NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
NATO has never started a war, much less committed genocide or systematic killing of cilians. I don't know what sources you're relying on, but they've been feeding you lies.
If a NATO member shows aggression against another country, other NATO members are not bound to come to their aid. This is because NATO is not an offensive alliance, but a defensive pact. NATO members are bound to come to the defense of a NATO member who's home soil (not property) is attacked by another country.
Do you forget the Kosovo war in 1999? NATO bombed Chinese Embassy，5 missles, we have never forget that. Sorry but in Chinese's mind, NATO = the US. And if it is a defensive pact, why it expand several times in east europe? You europeans are so eager to engage the Russians? I don't think so. Why China should donate the refugees? Who should Pay for this problem? Russians?Americans?European? Not us anyway.
The Kosovo war wasn't started by NATO, not even by a NATO member.
NATO intervened in 1999 - a year after the war started - and as a consequence the conflict ended a few months later. Around 500 civilians were killed (not targeted) by NATO, while the total cost of civilian life (killed or missing) over the whole war was around 11 000.
So even this controversial intervention by NATO doesn't support the claims you made. You can criticize NATO, that's alright. But the claims you made are way off.
Im from Serbia and i survived NATO bombing 1999! What you mean by "500 civilians were killed not targeted by NATO"? NATO bombed civilian train more then 100 people died,they bombed open market with cluster bombs. Many civilians died but hey nato said its collateral damage and its allright! They bombed Yugoslavia without permission of UN,same thing like Russia doing today. But i dont remember people so dramaticly crying all over the world about Serbia and victims over here. Look at Lybia,why they start war overthere and just compare Lybia how it looked before NATO "help" and how country look now. All in all war is bad and many innocent people die,while politicans doing their job and talk bullshit on TV. I would like war in Ukraine to stop asap but it will last long since NATO countries sending more and more weapons there and i dont see whats the point,since Russia is so strong it can wipe out complete Europe if they want. PS. Britains is the most disgusting nation ever with their politics.
Got any evidence of NATO deliberately targeting civilians? Also, you're conveniently ignored the topic of the ethnic cleansing. The level of brainwashing Serbs get regarding that war is incredible.
And by the way, NATO didn't start the war in Libya. At least get your facts straight.
It's not like Ukrainians have a choice. It's either war or genocide. That is Russia's stated goal at this point. Do you want that?
NATO has never started a war, much less committed genocide or systematic killing of cilians. I don't know what sources you're relying on, but they've been feeding you lies.
If a NATO member shows aggression against another country, other NATO members are not bound to come to their aid. This is because NATO is not an offensive alliance, but a defensive pact. NATO members are bound to come to the defense of a NATO member who's home soil (not property) is attacked by another country.
Do you forget the Kosovo war in 1999? NATO bombed Chinese Embassy，5 missles, we have never forget that. Sorry but in Chinese's mind, NATO = the US. And if it is a defensive pact, why it expand several times in east europe? You europeans are so eager to engage the Russians? I don't think so. Why China should donate the refugees? Who should Pay for this problem? Russians?Americans?European? Not us anyway.
The Kosovo war wasn't started by NATO, not even by a NATO member.
NATO intervened in 1999 - a year after the war started - and as a consequence the conflict ended a few months later. Around 500 civilians were killed (not targeted) by NATO, while the total cost of civilian life (killed or missing) over the whole war was around 11 000.
So even this controversial intervention by NATO doesn't support the claims you made. You can criticize NATO, that's alright. But the claims you made are way off.
Im from Serbia and i survived NATO bombing 1999! What you mean by "500 civilians were killed not targeted by NATO"? NATO bombed civilian train more then 100 people died,they bombed open market with cluster bombs. Many civilians died but hey nato said its collateral damage and its allright! They bombed Yugoslavia without permission of UN,same thing like Russia doing today. But i dont remember people so dramaticly crying all over the world about Serbia and victims over here. Look at Lybia,why they start war overthere and just compare Lybia how it looked before NATO "help" and how country look now. All in all war is bad and many innocent people die,while politicans doing their job and talk bullshit on TV. I would like war in Ukraine to stop asap but it will last long since NATO countries sending more and more weapons there and i dont see whats the point,since Russia is so strong it can wipe out complete Europe if they want. PS. Britains is the most disgusting nation ever with their politics.
"The evidence is also now clear that Serbian forces conducted a systematic campaign to burn or destroy bodies, or to bury the bodies, then rebury them to conceal evidence of Serbian crimes. On June 4, at the end of the conflict, the Department of State issued the last of a series of weekly ethnic cleansing reports, available at www.state.gov/www/regions/eur/rpt_990604_ksvo_ethnic.html concluding that at least 6,000 Kosovar Albanians were victims of mass murder, with an unknown number of victims of individual killings, and an unknown number of bodies burned or destroyed by Serbian forces throughout the conflict."
"Death represents only one facet of Serbian actions in Kosovo. Over 1.5 million Kosovar Albanians--at least 90 percent of the estimated 1998 Kosovar Albanian population of Kosovo--were forcibly expelled from their homes. Tens of thousands of homes in at least 1,200 cities, towns, and villages have been damaged or destroyed. During the conflict, Serbian forces and paramilitaries implemented a systematic campaign to ethnically cleanse Kosovo--aspects of this campaign include the following: [...]"
On June 27 2022 06:09 maybenexttime wrote: Got any evidence of NATO deliberately targeting civilians? Also, you're conveniently ignored the topic of the ethnic cleansing. The level of brainwashing Serbs get regarding that war is incredible.
And by the way, NATO didn't start the war in Libya. At least get your facts straight.
It's not like Ukrainians have a choice. It's either war or genocide. That is Russia's stated goal at this point. Do you want that?
First of all you trying to be smart like you know what did happen in my country better then me cause you probably watched news on tv and since you are Poland i suppose you didnt survived bombing like i did. Here is one video of NATO bombing civilian train
I have friends in Ukraine and in Russia so i would be more then happy war never happened,many innocent people dying everyday while Bayden,Putin,Zelenski and other political morons talking bullshit on tv.
NATO has never started a war, much less committed genocide or systematic killing of cilians. I don't know what sources you're relying on, but they've been feeding you lies.
If a NATO member shows aggression against another country, other NATO members are not bound to come to their aid. This is because NATO is not an offensive alliance, but a defensive pact. NATO members are bound to come to the defense of a NATO member who's home soil (not property) is attacked by another country.
Do you forget the Kosovo war in 1999? NATO bombed Chinese Embassy，5 missles, we have never forget that. Sorry but in Chinese's mind, NATO = the US. And if it is a defensive pact, why it expand several times in east europe? You europeans are so eager to engage the Russians? I don't think so. Why China should donate the refugees? Who should Pay for this problem? Russians?Americans?European? Not us anyway.
The Kosovo war wasn't started by NATO, not even by a NATO member.
NATO intervened in 1999 - a year after the war started - and as a consequence the conflict ended a few months later. Around 500 civilians were killed (not targeted) by NATO, while the total cost of civilian life (killed or missing) over the whole war was around 11 000.
So even this controversial intervention by NATO doesn't support the claims you made. You can criticize NATO, that's alright. But the claims you made are way off.
Im from Serbia and i survived NATO bombing 1999! What you mean by "500 civilians were killed not targeted by NATO"? NATO bombed civilian train more then 100 people died,they bombed open market with cluster bombs. Many civilians died but hey nato said its collateral damage and its allright! They bombed Yugoslavia without permission of UN,same thing like Russia doing today. But i dont remember people so dramaticly crying all over the world about Serbia and victims over here. Look at Lybia,why they start war overthere and just compare Lybia how it looked before NATO "help" and how country look now. All in all war is bad and many innocent people die,while politicans doing their job and talk bullshit on TV. I would like war in Ukraine to stop asap but it will last long since NATO countries sending more and more weapons there and i dont see whats the point,since Russia is so strong it can wipe out complete Europe if they want. PS. Britains is the most disgusting nation ever with their politics.
"The evidence is also now clear that Serbian forces conducted a systematic campaign to burn or destroy bodies, or to bury the bodies, then rebury them to conceal evidence of Serbian crimes. On June 4, at the end of the conflict, the Department of State issued the last of a series of weekly ethnic cleansing reports, available at www.state.gov/www/regions/eur/rpt_990604_ksvo_ethnic.html concluding that at least 6,000 Kosovar Albanians were victims of mass murder, with an unknown number of victims of individual killings, and an unknown number of bodies burned or destroyed by Serbian forces throughout the conflict."
"Death represents only one facet of Serbian actions in Kosovo. Over 1.5 million Kosovar Albanians--at least 90 percent of the estimated 1998 Kosovar Albanian population of Kosovo--were forcibly expelled from their homes. Tens of thousands of homes in at least 1,200 cities, towns, and villages have been damaged or destroyed. During the conflict, Serbian forces and paramilitaries implemented a systematic campaign to ethnically cleanse Kosovo--aspects of this campaign include the following: [...]"
Do you want to try that again with the moral high ground?
hahahah dude do you ever visit Kosovo? No did you ever visit Serbia?? You read articles on internet that is writen by USA so they can brainwash people like you to justify attack on Yugoslavia.
Graham Phillips is a well-known liar who used to work for pro-Russian propaganda news and still does pro-Russian propaganda to this day, in fact he has done so during this war against Ukraine. The video you posted doesn't show anything except a heavily edited clip.
You can criticize NATO. But if you spread misinformation and propaganda you'll get called out.
NATO has never started a war, much less committed genocide or systematic killing of cilians. I don't know what sources you're relying on, but they've been feeding you lies.
If a NATO member shows aggression against another country, other NATO members are not bound to come to their aid. This is because NATO is not an offensive alliance, but a defensive pact. NATO members are bound to come to the defense of a NATO member who's home soil (not property) is attacked by another country.
Do you forget the Kosovo war in 1999? NATO bombed Chinese Embassy，5 missles, we have never forget that. Sorry but in Chinese's mind, NATO = the US. And if it is a defensive pact, why it expand several times in east europe? You europeans are so eager to engage the Russians? I don't think so. Why China should donate the refugees? Who should Pay for this problem? Russians?Americans?European? Not us anyway.
The Kosovo war wasn't started by NATO, not even by a NATO member.
NATO intervened in 1999 - a year after the war started - and as a consequence the conflict ended a few months later. Around 500 civilians were killed (not targeted) by NATO, while the total cost of civilian life (killed or missing) over the whole war was around 11 000.
So even this controversial intervention by NATO doesn't support the claims you made. You can criticize NATO, that's alright. But the claims you made are way off.
Im from Serbia and i survived NATO bombing 1999! What you mean by "500 civilians were killed not targeted by NATO"? NATO bombed civilian train more then 100 people died,they bombed open market with cluster bombs. Many civilians died but hey nato said its collateral damage and its allright! They bombed Yugoslavia without permission of UN,same thing like Russia doing today. But i dont remember people so dramaticly crying all over the world about Serbia and victims over here. Look at Lybia,why they start war overthere and just compare Lybia how it looked before NATO "help" and how country look now. All in all war is bad and many innocent people die,while politicans doing their job and talk bullshit on TV. I would like war in Ukraine to stop asap but it will last long since NATO countries sending more and more weapons there and i dont see whats the point,since Russia is so strong it can wipe out complete Europe if they want. PS. Britains is the most disgusting nation ever with their politics.
"The evidence is also now clear that Serbian forces conducted a systematic campaign to burn or destroy bodies, or to bury the bodies, then rebury them to conceal evidence of Serbian crimes. On June 4, at the end of the conflict, the Department of State issued the last of a series of weekly ethnic cleansing reports, available at www.state.gov/www/regions/eur/rpt_990604_ksvo_ethnic.html concluding that at least 6,000 Kosovar Albanians were victims of mass murder, with an unknown number of victims of individual killings, and an unknown number of bodies burned or destroyed by Serbian forces throughout the conflict."
"Death represents only one facet of Serbian actions in Kosovo. Over 1.5 million Kosovar Albanians--at least 90 percent of the estimated 1998 Kosovar Albanian population of Kosovo--were forcibly expelled from their homes. Tens of thousands of homes in at least 1,200 cities, towns, and villages have been damaged or destroyed. During the conflict, Serbian forces and paramilitaries implemented a systematic campaign to ethnically cleanse Kosovo--aspects of this campaign include the following: [...]"
Do you want to try that again with the moral high ground?
hahahah dude do you ever visit Kosovo? No did you ever visit Serbia?? You read articles on internet that is writen by USA so they can brainwash people like you to justify attack on Yugoslavia.
I've been to Kosovo. I'm not sure how that makes me an expert... but I agree with Magic Powers assessment.
And yes, NATO bombed Serbia. I would be somewhat confident in saying they didn't deliberately target civilians, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were very careless about targeting... Iraq (and Afghanistan) have shown us exactly how "precise" precision bombing is. And the technology was even less mature in the Kosovo war.
Kharkiv is constantly getting hit by missile strikies in last two weeks, most of the missiles are launched from Belgogod and it happens daily around midnight local time as if there is a schedule, plus sometimes there are extra launches at random times. Intensity increased, civilan terror continues and the locals are jacked on cortisol. In worst days there were up to 14 missiles, just an hour ago today it was 6 or 7 hits with causalties. Yesterday one of those landed close to the residential bulding where my mom and grandmom are currently living in the apps where me and my family were living before the evacuation, 2 strories residential house (if anyone is in doubts and want to see the pics or video evidence on what's left from those building - just let me know) near kids hospital was leveled an this is the very geographic center of the city. Due to that it is unsafe in the city no matter where you are since it's not artillery, but missiles. Should I say there was/is 0 military presence? So when someone gonna argue that terrorstate is using only precision weapons - punch them in a face.
And as far as I know it happens not only with Kharkiv, but lately also in Kyiv, Mykolaiv, Chernihiv, Odesa.
The only thing I have no certainity is WHY? Either orcs are using outdated soviet maps, or the only thing they got left is a soviet era missiles that has little to do with precision, or maybe it's deliberate civilian terror? Or perhaps even worse - a combination of everything that was mentioned. Is that how "liberation" looks by the kremlin playbook? What a joke.
The sooner warmongers in kremlin are beheaded the better life will be for everybody.
On June 26 2022 05:10 FiWiFaKi wrote: EU having roughly 3x the population of Russia, but roughly 1/3rd the gdp% spending puts them on pretty even footing.
UK has higher military budget than Russia. For UK that's 2.2% GDP while for Russia it's 4.1%. China has 5x the military spending of Russia, but for them it's only 1.7% GDP. For smaller countries Japan has about 80% of Russia's military budget but only spends 1.1% of their GDP on it.
So, having big and modern military doesn't necessarily require huge spending GDP-wise. It all hinges on how good your economy is.
What you're saying is exactly what I'm arguing against. Absolute spending in terms in absolute billion dollars isn't a good measure. Gdp per capita is a way better measure, because Russia is able to pay their personnel way less, and is able to make tanks for way cheaper than the US because they can pay their employees less. That's why %gdp * population is a way better measure than the number you're using. At least for industrialized countries.
That's why Wikipedia lists % of gdp as well as absolute spending. For example Russia has similar spending to both France or Germany, but I have no doubt that Russia would roll through either of them 1 on 1. And a country like Turkey, even though they spend 25% of Germany or France have a military on par if not stronger than them. Sure, France likely has stronger special operation power, but when it comes to all out war, with only 200k troops, that spending doesn't transfer well.
What??? Russia can't even roll through Ukraine 1 on 1.
Not sure if satire or not, given how delusional some people on this forum are. The only reason Ukr is able to hang on is because of massive external support.
There are a lot of reasons, why Ukraine is performing better in the war, than many expected, because they aren't taking a lot of factors into account. Bear in mind, I will be talking only about Ukraine's own factors, not Russian shortcomings.
1) Military budget. There are few factors in play. 1.1. Nominal or PPP (per purchasing power) spending. RvB posted an exellent article from WarontheRocks on the subject, I'll even pin a link to his post in case someone missed it due to being at the end of the page, I highly recommend this reading. https://tl.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=27957801 Now if we compare Ukraine's nominal GDP with PPP GDP Nominal (53rd place with 200 billion USD, i'll take IMF number) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal) PPP (42nd with 600 billion, again IMF) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP) It's 3x difference. Add this to the fact that before the war Ukraine have mostly relied on domestically produced or modernized equipment, and didn't buy much stuff abroad, their spending was mostly domestic. So while the nominal Ukrainan defence budget is around 4-5 billion a year in the last 5 years (depending on the source) together with the difference between nominal and PPP GDP in Ukraine it gives actual military budget of something like 12-15 billion (probably even more), if we are talking about relative ability to supply, maintain and operate men and equpment in comparison with US, UK or Germany (whose nominal and PPP GDP is much more closer to each other, if not the same).
1.2. Even with PPP in mind, salaries in UA army are much lower than in, let's say, Bundeswehr. There is a read on UA military salaries (need Google translate though) in 2020-2021: https://myukraina.com.ua/finansy/zarplata/kakaya-budet-zarplata-kontraktnika-v-ukraine.html There was a substantual (almost x2 multiplier) bonus for those who served on Donbass, but for those privates/NCOs in the rear average number is 300-400 USD a month. Considering x3 PPP modifier, you can compare it with other European militaries: https://euromil.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Working-Paper-Major-GS-René-Schulz-with-Annex.pdf A read on European military salaries as of 2019 (PPP modificator included). It won't be the lowest, but still on the lower end. Which means that manpower is relatively cheap to maintain (in comparison with the likes of UK and Germany with their higher living standards) and more money may go on equipment.
1.3. Distribution of money. UA main focus is its ground forces. Air force is mostly maintained on operable level, without huge modernizations (and I'm not even talking about bringing in new models of planes or heavy SAM systems, even foreign-bought). Navy is maintained on a level of coastal mosquito fleet, with little to no upgrades at all. So in comparison, ground forces get a lion's share, which is not the case with most large EU militaries (even Germany spends a lot on it's Navy).
1.4. Production. UA, while producing some new equipment (like BTR-4, Stugna ATGM, or Neptune anti-ship missile) mostly spent money on maintenance and upgrade of already existing large stockpile of Soviet-era equipment. Which is much cheaper than producing new stuff (which again, huge EU militaries spend a lot of money on, and don't forget to add RnD into that).
1.5. Western aid. I believe most of the aid in terms of NATO training and equipment (both before and during the war) provided was not reflected in the figures of Ukrainian military budget (since it was aid financed by NATO members themselves). So these numbers add on top of the existing budget figures.
TLDR: Ukraine can field much more men, guns and vehicles for the same buck, than US, UK or Germany. Not saying it will be the same quality, generally it won't, but it will be much larger numbers (and it actually were, even before the war UA ground forces numbered 145 000 men (according to Military Balance 2021) + 100 000 National Guard (which is, while considered "paramilitary" is basically a second, internal, army) against 63 000 in Bundeswehr Ground forces, despite Ukraine having 10 times less military budget.
2. Clear enemy. UA doesn't have any hypotetical scenarios of who they will probably fight, their enemy for last 8 years is unquestionably Russia, hence all training, battle plans, etc. are made around that.
3. Combat experience. In 2021 in Ukraine it was reported that there are 407 thousand Donbass veterans (and 787 thousand combat veterans overall, but this number includes WW2 and Afghanistan veterans). So it probably makes Ukraine 3rd country after US and Russia in terms of combat veteran numbers. For Russia the number is 1,5 million, didn't look up US numbers, but it will be top-1 for sure. But in Russia the last major war, which a lot of people came through was 2nd Chechen war, and it's hot phase ended 15 years ago, so most of them aren't serving. In Ukraine most of these 400 thousand men are in the trenches from the start, and these are people with combat experience against the same opponent they were facing before. That's why a month or so ago I was saying that UA probably has better infantry and artillery, because these two were the main tools of Donbass war after battle at Debaltsevo in 2015, so UA veterans are experienced exactly in this field.
4. Defences built during Donbass war. For 8 years Ukrainian army have been digging in, constructing defensive lines worthy of WW1, with multiple layers of trenches, firing positions, observation posts, minefields, barbed wire, whole concrete bunkers. One DPR tank commander said that he had to spend all HE ammo payload (it depends, but could be from 15 to 30 shells) of his tank to destroy just one of those. https://bmpvsu.ru/lines.php Here is the good map of those. While in the north and south defence line was outflanked, it's depth is still helping UA to hold the ground.
5. Mass moblilization. Ukrainian army numbers are now range from 700 000 to 1 million, according to different UA official statements, so they currently outnumber Russians like 2-to-1, or even 3-to-1.
6. Well, Western aid. Money, weapons, intelligence, communication etc. Despite it being less than necessary for UA to change the course of the war at the moment, it's still helping a ton.
On June 27 2022 06:09 maybenexttime wrote: Got any evidence of NATO deliberately targeting civilians? Also, you're conveniently ignored the topic of the ethnic cleansing. The level of brainwashing Serbs get regarding that war is incredible.
And by the way, NATO didn't start the war in Libya. At least get your facts straight.
It's not like Ukrainians have a choice. It's either war or genocide. That is Russia's stated goal at this point. Do you want that?
First of all you trying to be smart like you know what did happen in my country better then me cause you probably watched news on tv and since you are Poland i suppose you didnt survived bombing like i did. Here is one video of NATO bombing civilian train https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oF2LeXQNmus
I have friends in Ukraine and in Russia so i would be more then happy war never happened,many innocent people dying everyday while Bayden,Putin,Zelenski and other political morons talking bullshit on tv.
NATO has never started a war, much less committed genocide or systematic killing of cilians. I don't know what sources you're relying on, but they've been feeding you lies.
If a NATO member shows aggression against another country, other NATO members are not bound to come to their aid. This is because NATO is not an offensive alliance, but a defensive pact. NATO members are bound to come to the defense of a NATO member who's home soil (not property) is attacked by another country.
Do you forget the Kosovo war in 1999? NATO bombed Chinese Embassy，5 missles, we have never forget that. Sorry but in Chinese's mind, NATO = the US. And if it is a defensive pact, why it expand several times in east europe? You europeans are so eager to engage the Russians? I don't think so. Why China should donate the refugees? Who should Pay for this problem? Russians?Americans?European? Not us anyway.
The Kosovo war wasn't started by NATO, not even by a NATO member.
NATO intervened in 1999 - a year after the war started - and as a consequence the conflict ended a few months later. Around 500 civilians were killed (not targeted) by NATO, while the total cost of civilian life (killed or missing) over the whole war was around 11 000.
So even this controversial intervention by NATO doesn't support the claims you made. You can criticize NATO, that's alright. But the claims you made are way off.
Im from Serbia and i survived NATO bombing 1999! What you mean by "500 civilians were killed not targeted by NATO"? NATO bombed civilian train more then 100 people died,they bombed open market with cluster bombs. Many civilians died but hey nato said its collateral damage and its allright! They bombed Yugoslavia without permission of UN,same thing like Russia doing today. But i dont remember people so dramaticly crying all over the world about Serbia and victims over here. Look at Lybia,why they start war overthere and just compare Lybia how it looked before NATO "help" and how country look now. All in all war is bad and many innocent people die,while politicans doing their job and talk bullshit on TV. I would like war in Ukraine to stop asap but it will last long since NATO countries sending more and more weapons there and i dont see whats the point,since Russia is so strong it can wipe out complete Europe if they want. PS. Britains is the most disgusting nation ever with their politics.
"The evidence is also now clear that Serbian forces conducted a systematic campaign to burn or destroy bodies, or to bury the bodies, then rebury them to conceal evidence of Serbian crimes. On June 4, at the end of the conflict, the Department of State issued the last of a series of weekly ethnic cleansing reports, available at www.state.gov/www/regions/eur/rpt_990604_ksvo_ethnic.html concluding that at least 6,000 Kosovar Albanians were victims of mass murder, with an unknown number of victims of individual killings, and an unknown number of bodies burned or destroyed by Serbian forces throughout the conflict."
"Death represents only one facet of Serbian actions in Kosovo. Over 1.5 million Kosovar Albanians--at least 90 percent of the estimated 1998 Kosovar Albanian population of Kosovo--were forcibly expelled from their homes. Tens of thousands of homes in at least 1,200 cities, towns, and villages have been damaged or destroyed. During the conflict, Serbian forces and paramilitaries implemented a systematic campaign to ethnically cleanse Kosovo--aspects of this campaign include the following: [...]"
Do you want to try that again with the moral high ground?
hahahah dude do you ever visit Kosovo? No did you ever visit Serbia?? You read articles on internet that is writen by USA so they can brainwash people like you to justify attack on Yugoslavia.
I've been to Kosovo. I'm not sure how that makes me an expert... but I agree with Magic Powers assessment.
And yes, NATO bombed Serbia. I would be somewhat confident in saying they didn't deliberately target civilians, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were very careless about targeting... Iraq (and Afghanistan) have shown us exactly how "precise" precision bombing is. And the technology was even less mature in the Kosovo war.
If anything, Afghanistan is evidence that the West is trying to minimize civilian casualties. Yes, mistakes can happen, but if you compare the Western invasion with that of the Soviet Union, the latter had about 350 times higher annual civilian death toll.
On June 27 2022 06:56 Dav1oN wrote: Kharkiv is constantly getting hit by missile strikies in last two weeks, most of the missiles are launched from Belgogod and it happens daily around midnight local time as if there is a schedule, plus sometimes there are extra launches at random times. Intensity increased, civilan terror continues and the locals are jacked on cortisol. In worst days there were up to 14 missiles, just an hour ago today it was 6 or 7 hits with causalties. Yesterday one of those landed close to the residential bulding where my mom and grandmom are currently living in the apps where me and my family were living before the evacuation, 2 strories residential house (if anyone is in doubts and want to see the pics or video evidence on what's left from those building - just let me know) near kids hospital was leveled an this is the very geographic center of the city. Due to that it is unsafe in the city no matter where you are since it's not artillery, but missiles. Should I say there was/is 0 military presence? So when someone gonna argue that terrorstate is using only precision weapons - punch them in a face.
And as far as I know it happens not only with Kharkiv, but lately also in Kyiv, Mykolaiv, Chernihiv, Odesa.
The only thing I have no certainity is WHY? Either orcs are using outdated soviet maps, or the only thing they got left is a soviet era missiles that has little to do with precision, or maybe it's deliberate civilian terror? Or perhaps even worse - a combination of everything that was mentioned. Is that how "liberation" looks by the kremlin playbook? What a joke.
The sooner warmongers in kremlin are beheaded the better life will be for everybody.
That's really tragic. Indiscriminate targeting of civilian areas...
I'm not sure but I think that maybe Russia is conducting this attacks from Belgorod for example as to force Ukrainians to go into Russian territory so they can officially declare it as war to their public?
One has to wonder how much that really matters. In normal times, defaulting tell you a country is incapable of adjusting its spending and taxation and therefore is unlikely to meet future obligations, increasing the cost of future funding. Russia's default seem to have little to do with inability to get the money, but moreso with having difficulty in accessing payment infrastructure.
One has to wonder how much that really matters. In normal times, defaulting tell you a country is incapable of adjusting its spending and taxation and therefore is unlikely to meet future obligations, increasing the cost of future funding. Russia's default seem to have little to do with inability to get the money, but moreso with having difficulty in accessing payment infrastructure.
This has very little impact now but in the future, when all of this is over, Russia will have a hard time securing loans and investment which will make it all that much harder to get their economy back on track.
One has to wonder how much that really matters. In normal times, defaulting tell you a country is incapable of adjusting its spending and taxation and therefore is unlikely to meet future obligations, increasing the cost of future funding. Russia's default seem to have little to do with inability to get the money, but moreso with having difficulty in accessing payment infrastructure.
This has very little impact now but in the future, when all of this is over, Russia will have a hard time securing loans and investment which will make it all that much harder to get their economy back on track.
Why would it (as a consequence of the default)? Their default today says nothing of their ability to pay in a post war scenario.
One has to wonder how much that really matters. In normal times, defaulting tell you a country is incapable of adjusting its spending and taxation and therefore is unlikely to meet future obligations, increasing the cost of future funding. Russia's default seem to have little to do with inability to get the money, but moreso with having difficulty in accessing payment infrastructure.
This has very little impact now but in the future, when all of this is over, Russia will have a hard time securing loans and investment which will make it all that much harder to get their economy back on track.
Why would it (as a consequence of the default)? Their default today says nothing of their ability to pay in a post war scenario.
Because to an investor, there is no guarantee that this won't happen again. Russia has proven that it gets itself into shitty situations where it cannot pay you back.
Speaking on Russian's channel-1 television, Andrey Gurulyov, a state Duma politician, said London will be hit first if the blockage of the Russian exclave Kaliningrad let to war.
I watched the video, he said "We will destroy their satelites and 100% missile defence system.It will not be Warsaw or Paris or Berlin, the first to be hit will be London, it is crystal clear that the threat to the world comes from the Anglo-Saxons"
So I am just curious, since UK is neither European nor American, IF Russian dropped a tactical-nuclear-missile in London，will the the situation instantly cool down or will a real nuclear war begin?
EPT
