"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (5 Viewers)

[GrauGeist]

In regards to Finland and Sweden joining NATO and thus becoming "militarized" - I'm fairly sure that both Nations currently have capable militaries.
Even Sweden's current SAAB fighters are capable of interfacing with NATO systems amd both nations have participated in joint exercises with NATO nations in the past.

Stating that becoming members of NATO makes them a threat to Russia is just an age-old whine dripping out of Moscow.

 

[buffnut453]

Dont go looking for a war. The Ukraine only had to agree to be neutral. That would have been the end of it.

No it wouldn't. From 1994, Russia vouchsafed Ukrainian territorial integrity. Then came the 2014 elections in Ukraine which brought in a new government that didn't align with what Moscow wanted. At that stage, Ukraine was entirely neutral and yet Russia invaded, took over Crimea, and fomented conflict in the Donbas.

If neutrality didn't protect Ukraine in 2014, why would it work in 2022?

 

[Admiral Beez]

Ukrainians claim to be on the border!



Assuming this is actual combat footage, good stuff...

 

[Snautzer01]

I have and the radiation levels were not high enough to be considered dangerous. Nuclear power is shunned by many but is cheap to run
and relatively safe.

My point in all this is Europe needs to start now on reliable alternatives to power requirements and nuclear should be on the list.

Nuke power is safe in a closed environment. Fukushima is now far from safe. Go off the road into 25 meters and levels rise more then is safe.

Again i am not against nuke power. But i think in the day and age it is a too easy target. And it is not cheap. Waist is a bitch and will cost us a long time. Is it better then coal power or other? I think it is. But then there is Putin.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Dont go looking for a war. The Ukraine only had to agree to be neutral. That would have been the end of it.

Ukraine only abandoned neutrality in Dec 2014, after Russia invaded them and seized Crimea. Perhaps you should read up up on the history of this conflict.

ETA -- Further to this:

Ukraine pledged neutrality when it gained independence in 1991, but changed tack after Russia's annexation of the Crimean peninsula in 2014. Ukraine's parliament voted by a large majority to amend the constitution and made membership in the European Union and in NATO into a state objective.

But not only Russia wants to prevent this. NATO has consistently refused the application, fearing this would trigger a military confrontation with Russia. And now Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has admitted that the goal of joining NATO is probably unattainable.

Is neutrality really an option for Ukraine? – DW – 03/25/2022

Russia has demanded that Ukraine rule out NATO membership. But even neutral countries in Europe are now considering joining the military alliance.

www.dw.com

[Emphasis added -- Thump]

So let's see why you believe this has everything backwards. What're the sources you're relying upon?

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Dont go looking for a war. The Ukraine only had to agree to be neutral. That would have been the end of it.

Are you naive enough to actually believe that?

 

[Admiral Beez]

Nuke power is safe in a closed environment. Fukushima is now far from safe. Go off the road into 25 meters and levels rise more then is safe.

Again i am not against nuke power. But i think in the day and age it is a too easy target. And it is not cheap. Waist is a bitch and will cost us a long time. Is it better then coal power or other? I think it is. But then there is Putin.

What's the alternative for Europe? I suppose Norway and Scotland have a lot of oil, but I'm not sure about gas. One place that does have gas is Ukraine. Once the war's over, switch over the Ukrainian gas as part of the rebuilding process. Natural gas in Ukraine - Wikipedia

 

[Crimea_River]

Dont go looking for a war. The Ukraine only had to agree to be neutral. That would have been the end of it.

Ah yes, "Peace in our time".....

 

[GrauGeist]

Posted before, but still informative regarding thw relationship between NATO and the Ukraine from 1991 onward.

Relations with Ukraine

The security of Ukraine is of great importance to NATO and its member states. The Alliance fully supports Ukraine’s inherent right to self-defence, and its right to choose its own security arrangements. Ukraine’s future is in NATO. Relations between NATO and Ukraine date back to the early 1990s...

www.nato.int

 

[Dimlee]

Dont go looking for a war. The Ukraine only had to agree to be neutral. That would have been the end of it.

Facepalm is not enough here...

 

[Dimlee]

Another video of Brimstone in the ground to ground role. Tests, probably.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I think someone here has too much Tucker Carlson exposure. It's the only thing that explains the belief that Ukraine is at fault for being invaded.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

I think someone here has too much Tucker Carlson exposure. It's the only thing that explains the belief that Ukraine is at fault for being invaded.

The victim-blaming definitely smacks of Russian apologetics, but that's why I'd like to see syscom3 's sources for this claim of his.

 

[RogerdeLluria]

The best vids to post are those from the established media, as they're responsible for confirming the accuracy of what is being portrayed. I think we've heard this before….

Don't believe established media either.

Established media massively published news of Admiral Makarov being hit/sunk. Some even published the fake video generated with a videogame.

False report that Russian frigate hit by Ukrainian anti-ship missiles

The vessel the Admiral Makarov was reportedly struck near Snake Island by Ukrainian-made Neptune anti-ship missiles.

www.jpost.com

Established media also published news of Vsevolod Bobrov being on fire. Which also resulted to be false. Incidentally the first evidences showing it was not true emerged on twitter.

If you search for Vsevolod Bobrov still plenty of news about it being on fire, but very few about it not being true.

 

[Denniss]

Does not rule out a sisterships with an 'updated' name, anything is possible in this war and propaganda from both sides.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Don't believe established media either.

Established media massively published news of Admiral Makarov being hit/sunk.

Not what I read. The established media either ignored the stories or published along the lines of the cruiser Admiral Makarov has "reportedly" been sunk.

Here's Forbes on May 6th, for example.

" there were reports the Ukrainians had landed a blow with a Neptune and the frigate was on fire. There was no immediate hard evidence to back up the rumors, although one blurry video that circulated online does seem to depict a warship in flames. The video could be a fake."

And here's the BBC.

"A Russian warship, Admiral Makarov, has been hit by a Ukrainian Neptune missile in the Black Sea and has been badly damaged, according to an unconfirmed report by a local website in Odesa. Western defence officials said they had not seen anything that confirms the frigate has been hit."

Once the sinking was found to be a hoax or at best a misunderstanding the media reported it as such. For example, here's Forbes again three days later on May 9th.

"commercial satellite imagery seems to confirm that last week's rumors about a successful Ukrainian attack on Admiral Makarov were just that—rumors. The frigate survives."

You won't get that level of fact checking and almost contrition from Twitter posters. You do you, I'm not a Mod here, but I would argue that proliferation of misinformation, including purported combat footage from Twitter does no one any good. Look at how the Ghost of Kyiv debacle made so many people look ridiculous, including those here.

Ukraine admits the 'Ghost of Kyiv' isn't real, but the myth was potent for a reason

Last weekend, the Ukrainian Air Force Command admitted the pilot was a “superhero legend whose character was created by Ukrainians.”

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

STOCKHOLM/KYIV, May 16 (Reuters) - Vladimir Putin appeared to climb down on Monday from Russia's objections to Sweden and Finland joining NATO, saying Moscow had no issues with them entering the U.S.-led military alliance they now aim to join in reaction to his invasion of Ukraine.

Though the Russian leader said Moscow would take action if NATO were to move more troops or hardware onto the territory of its new members - steps Finland and Sweden have both already ruled out - he said NATO's expansion itself was not a threat.

"As far as expansion goes, including new members Finland and Sweden, Russia has no problems with these states - none. And so in this sense there is no immediate threat to Russia from an expansion to include these countries," Putin said.

The comments appeared to mark a major reversal of Russian policy. For decades, Moscow has cast NATO's expansion to include new members as a direct threat to Russia's security, including citing it as a justification for the invasion of Ukraine itself.

Just hours before Putin spoke, Russia's deputy foreign minister, Sergei Ryabkov, said Finland and Sweden were making a mistake that would have far-reaching consequences: "They should have no illusions that we will simply put up with it."

Putin's own spokesman Dmitry Peskov, asked last Thursday if Finland joining NATO was a threat to Russia, had said: "Definitely. NATO expansion does not make our continent more stable and secure."

But faced with the prospect that his own actions may cause the very expansion of NATO he had opposed, Putin appears to have decided not to object directly.

He did however say NATO enlargement was being used by the United States in an "aggressive" way to aggravate an already difficult global security situation, and that Russia would respond if the alliance moves weapons or troops forward.

"The expansion of military infrastructure into this territory would certainly provoke our response. What that (response) will be - we will see what threats are created for us," Putin said. "Problems are being created for no reason at all. We shall react accordingly."

Ukrainian force begins evacuating from last Mariupol stronghold

Troops holed up in the last Ukrainian stronghold in the besieged port of Mariupol began evacuating on Monday, appearing to cede control of the once prosperous city to Russia after months of bombardment.

www.reuters.com

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

You won't get that level of fact checking and almost contrition from Twitter posters.

This is why I only post sources like Reuters or The Hill which either vet and name their sources, or include a caveat in their articles if the report is not confirmed.

 

[Admiral Beez]

STOCKHOLM/KYIV, May 16 (Reuters) - Vladimir Putin appeared to climb down on Monday from Russia's objections to Sweden and Finland joining NATO, saying Moscow had no issues with them entering the U.S.-led military alliance they now aim to join in reaction to his invasion of Ukraine.

With Sweden now in NATO I wonder if there's more opportunities to sell Gripens? Everyone wants F-35s now, but they may be hard to come by.

 

[GTX]

With Sweden now in NATO I wonder if there's more opportunities to sell Gripens? Everyone wants F-35s now, but they may be hard to come by.

1. They are not yet in NATO
2. There is nothing stopping nations in NATO now from buying Gripens...and yet they haven't
3. If anything F-35s will be easier than Gripens to come by.