Ukraine war/President/news

[65deluxe]

Well surprise, surprise. Will we now see a warrant our for Zelensky's arrest?
"U.N. Accuses Both Russia and Ukraine of Potential War Crimes, Summary Execution, Torture of Prisoners of War"

"A report from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) claimed that both Russia and Ukraine have engaged in the summary execution of prisoners of war, which contravenes numerous international human rights laws and treaties on war."
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2023/0 ... rs-of-war/

[gertlush]

Seems like a bit of a slowdown along the frontlines as now fully into muddy season and Russia rotates formations in Bakhmut.

Zelensky now saying no Ukie offensive without more gunz 'n ammo, which is correct. Their problem is they've pulled together one last army but what to do with it? The West is poking them in the back saying "Action!" But everybody knows the cupboard is bare now... like you think France is gonna pour in a few more billion again? Etc.

The Russians are on the strategic offensive but tactical defensive. So as soon as they see where/when the Ukies are coming they can counter it. Either let the Ukies run headlong into defenses or do the disappearing act again and let the Ukies punch air, like in Kharkov and Kherson.

Either way very unpalatable scenarios for the Ukies. Most importantly, no matter what they do, they can't win this war.

[gertlush]

Im assuming with the debt ceiling fight in the US we will see some unsavoury negotiations. A likely trade for continued Ukie funding will be cuts to Medicare and Social security, which I think Bidens controllers are fine with. So, as Thinktank has pointed out, it will truly become a situation of robbing from the poor to pay for war overseas.

[gertlush]

Also for the Dems to have a chance in '24 Brandon clearly needs to go. So all the more important to have the Ukie collapse on his record, so the next contender can draw a line under it.

Mind you another calculation might be to purposely lose the WH and force the Repubs to deal with Joes catastrophic legacy. Problem with that is, given the way the US is heading, might not be too many more elections. Will be more of a "Supreme Leader" kind of country going forward.

[Mazdatruck]

^^^^ sorry....

Well, that took 24 hours.

Russia to station tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/ ... in-belarus

[oldtrucker]

^^^^ sorry....

Well, that took 24 hours.

Russia to station tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/ ... in-belarus

I think I posted about a week ago that they will probably be deployed via Iskander srbm ...exactly what's on its way to Belarus

[GordonH]

So the huge game of chicken begins.
Citizens of Europe are the pawns in this.

[seewood]

Russia to station tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus

and?

So what? Russia ( USSR) had tactical nukes in Ukraine in the past.
Belarus is a puppet state of Russia and if they wanted to lean to western values in the past they likely would have been invaded as well when Pootin gained power, so now they get Russian nukes. If used from Belarus, they become a retaliatory target I suspect.
France has nukes in their country as does Brittan. As a matter of fact Turkey has US nukes inside their country. Oh, and Italy :
"Italy is one of five members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) to host US nuclear weapons on its territory as part of a nuclear-sharing agreement. The Italian air force is assigned approximately 40 B61 nuclear bombs, which are deployed at Aviano Air Base and Ghedi Air Base."

"As part of NATO's nuclear umbrella , Turkey continues to host approximately 50 U.S. tactical nuclear weapons on its territory at Incirlik Air Base. While the Cold War-era B61 bombs serve little military purpose, they provide tangible evidence of a continued American commitment to Turkish security.Mar 31, 2021"

[Mazdatruck]

I think I posted about a week ago that they will probably be deployed via Iskander srbm ...exactly what's on its way to Belarus

Those systems are already in place.

Putin is signalling to the West in the clearest possible terms.

If NATO tries to regime change Russia or kill Putin, Russia will defend themselves.

[Mazdatruck]

and?
So what? Russia ( USSR) had tactical nukes in Ukraine in the past.

Tactical, short range nuclear weapons being deployed sets back 40 years of de-escalation in Europe.

The reason there was so much effort made by Gorbachev, Reagan and other world leaders to not have easily deployable short range nuclear weapons on hair trigger systems should be fairly obvious to everyone, which is why I ask your age.

This significantly increases the likelihood of a full scale nuclear exchange rapidly escalating beyond control.

If Putin has 60 second to decide if a unknown missile (possible nuke? conventional? how can you tell in 60 seconds?) is on it way to Moscow or a field in between Moscow and Ukraine he might off a tactical nuke and take out airfield that launched cruise missile strike. NATO based nuked? NATO would re-nuke. Putin would have seconds to decide if its small scale NATO strike or it's NATO launching full on and his choices will be full scale attack or wait and see get nuked. This would happen in minutes.

Putin stated though this isn't anything that the Americans havent already done. The US and NATO have deployed so called anti missile systems in Poland that are suppose to be used to shoot down missilies from Iran but the warheads can be swapped out with nuclear weapons in minutes. Russia objected this for the last 10 years and were told by the US to go stuff it.

[seewood]

If Putin has 60 second to decide if a unknown missile (possible nuke? conventional? how can you tell in 60 seconds?) is on it way to Moscow or a field in between Moscow and Ukraine he might off a tactical nuke and take out airfield that launched cruise missile strike. NATO based nuked? NATO would re-nuke. Putin would have seconds to decide if its small scale NATO strike or it's NATO launching full on and his choices will be full scale attack or wait and see get nuked. This would happen in minutes.

You are assuming that NATO would be on the offensive and strike first by the sounds of it.
I don't believe NATO would strike first in any scenario, let alone with nukes.
If Russia has a go against the Baltic States ( they are NATO members) then Russia would have its butt kicked by the combined forces of NATO.

Age 65 if your asking.

The reason there was so much effort made by Gorbachev, Reagan and other world leaders to not have easily deployable short range nuclear weapons on hair trigger systems should be fairly obvious to everyone,

But, but doesn't sound like Russia has followed suit
From the Atlantic ?
During the autumn of 1991, as the Soviet Union neared collapse, President George H. W. Bush sought to reduce the danger of nuclear war and assure Moscow that NATO was a purely defensive alliance. Bush declared that the United States would not only remove all of its short-range, ground-launched nuclear weapons from Europe but would bring them back to the United States and destroy them. These “tactical” weapons were intended for use on the battlefield. In addition, Bush promised that all nuclear weapons would be removed from American warships and attack submarines. These major reductions would be made unilaterally by the United States, without any requirement that Moscow do the same. The Bush administration announced further unilateral cuts to NATO’s nuclear arsenal a few months later. One scholar has called President Bush’s efforts to reassure Moscow “the most sweeping nuclear arms reductions in history.”

In 1991, NATO forces had more than 3,000 tactical nuclear weapons. Today NATO has about 100, all of them gravity bombs that would take many hours, if not days, to be fitted into aircraft. Although the Kremlin promised in 1991 to make similar cuts, it never did. Today Russia has about 2,000 tactical nuclear weapons, a great many of them recently modernized and carried by cruise missiles.

: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... to/672727/

another snip, which I and most agree on :The psychological impact upon the Kremlin of new lines on the map, shifting alliances, and the loss of empire is understandable. But the argument that, for the past three decades, NATO has been expanding in order to attack or invade Russia is absurd.

[gertlush]

Russia certainly felt threatened by NATO expansion, and expressed that view over a period of decades.

[Even Steven]

Poland will have to tbink twice now before getting involved.

[seewood]

Russia certainly felt threatened by NATO expansion, and expressed that view over a period of decades.

The reverse is true with the countries that were in the Warsaw Pact prior to 1991. However they felt threatened by their previous master, Russia, so joining NATO and the EU was a solution to let those countries plot their own path and not have meddling from corrupt Russia.

I suspect many in Russia do believe that NATO is a reactionary force and have no intentions to invade anyone. Saying that, Russia is embarrassed about losing their sphere of influence, including Ukraine so a lot of bellicose saber rattling is the result.
Ukraine is not a NATO member so Pootin thought it was low hanging fruit to reintroduce the Russian way of doing things.
Ukraine wanted to join the EU and NATO but the Russian friendly governments in the past wanted nothing to do with that however the greater population did and still does.
Consequently we now have a disillusioned master in Russia thinking Ukraine would be a cakewalk to occupy and install a Russian friendly government with the greater population of Ukraine taking exception to that notion.

[gertlush]

Russia certainly felt threatened by NATO expansion, and expressed that view over a period of decades.

The reverse is true with the countries that were in the Warsaw Pact prior to 1991. However they felt threatened by their previous master, Russia, so joining NATO and the EU was a solution to let those countries plot their own path and not have meddling from corrupt Russia.

I suspect many in Russia do believe that NATO is a reactionary force and have no intentions to invade anyone. Saying that, Russia is embarrassed about losing their sphere of influence, including Ukraine so a lot of bellicose saber rattling is the result.
Ukraine is not a NATO member so Pootin thought it was low hanging fruit to reintroduce the Russian way of doing things.
Ukraine wanted to join the EU and NATO but the Russian friendly governments in the past wanted nothing to do with that however the greater population did and still does.
Consequently we now have a disillusioned master in Russia thinking Ukraine would be a cakewalk to occupy and install a Russian friendly government with the greater population of Ukraine taking exception to that notion.

Nothing here that hasn't been rebutted before, it just keeps going in circles. At the end of the day though Russia will impose its will on Ukraine. We're 13 months in and the collective Western leadership still has no plan.