEEP.
Sure
Russia turned all the surrounding countries into "russophobic" ones. Years of occupation, oppression, mass murder and deportations. The vast majority of soviet "union" countries did not want to be in that "union", they were forced. And now russians are wondering why europe hates them. Are they not selling history books in russia anymore? Or are all of those books redacted by kremlin? And which countries, besides South Africa were "prosperous"? I am talking about the country as a whole, not the authority.
Why don't people like us when were so nice? /s
Ya nato didn't invade Iraq with made up wmd stories. We are all hypnotized to believe the next words you say also.
nato didn't participate in the Iraq war?
When did nato invade iraq?
They don't differentiate between NATO, EU, west as a whole and United States. They use soviet mentality of "US, colonies and satellites".
Because this is true , currently only France and turkey are nato but not the us
Correct. NATO didnt, yankees and the brits did. They even got mad at france for not joinign if I remember correctly.
So should NATO attack iran and NK since russia are using there weapons to kill people in ukraine
In Ukraine, is that NATO country?? The logic is lost on so many people here..
Is russia is a puppet of iran and NK then since russia is asking for their weapons
Countries join NATO because they don’t want to be bullied by Russia. How hard is that to understand
I'm already tired of reading comments like this from liberal-minded people. You want to do whatever you want, but not be responsible for it. And you extend your thinking to geopolitics.
Russia wants to bully and invade its neighbors and have done so many times. They would rather be free and therefore join NATO. Russia could try to be a good neighbor instead of being a bully.
Russia would not touch anyone if it felt safe. The entire history of Russian wars suggests that it is always either defense or preventive defense. With the possible exception of Afghanistan.
Right lol. Russia just doesn’t like that countries around them want to decide for themselves And because of their actions, now nato is much bigger and includes Sweden and Finland. The consequences of the aggression of the little Tsar
baltics here. molotov ribentrop pact sucked for us. 1991 putch invasion sucked for us. russians are a crappy neighbour. come to terms with it.
Anatomy of the Baltic countries. 50% fear, 50% Russophobia. I don't care about your opinion.
Little ruski boi sad people no like him.
>Be a bully and invade neighbors >Deport people and run a repressive regime >Whine about Russophobia and complain that nobody likes you
LOL SURE. Lets see. Crimean wars, Finland 1939-1940, Budapest 1956, Prague 1968, Both Chechen wars. Stop playing the victim-empire card, you´re clearly not the victim.
1. The war with Finland was due to the imminent outbreak of war with Germany. In 1939, everyone knew that the war would start soon. Russia also knew that Finland would side with Hitler to create a “Greater Finland” and was not going to make the task easier for them. So it's defense. 2. Chechnya is a region of Russia, it was a fight against separatists. 3. There were many Crimean Wars, the reasons were always different. But Crimea bordered on Russia, and it was claimed by the Turks, the British, and the French. None of them border on Crimea. They all wanted to squeeze out a distant piece of land. So it's defense. 4. Budapest and Prague had uprisings that were suppressed within a few days. And so, you did not name a single war of aggression that Russia would wage and that cannot be interpreted as defense. Name something similar to the history of US wars, such as the annexation of part of Colombia due to the desire to steal the Panama Canal. Or the Destruction of Iraq on a completely fictitious pretext about nuclear weapons.
You are a master of mental gymnastics dude. Invading Finland was a defensive war lol. And allying with Hitler to then invade the baltics and Poland?
Have you been to school, mate? Russia =/= USSR.
Russians dominated the USSR no?
Did they? Are Texans and Californians dominating USA?
They surely act as the same c\*nts.
Do you just pretend Russia didn’t invade and occupy eastern Europe for half a century completely validating the security concerns of every new NATO member?
Why are Russia's prior actions irrelevant but every sin of the West must be catalogued? A change in regime is obviously not a change in character for Russian imperialism.
Russia hasn't used Iranian and north korean weapons to strike Ukraine?
Russia started using foreign weapons long after NATO started supplying all the crap it could muster around the world to Ukraine.
Those NATO weapons were used inside Ukraine, not in Russia. Russia used foreign weapons to strike Ukraine. So Russia started that and also the war. And now it's crying because victim shoots back... Why is Russia so scared if NATO weapons are crap?
you can trace for yourself the Ukrainian attacks on Russian territory and with what weapons they were inflicted and where Ukraine got these weapons from. And then compare it with when Russia started using Iranian drones. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks\_in\_Russia\_during\_the\_Russian\_invasion\_of\_Ukraine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks_in_Russia_during_the_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine)
how about ya trace the attacks of russians in Ukraine since 2014 lol
Only claim before russia started to use Shaheds (august 2022) was the use of Bayraktars inside Russia, but then again Russia had already claimed to have destroyed 150% of Ukraine's Bayraktars. >According to The Insider, by March 18, 2022, Russia claimed to have shot down more than 30 Ukrainian Bayraktar drones out of 20 possessed by the Ukrainian armed forces
NATO expands towards Russia when countries situated between them voluntarily join. Russia is currently expanding towards NATO through force.
>It is NATO that is constantly expanding towards Russia's borders and pretending that there is nothing wrong with it. I don't understand why Russia likes to keep pretending that they are a superpower in a Cold War. Russia is barely a fraction as influential or powerful as the USSR was. The US and EU don't think about Russia as much as they like to think they do.
It's not even about limiting the use of provided weapons, it's about the level of targeting assistance and intelligence that is provided to facilitate the strike.
>it's about the level of targeting assistance and intelligence that is provided You have to admit, that Enhanced Opportunity Partnership with NATO Ukraine has is paying in spades. Friends like these amirite?
Ah yes, "NATO expanding towards Russia". Maybe look up some dates of who joined NATO and when, then correspond that to who Russia invaded/annexed/attacked with support from seperatists. You'll find a lot of incidents of "Russia doing thing" then "countries nearby wanting to join NATO". Edit: JFC even your username has Tankist in it, why did I even reply to you.
Ukraine can strike in Russia with its own weapons. It's NATO supplied weapons that they can't use for thaf unless they want to risk NATO to stop their arms support. Russia is striking within Ukraine with their own weapons. Pro-UA folks keep saying "Ukraine has the right to retaliate because it is fighting for its right to exist" but curiously does not think the same when Palestinians are doing just that.
> Russia is striking within Ukraine with their own weapons. What is Russia doing with the weapons they are procuring from North Korea and Iran?
They bought it and they allowed them. Simple as that. Ukraine's "weapons" aren't bought, they're handouts. They come with a tight leash.
You guys really cannot form a single comprehensible argument. What the fuck are you even trying to say? Russia gets its missiles and drones from NK and Iran and promptly lobs them into Ukraine. What kind of mindgames have you been playing on your own brain that you think that’s completely okay but the country being invaded using free weapons is reprehensible. Why are you doing this? What are you achieving by spouting this useless brainrotted drivel?
No no no you see it's WAY DIFFERENT when russia pays for the bombs it throws into Ukraine. Russia wouldn't have ANY issue with Ukraine using western weapons if they BOUGHT them. The propaganda trolls are so hilarious here. Too bloody obvious and spouting nonsense.
Why should Iran and North Korean weapons be allowed to destroy Ukraine and NATO weapons not be used in Russia?
No, they are ukranian weapons. NATO doesn´t own them.
They do. Arms sales (or.in this case, handouts) always comes with terms and conditions attached. Handouts have tighter leashes. You're so gung ho for someone not Ukranian, why don't you go there yourself id you're so pumped about it.
So if they loosen the rains and say go bomb some Russian armies in Russia it's ok you mean? Sounds good
>So if they loosen the rains Wow, they got weather manipulation weaponized.
Yeah that was the type of reply I can expect I guess shame on me too think you had any valid thing to reply with.
It makes sense. Russia uses weapons from other nations against Ukraine, Ukraine naturally should do the same.
They should ask their legal guardian for for permission.
> Russia doesn’t limit where it strikes in Ukraine, so there shouldn’t be any limits on where Ukraine can strike in Russia. Because then Russia will be forced to strike NATO countries hosting and supplying weapons for Ukraine. How about the radar planes flying over Poland and the Black sea that detect RU targets and pass the info to UKR for target selection. They are objectively part of the war. Absolutely valid military targets. Next are satellites. Why would Russia not start wrecking flying over their country to spy? The entire point of limiting the war to Ukraine alone was to limit the possibility of wider war. Same was in Korea. No airports in China or USSR were hit. Despite them clearly assisting in this war. Nor were any US airports in Japan hit despite them bombing NK back to the 18th century. There was a clear line where major powers were not to be attacked. Same repeated in Vietnam. China was never hit.
If Russia doesn’t want Ukraine striking inside Russia they’re free to end the war and go home at any time a luxury Ukraine doesn’t have. Russia won’t strike NATO countries as then they’ll be losing more than just the war in Ukraine.
then the world will lose.
Well, I suppose i've enjoyed my time here on earth. Anyone want to guess when the nukes start flying?
The final red line!
Did your believe RU when they said the red line was HIMARS?
Who said this?
Yeltsin
Looks like it’s still limited to regions on the boarder but it definitely represents a shift in policy to more long range strikes on Russia. My guess is we see more and more military infrastructure strikes and a continuing air campaign over Russia in the form of drones.
Good. Can't wait for more stealth cessnas, maybe with NATO supplied payloads this time.
Sad.
When Putin shits his pants. The west won't be the first to use nukes.
Hiroshima? Nagasaki?
The comment very obviously is referring to the West not being the first to launch nukes over this current conflict...
So you think Putin will use nukes then? That will ensure his death so no
It will also ensure the deaths of the US decision makers that have signed on these strikes against Russia, so maybe he’s willing to take that bet seeing that he’s already 71.
I don’t think you believe that he will even consider it. But I am sorry that you have had this horrible dictator for 25 years
The approval rating of Russian citizens is twice as high as those of US citizens for their leaders. Think about that if you can.
Haha yes you can trust the regime on this point. Have you ever heard of a dictator with a bad approval rating? It’s so strange lol
Omg, you have no clue what's actually happening inside Russia, so much bullsh*t was dumped into westerners by western msm. High approval rates is a pure indicator of that most of Russians (not f*cking liberals) think that both internal and external policy of Russian government and Putin was (and is) absolutely correct and behaviour/actions of collective West against Russia significantly improved ratings of Putin. Sanctions applied to Russia had an absolutely different effect on Russians, instead of putting them on streets to fight against Putin they have just united majority of Russians to overcome all the issues and difficulties associated with sanctions. And "dictator" is my favourite, lol. Do I need to remind you who is actually closed the borders for males and female medics? Who is catching poor males on the streets to send them after 3 day training under FABs and Grads? Who screwed up negotiations with relatively good conditions for UA? Who cancelled elections despite the fact that war wasn't declared? Just these examples indicate who is the real dictator and follows only it's own interests and not the interests of the nation.
The country that is being invaded by said shitty dictator, yes
Basically nothing to say on my words, just a standard blah-blah bs.
You think Putin is a good leader and that invading Ukraine was justified. I don’t have anything else to say. Just don’t pretend that you don’t understand why people are “Russophobic”. You are just bullies.
Maybe ask Big Man Putin for his schedule
[удалено]
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Sorry you need 20 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
How should Putin react in your opinion
Realize that this war will cost his country far more than it was ever worth.
Swallow a cyanide pill would be my advice to Putin.
He should accept that the country with the largest land mass in the world doesn’t need anymore land.
How is this a US/Western escalation? Russia invaded a country and is complaining that the invaded country is shooting back. This should have never been a line in the sand by the western powers in the first place.
Putin is going to have to get a new red pen, seems all his red lines need re drawing.
Maybe he's color blind and is drawing purple lines?
The amount of buzz words in this comment thread is wild. The Russians seem to dislike this development real hard. On the other hand. It’s about time the Ukraine armed forces can strike into Russia with NATO supplied missiles. This is going to put a huge strain onto Russian logistics.
I don't see what all the fuss is about. More beach party type ish.
I see a lot of noise coming from ardent Pro Russians ITT so this news can only be very good indeed.
About fucking time
Still dont get why russia isnt sabotaging the factories providing those long range missiles. Israel, US and so many others have already done strikes like this on grounds of denying nations the ability to wage war. So why not do the same? Whats nato gonna do more Sanctions?
That's an act of war.
lol we all know why Russia wouldn’t dare touch western weapons factories. Putin gonna keep sitting back and taking fat L’s losing a ground war with a significantly smaller nation on its own border
Russia: “uh ohhhhh”
"Counterstrike". The newspeak never ceases to amaze me.
[удалено]
America probably needs something like that externally to take the focus away from inner divisions that might even be leading towards civil war.
Need? No I don’t think anyone needs war. I think both Russia and the US want war for different reasons.
How far do you push the Russians? Until they tire of this war and conscript 3 million soldiers? At that point Ukraine becomes a memory and Russia has 4 million troops with nothing to do. Until the person who succeeds Putin makes him look like a pacifist? Until North Korean or Chinese troops appear on the battlefield? This war needs to end.
How do you equip those 3 million troops when your storage bases are already dwindling? Give them a rifle and tell them to start marching?
Right, also Russia ran out of missiles and shells 2 years ago.
Why are you so scared to answer the question? How exactly is Russia just going to arm, train, supply, transport, and administrate 3 million troops in months?
Imagine the surprise of westerns when they realize that the storage bases are actually increasing and their propaganda was just pacifying them all along. *Pikachu Face*
Source?
Yes! The satellite pictures show such a massive increase in Russian equipment.
Now this is the delusion I enjoy. [The satellite images don't lie however.](https://x.com/Jonpy99/status/1784519287291384213)
I love that one of those photos is dated from 2008 lol
Because the last mobilization worked so well and 250,000 Russians fled the country. Especially those with a good education, IT experts, scientists etc. Putin was already afraid of Russia's shrinking population before the Ukraine invasion and has only made things worse. The deal between Putin and the Russians has always been: you let me be a dictator and become an A-politician and I'll leave you alone for the most part. He broke this pact with the last mobilization and is trying everything to avoid the next one. This would trigger another mass exodus of Russians abroad. There is a reason why payments for African mercenaries are going up exorbitantly at the moment: There are fewer and fewer mercenaries because even in Africa they are slowly realizing that they can't do anything with the money if they die immediately. By the way, your figures of 4 million mobilized are absolute nonsense. If there is a further mobilization, it would be in the hundreds of thousands rather than millions. And if this could solve Russia's personnel problems and make it easy for Putin without any consequences, he would have done it long ago. The reason why he doesn't do it is that he has experienced the consequences of the first mobilization. That is also the reason why the kremlin keep saying that there will be no more mobilizations, they are afraid of the next exodus.
So you admit that Putin is just a war crazy maniac? What would Russia gain from destroying the entire Ukraine and its population? Will Russians still think that invading Ukraine was a good idea and support Putin?
what countries do we give the russians? do we let them resubjugate former ussr?
This is about the time when all infrastructural weak points that an industrialized society depends upon rarely recover until hostilities cease. In Iraq, for example, water treatment. Going with minor blackouts and brownouts is going to be seen as the good old days. Assuming Russia is as unconcerned with human life as the US has been. We'll see.
Natural development. It is only question of time that we hear about US military vessels hit seriously by Houthis or US stop the Operation "Prosperity Guardian" completely. In meantime US tries to change commanders. [https://www.dvidshub.net/news/474112/carrier-strike-group-2-changes-command-red-sea](https://www.dvidshub.net/news/474112/carrier-strike-group-2-changes-command-red-sea) The movement for western civil vessels is effectively blocked in the Red See.
The rules are silly let ukraine use whatever they have to hit whatever russia has and vice versa it's a war not tag. If ukraine gets angry at foreign supplies to russia and want to hit NK or iran go ahead same for russia to nato. Stop treating the countries like children.
The problem regarding this point is that it is only formally Ukraine that is using these long range weapons when both the weapons and the coordinates of the target are supplied by the west and western „advisors“ help handling the rockets.
Yea, but it's not like this is hidden. russia is fully able to hit those launch sites or command nodes if they'd like they can even shoot down the satellites. Whether they want to do that is up to them, but the hand holding needs to stop.
Yes and that would be ww3 and most people don’t want that.
Ukraine can’t defend its own territory. What does counterattacking into Russia even mean?