Is Ukraine about to have a war?
… ermmmm… Vive la France.. 
It seems high. My guess is that they are visiting the front lines to get things moving and / or figure out what's the holdup. The higher ups are under pressure.
Getting there and back runs a missile gauntlet. Then there's photos of the latest sniper kit being delivered.
Stalin's first attack on Finland failed. He pulled back, regrouped and returned with a much stronger force. But if Vlad does that, Ukraine will be even better supplied, perhaps even with repainted Polish fighters.
A very useful item for the Ukrainians would be counter batteries to take out Russian artillery.
Getting there and back runs a missile gauntlet. Then there's photos of the latest sniper kit being delivered.
Stalin's first attack on Finland failed. He pulled back, regrouped and returned with a much stronger force. But if Vlad does that, Ukraine will be even better supplied, perhaps even with repainted Polish fighters.
A very useful item for the Ukrainians would be counter batteries to take out Russian artillery.
IG
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Let's be honest, the Polyarchy that props up Putin also has more than a passing resemblance to the wealthy German industrialists who propped up the early Third Reich.
In response, the rest of the world (apart from half a dozen similarly unpleasant nations) is not applying sanctions. It's conducting a 'special financial operation' to penalise Russia for its war crimes.
(I can't remember who coined the phrase but I like it.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMillan_TAC-50
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,966
Received 2,862 Likes
on
1,228 Posts
WHY??????????????????????????????????
GRAPHIC SCENES OF IN THE CAR
GRAPHIC SCENES OF IN THE CAR
Last edited by NutLoose; 8th Mar 2022 at 11:55.
Article & photos etc in The Times lunchtime update.
Poland could suffer ‘blowback’ for supplying Ukraine with jets, says Ben Wallace
Poland could suffer ‘blowback’ for supplying Ukraine with jets, says Ben Wallace
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,966
Received 2,862 Likes
on
1,228 Posts
The Nato security alliance faces a stark choice between fighting Putin now or fighting him later, a former senior British military chief has said.
Retired army general, Sir Chris Deverell, revealed he has changed his mind about a no-fly zone over Ukraine and now believes it could be necessary. If imposed it would put Nato aircraft in direct conflict with Russian planes.
Sir Deverell, who until his retirement in 2019 was in charge of military intelligence, cyber and special forces, said that “Putin seems hell bent on escalation.”
He said: “I have been against the imposition of a no-fly zone by Nato in Ukraine, believing that it would surely escalate the conflict.
“But Putin seems hell-bent on escalation. So the question is becoming: does Nato fight him now or fight him later?”
He added, in comments made on Twitter, that the no-fly zone should only be imposed if the West were willing to back it up with on the ground troops.
Sir Deverell added that Putin “will likely respond with nuclear threats”, but said that his threats were likely to be “meaningless”.
He said: “Whatever he can do to us, we can do to him.”
“The risk of course is that Putin is sufficiently mad to prefer a (very!) high scoring draw to a defeat,” he said. “But a) many of those around him may not be equally invested in his plans, and b) there are still possible outcomes that he need not admit as defeat.”
Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky has repeatedly called on Western leaders to impose a no-fly zone, warning that “this will become Europe’s problem” if the US and Nato countries don’t act.
So far Mr Zelensky’s calls for a no-fly zone have been met with stiff resistance in the US and the UK because it would mean a direct military conflict with Russia.
Petro Poroshenko, Ukraine’s former president, has said that military aircraft should be supplied to his country so that Ukrainian pilots can defend their skies.
He told Sky news: “We need to be united. This is not a war against Ukraine, this is a war against the whole West. Against US, against Europe, against the UK.
“We need a plane - a military jet. I’m absolutely confident we have no other way out. We like to have the plane now because we need to protect our airspace.
“We don’t need now the American pilots, we don’t need now the American soldiers - just give us the opportunity to protect you.”
Ukrainian foreign minister Dmytro Kuleba urged Nato to impose a no-fly zone on Monday, saying: “We heroically repel attacks of the Russian armed forces on the ground. However we do have issues with the skies.
“And The Russian air force dominates in the skies, and continues bombing our cities and killing many civilians.”
Mr Kuleba added: “We believe that the rejection of the no-fly zone is based on the lack of confidence in the strengths of Nato as an alliance, because the military might of Nato is bigger compared [with] Russia.”
Retired army general, Sir Chris Deverell, revealed he has changed his mind about a no-fly zone over Ukraine and now believes it could be necessary. If imposed it would put Nato aircraft in direct conflict with Russian planes.
Sir Deverell, who until his retirement in 2019 was in charge of military intelligence, cyber and special forces, said that “Putin seems hell bent on escalation.”
He said: “I have been against the imposition of a no-fly zone by Nato in Ukraine, believing that it would surely escalate the conflict.
“But Putin seems hell-bent on escalation. So the question is becoming: does Nato fight him now or fight him later?”
He added, in comments made on Twitter, that the no-fly zone should only be imposed if the West were willing to back it up with on the ground troops.
Sir Deverell added that Putin “will likely respond with nuclear threats”, but said that his threats were likely to be “meaningless”.
He said: “Whatever he can do to us, we can do to him.”
“The risk of course is that Putin is sufficiently mad to prefer a (very!) high scoring draw to a defeat,” he said. “But a) many of those around him may not be equally invested in his plans, and b) there are still possible outcomes that he need not admit as defeat.”
Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky has repeatedly called on Western leaders to impose a no-fly zone, warning that “this will become Europe’s problem” if the US and Nato countries don’t act.
So far Mr Zelensky’s calls for a no-fly zone have been met with stiff resistance in the US and the UK because it would mean a direct military conflict with Russia.
Petro Poroshenko, Ukraine’s former president, has said that military aircraft should be supplied to his country so that Ukrainian pilots can defend their skies.
He told Sky news: “We need to be united. This is not a war against Ukraine, this is a war against the whole West. Against US, against Europe, against the UK.
“We need a plane - a military jet. I’m absolutely confident we have no other way out. We like to have the plane now because we need to protect our airspace.
“We don’t need now the American pilots, we don’t need now the American soldiers - just give us the opportunity to protect you.”
Ukrainian foreign minister Dmytro Kuleba urged Nato to impose a no-fly zone on Monday, saying: “We heroically repel attacks of the Russian armed forces on the ground. However we do have issues with the skies.
“And The Russian air force dominates in the skies, and continues bombing our cities and killing many civilians.”
Mr Kuleba added: “We believe that the rejection of the no-fly zone is based on the lack of confidence in the strengths of Nato as an alliance, because the military might of Nato is bigger compared [with] Russia.”
It seems views are changing.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,966
Received 2,862 Likes
on
1,228 Posts
It is not at all clear to me what difference more aircraft would make to Ukranian forces: I imagine they would be very much at risk from manpads and SAM batteries as are Russian aircraft presently. The repeated clamouring of the UKR government for this - in the face of numerous refusals - makes me wonder if this is not a tactic to spread the war and make it a NATO-Russia conflict, instead of NATO aiding Ukraine. The larger conflict would represent ( imo ) the only chance of getting Russia out of all captured Ukranian territory.
There is no puff of smoke, apart from the impacts of machine gun fire on the car.
It is not at all clear to me what difference more aircraft would make to Ukranian forces: I imagine they would be very much at risk from manpads and SAM batteries as are Russian aircraft presently. The repeated clamouring of the UKR government for this - in the face of numerous refusals - makes me wonder if this is not a tactic to spread the war and make it a NATO-Russia conflict, instead of NATO aiding Ukraine. The larger conflict would represent ( imo ) the only chance of getting Russia out of all captured Ukranian territory.
Putin, like another recent leader I like about as much, employs threats to make himself feel and look larger to others.
