The Duce is back to regime change.

[Tigerace117]

I think Ukraine would have given up some of their territory if the infinitely vile denizens of the Russian Federation had an ounce of integrity between them, but they don't, so there's no incentive for Ukraine to do so.

Also what "wunderwaffe" are you talking about? You've been raving about the mystic supremacy and invincibility the West supposedly assigns to these weapons, but the last time I asked you WTF you were talking about, you came up short:

Post in thread 'Ukraine can still win, but not if Trump keeps chasing a cease-fire Russia doesn’t want'

May 17, 2025

What do you mean? I think Putin is bad news because he's waging a war of aggression in Europe and will continue past Ukraine if we appease him. Same as during World War II. Whether one cares about Ukrainians in and of themselves is irrelevant.

Who said they were invincible?

Well, I hope all the dead Russians' wives, mothers, and daughters are glad their relatives died to "humiliate" us. Can we keep this "humiliated" thing going for another 3-4 years?


I'm just pointing out why Ukrainians keep fighting and why it's in their interest since you brought up their interests...

• Tigerace117

You sure you're not projecting?

Gee dude, given the utter lack of evidence to support that claim—as usual for you—your sputtering is all the more hilarious.

I’m aware Russia kicking the shit out of America’s fascist heroes, playing a massive role in bringing down apartheid, and generally humiliating the U.S. has badly traumatized you and the other Trump acolytes, but no amount of blind jingoism can ever change the facts

All those burning “best in the world” Abrams tanks not ringing a bell? Ukraine can count the number they have left on one hand, and they performed so shittily against the Russians the Ukrainians don’t even really want more.

You sure you bothered to actually read instead of just flailing?

 

[anatta]

Foolishly is the word for it. Trump is making himself part of the problem as opposed to the solution. And his reasons dont make sense. He says he is disappointed in Putin. What has that got to do with core US interests? And I am not even sure that in the end it benefits Ukraine. One thing for sure is Trump will not provide a dime to Ukraine. He will stick to the Europeans paying for it; but will they? France has already declared it will not pay for US weapons to Ukraine; insisting it will only pay for European weapons. But a few weeks back Macron already stated that everything France is producing is being sent to Ukraine; that France is maxed out; that not to ask him the impossible? What is likely gonna be the case is that various European countries will find ways to weasel out. The UK is committed, but the UK is quasi broke. The Three Baltic Midgets are fully committed but they dont have deep pockets. That leaves Germany.

My suspicions is that Trump's tantrums only raises expectations that may not materialise

at this point since we are supplying more Patriot and ATACM missile I don't trust Trump's instincts. He has caved on his core campaign stance
You know how these things go. Parties of vested interests, or just the John McCain type Russiaphobes will be pressing Trump for more involvement in all areas . Trump needs to get out. he's in a room full of mirrors looking to make his peace plan work out..distracted

 

[anatta]

The Ukrainian air defense also appears to be in tatters. Ukraine still claims to shoot down 98% plus of Russian drones and missiles, but even its most fanatical backers in the west are not taking the claims seriously anymore. The fires on the ground state otherwise

we'll never know. there was a CNN piece tonight claiming the most intense Russian air attack on Kyiv in over a year.
I saw about 15 seconds of a wid shot of Kviv being lit up by Russian missiles/drones. Then 4 minutes of an apartment building hit by the same.
There must be an incredible amount of damage by now -but western press will never give it's audience any access

 

[Pyrite]

we'll never know. there was a CNN piece tonight claiming the most intense Russian air attack on Kyiv in over a year.
I saw about 15 seconds of a wid shot of Kviv being lit up by Russian missiles/drones. Then 4 minutes of an apartment building hit by the same.
There must be an incredible amount of damage by now -but western press will never give it's audience any access

Post #53


What makes you believe the "western press" has refused these last years to report Russia's attacks on Ukraine?

 

[pedex]

Post #53


What makes you believe the "western press" has refused these last years to report Russia's attacks on Ukraine?

Not so much refused but very one sided and biased against Russia.

 

[Pyrite]

Not so much refused but very one sided and biased against Russia.

Post #55


"Biased" in that the "Western press" points out that Russia attacked and continues to attack Ukraine?

 

[anatta]

Post #53


What makes you believe the "western press" has refused these last years to report Russia's attacks on Ukraine?

i see a lot of coverage ( apartment buildings again and again ) and not much else. Also Z has a policy of not giving out any damage data

 

[Fledermaus]

i see a lot of coverage ( apartment buildings again and again ) and not much else. Also Z has a policy of not giving out any damage data

Perhaps because apartment buildings are being hit again and again.

 

[Pyrite]

i see a lot of coverage ( apartment buildings again and again ) and not much else. Also Z has a policy of not giving out any damage data

"Also Z has a policy of not giving out any damage data"

1) I have no idea whether this claim is accurate.

2) How does this substantiate your claim the "western press" doesn't report accurately about Russia's ongoing attacks against Ukraine?

I see "a lot of coverage" as well. And I have more access to what the "western press" says about Russia's ongoing war against Ukraine (because I pay for subscriptions). I've seen more than a lot of "apartment buildings". Perhaps you should avail yourself of non-paywall sources such as nbc.com, cbs.com, abc.com, pbs.com, cbc.com, npr.com, bbc.com and others.

 

[pedex]

i see a lot of coverage ( apartment buildings again and again ) and not much else. Also Z has a policy of not giving out any damage data

Exactly but the the bias is incredibly obvious. Ukraine gains an inch or destroys something and it's all over the press. Russia takes a town and there's nothing until well after the fact. Very little is reported about the military damage Russia does or the nature of what's going on inside Ukraine. You get jailed for speaking about military losses or pointing out propaganda in both countries. Still ever since Ukraine has been slowly getting ground up by Russia the news has been very one sided. The narrative definitely flipped after the summer offensive by Ukraine failed and NATO wonder weapons turned out to be less than game changing.

 

[Pyrite]

Exactly but the the bias is incredibly obvious. Ukraine gains an inch or destroys something and it's all over the press. Russia takes a town and there's nothing until well after the fact. Very little is reported about the military damage Russia does or the nature of what's going on inside Ukraine. You get jailed for speaking about military losses or pointing out propaganda in both countries. Still ever since Ukraine has been slowly getting ground up by Russia the news has been very one sided. The narrative definitely flipped after the summer offensive by Ukraine failed and NATO wonder weapons turned out to be less than game changing.

You do realize that when "Russia takes a town", Russia is stealing and destroying land and infrastructure and people, right?

You do accept the FACT that Russia has absolutely no right to attack and take land from and to damage infrastructure in Ukraine, right?

Somehow, this isn't exactly coming through in your post. You seem to want Russia to get credit for invading and destroying Ukraine and for displacing and killing Ukrainians.

 

[pedex]

You do realize that when "Russia takes a town", Russia is stealing and destroying land and infrastructure and people, right?

You do accept the FACT that Russia has absolutely no right to attack and take land from and to damage infrastructure in Ukraine, right?

Somehow, this isn't exactly coming through in your post. You seem to want Russia to get credit for invading and destroying Ukraine and for displacing and killing Ukrainians.

News isn't about feelings or right or wrong. That's propaganda. All I want from news is unbiased reports of what's actually going on.

 

[Pyrite]

News isn't about feelings or right or wrong. That's propaganda. All I want from news is unbiased reports of what's actually going on.

And you feel that msm isn't providing sufficient information/details about Russia's taking more and more territory from Ukraine, re Russia's inflicting more and more damage on Ukrainian buildings, infrastructure etc. (your Post #60).

 

[pedex]

And you feel that msm isn't providing sufficient information/details about Russia's taking more and more territory from Ukraine, re Russia's inflicting more and more damage on Ukrainian buildings, infrastructure etc. (your Post #60).

They clearly aren't and there is much spin and outright falsehoods being peddled it distorts the realities of what's going on. The picture being painted for us by our mainstream press is severely divorced from reality. This is an enormous problem and its not confined to just the Ukraine war.

 

[Pyrite]

They clearly aren't and there is much spin and outright falsehoods being peddled it distorts the realities of what's going on. The picture being painted for us by our mainstream press is severely divorced from reality. This is an enormous problem and its not confined to just the Ukraine war.

Post #64


How do you know this is what is happening re Russia's successes in its war against Ukraine and Ukrainians?

Do you have access to sources outside of the "Western press" and the msm? If so, what are those sources? How do you determine their credibility?

 

[Rogue Valley]

They clearly aren't and there is much spin and outright falsehoods being peddled it distorts the realities of what's going on. The picture being painted for us by our mainstream press is severely divorced from reality. This is an enormous problem and its not confined to just the Ukraine war.

What is the purpose of Western news distortions vis-a-vis Ukraine?

What do these news organizations gain?

 

[Cosmo]

What was the toll on Ukraine? Or its a secret

A lot, but if Russia is to win this war and capture all of Ukraine, I'd rather they get less spoils. Either way it works out for the USA.

 

[Cosmo]

Napoleon and Hitler were backward nations?

Like I said, unless those nations are [...] also fighting against other advanced adversaries. Both Hitler and Napoleon had long been at war with the UK (Hitler had also been at war with USA, placing him at war with 2/3rds+ of the planet's industry).

 

[Cosmo]

Gee dude, given the utter lack of evidence to support that claim—as usual for you—your sputtering is all the more hilarious.

I’m aware Russia kicking the shit out of America’s fascist heroes, playing a massive role in bringing down apartheid, and generally humiliating the U.S. has badly traumatized you and the other Trump acolytes, but no amount of blind jingoism can ever change the facts

All those burning “best in the world” Abrams tanks not ringing a bell? Ukraine can count the number they have left on one hand, and they performed so shittily against the Russians the Ukrainians don’t even really want more.

You sure you bothered to actually read instead of just flailing?

So where'd you get the "wunderwaffe" nonsense you were babbling about before?

 

[Tigerace117]

So where'd you get the "wunderwaffe" nonsense you were babbling about before?

Are you denying all those fancy, supposedly “best in the world” tanks were supposed to “game changers” before the Russians turned them into scrap metal?

 

[Tigerace117]

Like I said, unless those nations are [...] also fighting against other advanced adversaries. Both Hitler and Napoleon had long been at war with the UK (Hitler had also been at war with USA, placing him at war with 2/3rds+ of the planet's industry).

Hitler invaded the Soviet Union before he was at war with the U.S., so you’d narrative doesn’t hold up.

Both Hitler and Napoleon also controlled just about all of continental Europe when they invaded, with Britain stuck on its island unable to do much to affect continental events.

And seeing as the pre invasion Grande Armee was pretty much entirely annihilated in Russia—outside a handful of surviving units the post invasion French forces Napoleon were basically brand new recruits—trying to pretend like the Russians didn’t utterly kick their asses is laughably ignorant.

 

[pedex]

Post #64


How do you know this is what is happening re Russia's successes in its war against Ukraine and Ukrainians?

Do you have access to sources outside of the "Western press" and the msm? If so, what are those sources? How do you determine their credibility?

How can you not? It's obvious and in front of your face.

For example Ukraine says yes we intercepted and destroyed like 95% of incoming aerial weapons overnight yet in the morning there's 30 or more things on the ground destroyed and burning. Math doesn't work and its blatant. Israel tried to cover up the destruction Iran inflicted too. And the Houthis. Problem is you can't block all media and the internet can't be completely censored. Ever heard of maksim krovonos? Another thing the western press doesn't want to talk about. Kinda screws up the official narrative. Too many things don't add up or just are ignored. When you see that and you also see the same phrases repeatedly your being fed BS. The sudden meme and narrative changes are glaringly obvious.

 

[Cosmo]

Are you denying all those fancy, supposedly “best in the world” tanks were supposed to “game changers” before the Russians turned them into scrap metal?

I'm just asking where you're getting all these quotes from. You always come up empty-handed when I ask.

 

[Cosmo]

Hitler invaded the Soviet Union before he was at war with the U.S., so you’d narrative doesn’t hold up.

Lend-lease to the UK was already happening. Plus, Hitler did pretty well in 1941!

Both Hitler and Napoleon also controlled just about all of continental Europe when they invaded, with Britain stuck on its island unable to do much to affect continental events.

Thank you for demonstrating your inability to comprehend things like naval warfare.

And seeing as the pre invasion Grande Armee was pretty much entirely annihilated in Russia—outside a handful of surviving units the post invasion French forces Napoleon were basically brand new recruits—trying to pretend like the Russians didn’t utterly kick their asses is laughably ignorant.

 

[Fledermaus]

How can you not? It's obvious and in front of your face.

For example Ukraine says yes we intercepted and destroyed like 95% of incoming aerial weapons overnight yet in the morning there's 30 or more things on the ground destroyed and burning. Math doesn't work and its blatant. Israel tried to cover up the destruction Iran inflicted too. And the Houthis. Problem is you can't block all media and the internet can't be completely censored. Ever heard of maksim krovonos? Another thing the western press doesn't want to talk about. Kinda screws up the official narrative. Too many things don't add up or just are ignored. When you see that and you also see the same phrases repeatedly your being fed BS. The sudden meme and narrative changes are glaringly obvious.

95% of what number fired?

If only 100 rockets and drones the numbers wouldn't match up.

If hundreds then things change.