Strikes put Ukraine in darkness; missiles cross into Poland - ABC News

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  perrie-halpern  •  2 weeks ago  •  168 comments

By:   ABC News

Strikes put Ukraine in darkness; missiles cross into Poland - ABC News
Russia pounded Ukraine's energy facilities with its biggest barrage of missiles yet, striking targets across the country and causing widespread blackouts, and a U.S. official said missiles crossed into NATO member Poland, where two people were killed

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



KYIV, Ukraine -- Russia pounded Ukraine's energy facilities Tuesday with its biggest barrage of missiles yet, striking targets across the country and causing widespread blackouts, and a U.S. official said missiles crossed into NATO member Poland, where two people were killed.

A defiant Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelenskyy shook his fist and declared: "We will survive everything."

Polish government spokesman Piotr Mueller did not immediately confirm the information from a senior U.S. intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the situation. But Mueller said top leaders were holding an emergency meeting due to a "crisis situation."

Polish media reported that two people died Tuesday afternoon after a projectile struck an area where grain was drying in Przewodow, a Polish village near the border with Ukraine.

Neighboring Moldova was also affected. It reported massive power outages after the strikes knocked out a key power line that supplies the small nation, an official said.

Zelenskyy said Russia fired at least 85 missiles, "most of them at our energy infrastructure," and shut down power in many cities.

"We're working, will restore everything. We will survive everything," the president vowed. His energy minister said the attack was "the most massive" bombardment of power facilities in the nearly 9-month-old Russian invasion, striking both power generation and transmission systems.

The minister, Herman Haluschenko, described the missile strikes as "another attempt at terrorist revenge" after military and diplomatic setbacks for the Kremlin. He accused Russia of "trying to cause maximum damage to our energy system on the eve of winter."

The aerial assault, which resulted in at least one death in a residential building in the capital, Kyiv, followed days of euphoria in Ukraine sparked by one of its biggest military successes — the retaking last week of the southern city of Kherson.

The power grid was already battered by previous attacks that destroyed an estimated 40% of the country's energy infrastructure.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has not commented on the retreat from Kherson since his troops pulled out in the face of a Ukrainian offensive. But the stunning scale of Tuesday's strikes spoke volumes and hinted at anger in the Kremlin.

By striking targets in the late afternoon, not long before dusk began to fall, the Russian military forced rescue workers to labor in the dark and gave repair crews scant time to assess the damage by daylight.

More than a dozen regions — among them Lviv in the west, Kharkiv in the northeast and others in between — reported strikes or efforts by their air defenses to shoot missiles down. At least a dozen regions reported power outages, affecting cities that together have millions of people. Almost half of the Kyiv region lost power, authorities said. Ukrainian Railways announced nationwide train delays.

Zelenskyy warned that more strikes were possible and urged people to stay safe and seek shelter.

"Most of the hits were recorded in the center and in the north of the country. In the capital, the situation is very difficult," said a senior official, Kyrylo Tymoshenko.

He said a total of 15 energy targets were damaged and claimed that 70 missiles were shot down. A Ukrainian Air Force spokesman said Russia used X-101 and X-555 cruise missiles.

As city after city reported attacks, Tymoshenko urged Ukrainians to "hang in there."

With its battlefield losses mounting, Russia has increasingly resorted to targeting Ukraine's power grid, seemingly hoping to turn the approach of winter into a weapon by leaving people in the cold and dark.

In Kyiv, Mayor Vitali Klitschko said authorities found a body in one of three residential buildings that were struck in the capital, where emergency blackouts were also announced by power provider DTEK.

Video published by a presidential aide showed a five-story, apparently residential building in Kyiv on fire, with flames licking through apartments. Klitschko said air defense units also shot down some missiles.

Dutch Foreign Minister Wopke Hoekstra took to a bomb shelter in Kyiv after meeting his Ukrainian counterpart and, from his place of safety, described the bombardment as "an enormous motivation to keep standing shoulder-to-shoulder" with Ukraine.

"There can be only one answer, and that is: Keep going. Keep supporting Ukraine, keep delivering weapons, keep working on accountability, keep working on humanitarian aid," he said.

Ukraine had seen a period of comparative calm since previous waves of drone and missile attacks several weeks ago.

The strikes came as authorities were already working furiously to get Kherson back on its feet and beginning to investigate alleged Russian abuses there and in the surrounding area.

The southern city is without power and water, and the head of the U.N. human rights office's monitoring mission in Ukraine, Matilda Bogner, on Tuesday decried a "dire humanitarian situation" there.

Speaking from Kyiv, Bogner said her teams are looking to travel to Kherson to try to verify allegations of nearly 80 cases of forced disappearances and arbitrary detention.

The head of the National Police of Ukraine, Igor Klymenko, said authorities are to start investigating reports from Kherson residents that Russian forces set up at least three alleged torture sites in now-liberated parts of the wider Kherson region and that "our people may have been detained and tortured there."

The retaking of Kherson dealt another stinging blow to the Kremlin. Zelenskyy likened the recapture to the Allied landings in France on D-Day in World War II, saying both were watershed events on the road to eventual victory.

But large parts of eastern and southern Ukraine remain under Russian control, and fighting continues.

Zelenskyy warned of possible more grim news ahead.

"Everywhere, when we liberate our land, we see one thing — Russia leaves behind torture chambers and mass burials. … How many mass graves are there in the territory that still remains under the control of Russia?" Zelenskyy asked.

———

Associated Press writers Joanna Kozlowska in London, Jamey Keaten in Geneva, Mike Corder in The Hague, Hanna Arhirova in Kherson, Yuras Karmanau in Tallinn, Estonia, and James LaPorta in Wilmington, North Carolina, contributed to this story.

———

Follow AP's coverage of the war in Ukraine: https://apnews.com/hub/russia-ukraine


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1  JohnRussell    2 weeks ago

Such an attack, on paper, is supposed to trigger a NATO military response. It will be a nervous time until a response is devised that lowers the temperature. 

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Participates
1.1  Sunshine  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago
It will be a nervous time until a response is devised that lowers the temperature. 

Biden likes to raise it...

Biden warns of nuclear 'Armageddon' as Putin's military struggles (nbcnews.com)

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sunshine @1.1    2 weeks ago

Don't worry...As much as Biden drank the Clinton Kool-Aid, he is not up to war with anyone.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago
Such an attack, on paper, is supposed to trigger a NATO military response.

Absolutely!

Does the west have the guts!

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.2.1  Ozzwald  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2    2 weeks ago
Does the west have the guts!

Are you hoping for World War 3, or just a limited nuclear exchange?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.2.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ozzwald @1.2.1    2 weeks ago

Tell us: What should NATO do?

What if Poland enacts Article 5?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.2.3  Ozzwald  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.2    2 weeks ago
Tell us: What should NATO do?

Don't know, but unlike you, I am not rooting for war.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.3  devangelical  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago

... it was probably an accident, since they didn't hit a school, a church, an apartment building, or a shopping mall.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
1.3.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  devangelical @1.3    2 weeks ago

Thanks for the informed analysis.  

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Principal
1.3.2  Split Personality  replied to  devangelical @1.3    2 weeks ago

Just as likely, a Russian made S300 fired by the Ukrainians at incoming missiles 

launched by Putin or his puppet in Belarus. 

What goes up... must come down.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.3.3  devangelical  replied to  Split Personality @1.3.2    2 weeks ago

launched from belarus would add an interesting dynamic to the mix ...

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
1.4  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago
Such an attack, on paper, is supposed to trigger a NATO military response.

I assume it was an accident - the natural result of typical Russian military incompetence.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
2  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.    2 weeks ago

This is a game changer for sure.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.1  devangelical  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2    2 weeks ago

a cargo plane full of cruise missiles and the coordinates for some russian infrastructure sounds fair.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2    2 weeks ago

Only if NATO strikes back!

If not, it might just happen again!

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Guide
2.2.1  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2    2 weeks ago
Only if NATO strikes back!

Which, because of the weak POTUS we have, will put the US at the forefront of the fighting.  Again.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.2.2  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.1    2 weeks ago

What are you talking about?   We now know that this was not a Russian attack and we know that NATO appropriately did not strike back.   

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Guide
2.2.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.2    2 weeks ago
What are you talking about?

I put it in plain English. [deleted]

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.2.4  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.3    2 weeks ago

Your plain English illustrates that you are not current on the news and leap to blame Biden regardless of the facts.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Guide
2.2.5  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.4    2 weeks ago

I guess you didn't ask somebody to explain it to you.  I didn't blame Biden.  I called him out as a weak leader.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.2.6  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.5    2 weeks ago

Note the phrase ‘because of’:

Jeremy @2.2.1Which, because of the weak POTUS we have, will put the US at the forefront of the fighting.  Again.

You blamed Biden for putting the US on the forefront of the fighting.   On top of that you showed that you are not even aware that no action was taken.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Guide
2.2.7  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.6    2 weeks ago

What I did was state a fact.  Biden is a weak leader.  And because of that, IF NATO chooses to take action, it willl put the US at the forefront of the fighting.  

You see to ignore the piece I quoted that stated IF NATO strikes back.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.2.8  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.7    2 weeks ago
And because of that ...

You (and certain others) seem to not understand the consequence of 'because of'.   

'X because of Y' means that 'Y caused X'.     'Put US at the forefront of fighting' because of 'Biden is a weak leader' means that you claim Biden as the cause for putting the US at the forefront.   You blame Biden for putting the US at the forefront of fighting, if NATO strikes back.

Who do you think you are fooling with this ridiculous denial of basic English?


Alternatively, if you are not blaming Biden for conditionally putting the US at the forefront, then who are you blaming?   To wit, if NATO strikes back, who are you blaming for putting the US at the forefront?

 
 
 
independent Liberal
Freshman Quiet
3  independent Liberal    2 weeks ago

Hopefully the establishment Neocons in this country take a deep breath. Most likely it was two errant missiles off target. There is a difference. I pray that the war parties approach this carefully and rationally.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.1  devangelical  replied to  independent Liberal @3    2 weeks ago
Most likely it was two errant missiles off target.

famous last words...

 
 
 
independent Liberal
Freshman Quiet
3.1.1  independent Liberal  replied to  devangelical @3.1    2 weeks ago

Grain storage facility in a small village on a farm isn't exactly a massive target. Like I said we need to approach this with caution. In an instant all our arguments become irrelevant.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1.2  Sean Treacy  replied to  independent Liberal @3.1.1    2 weeks ago
Grain storage facility in a small village on a farm isn't exactly a massive target.

Yes, if Russia meant to go to war  with Poland the first strike would be substantial. 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.1.3  devangelical  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.2    2 weeks ago

poland seems to be a bit west of the front, dontcha think?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.2    2 weeks ago

Correct. Russia has been reckless. Maybe they get a warning.

 
 
 
independent Liberal
Freshman Quiet
3.1.5  independent Liberal  replied to  devangelical @3.1.3    2 weeks ago
Poland seems to be a bit west of the front, dontcha think?

Ukraine stores weapons and trains fighters in Western Ukraine near the polish border, it has always been a target of strikes.

 
 
 
shona1
Junior Participates
3.1.6  shona1  replied to  independent Liberal @3.1.5    2 weeks ago

Well at least Ukraine does train their soldiers regardless of location..

Seems the Russians are training theirs on the front line...and we can see how that's working out..

🇦🇺🇺🇦

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Participates
3.2  Sunshine  replied to  independent Liberal @3    2 weeks ago
I pray that the war parties approach this carefully and rationally.

That won't happen.  It has been in play for months.  

Swamp loves them some Putin.

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Participates
4  Sunshine    2 weeks ago

Well the swamp got their war.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
4.1  devangelical  replied to  Sunshine @4    2 weeks ago

oh no, how will the GOP explain to their base how us liberal commies helped defeat their russian allies... 

 
 
 
independent Liberal
Freshman Quiet
4.1.1  independent Liberal  replied to  devangelical @4.1    2 weeks ago

It doesn't matter who wrote good by blue skies, if war breaks out we all lose and we won't have fingers to point with.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
4.1.2  devangelical  replied to  independent Liberal @4.1.1    2 weeks ago

meh, I won't have to travel far to find some russian sympathizers.

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Participates
4.1.3  Sunshine  replied to  independent Liberal @4.1.1    2 weeks ago
if war breaks out we all lose and we won't have fingers to point with.

Wait for it...here comes the deep dive into Russian conspiracy theories from the sable rattlers in DC.  The base will follow.

They love some Liz Inc. right now.  The heir to daddy warbucks.

 
 
 
independent Liberal
Freshman Quiet
4.1.13  independent Liberal  replied to    2 weeks ago
Perhaps you can explain to us how you helped defeat the russians.

He like most of his kind believe a simple Ukrainian flag emoticon in their oh so important social media profile would defeat Russia. I preferred them when the unsuitable bunch of keyboard special forces were volunteering to fight and Ukraine. The handful that actually showed up were asked to leave because they looked like a Layne Bryant ad.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
4.1.14  JBB  replied to    2 weeks ago

A Democratic Congress and a  Democratic Senate passes tens of billions of dollars in military and humanitarian aid for Ukraine which a Democratic President signed into law. Also, Joe Biden is credited with leading NATO and helping to unite Europe and western nations against Russian aggression in Ukraine. Any more pedantic questions?

Better question, what has the gop done?

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Participates
4.1.25  arkpdx  replied to    2 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.26  Tessylo  replied to  JBB @4.1.14    2 weeks ago

Absolutely nothing, as usual.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5  JohnRussell    2 weeks ago

Russia is denying that it ever happened. 

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.1  Kavika   replied to  JohnRussell @5    2 weeks ago
Russia is denying that it ever happened. 

Par for the course.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
5.1.1  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Kavika @5.1    2 weeks ago

I'm shocked, shocked I tell you!

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
5.1.2  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @5.1.1    2 weeks ago

LOL.  Well, Putin is gambling for sure.

 
 
 
shona1
Junior Participates
5.2  shona1  replied to  JohnRussell @5    2 weeks ago

Morning..

Russia denies everything and anything..

You can smell Putin's desperation from here.

 
 
 
George
Freshman Participates
5.3  George  replied to  JohnRussell @5    2 weeks ago

It appears Biden is sucking him of again, because you all know more than he does, so he must be defending his best friend with benfits in Putin.

Biden says it's "unlikely" missile that fell in Poland was fired from Russia

Live update: Poland says 2 dead after Russian-made missile fell on village near Ukraine border (cnn.com)

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Principal
5.3.1  Split Personality  replied to  George @5.3    2 weeks ago

News Flash George. Ukraine uses the Russian S300 air defense missile systems.

Russian made defensive missile systems shooting at incoming Russian ballistic missiles.

What could possibly go wrong?

 
 
 
George
Freshman Participates
5.3.2  George  replied to  Split Personality @5.3.1    2 weeks ago

News flash, I’m not the one claiming Putin did it like your fellow libs. And Biden is defending Putin. So who is wrong?

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.3.3  Kavika   replied to  George @5.3    2 weeks ago

Poland said this morning that the missile was Ukrainian. I would say that Poland and Biden know a hell of a lot more about it than you do. 

Poland says missile that hit it was Ukrainian stray, easing concern of escalation

 
 
 
George
Freshman Participates
5.3.4  George  replied to  Kavika @5.3.3    2 weeks ago
I would say that Poland and Biden know a hell of a lot more about it than you do. 

[deleted]

These missiles were part of the 80 or so launched at civilian targets by Russia which is a signatory to the Geneva convention which states that attacks on civilian infrastructure are a war crime. 

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.3.5  Kavika   replied to  George @5.3.4    2 weeks ago

[comment removed for context]

 
 
 
George
Freshman Participates
5.3.6  George  replied to  Kavika @5.3.5    2 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.3.7  Kavika   replied to  George @5.3.6    2 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
squiggy
Junior Quiet
5.3.8  squiggy  replied to  George @5.3.6    2 weeks ago

deleted

 
 
 
George
Freshman Participates
5.3.9  George  replied to  Kavika @5.3.7    2 weeks ago

Removed for context

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Principal
5.3.10  Split Personality  replied to  George @5.3.2    2 weeks ago
News flash, I’m not the one claiming Putin did it like your fellow libs.

My fellow libs?  Like Vic?

And Biden is defending Putin.

Biden cautioned jumping the shark and he was right. 24 hours later, everyone now acknowledges that it was Ukrainian defensive munitions that lost their target and went too far.

So who is wrong?

You apparently.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
6  Sean Treacy    2 weeks ago

This happens one time and it can be a mistake.  

Hopefully, that's all it was and is being satisfactorily explained as such.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
6.1  devangelical  replied to  Sean Treacy @6    2 weeks ago

you're probably right. let's all sit on our hands until the next mistake.

reposition ukraine's russian POW camps downwind of the nuke plants and in the flood plain of the dam putin is threatening to blow up. but first, grab some chain and cut up some rail so those russians can have some nice ankle bracelets before they start treading water, in the winter...

start to mobilize NATO forces on russia's western border, and call putin's bluff. find out how many of his generals are willing to let their families get vaporized by the desperate actions of their glorious leader that already has one foot in the grave and has delivered to them 2 decades of financial hardship and starvation in a 3rd world future. 

it won't be too much longer before one of his pals fits him with a set of lead earplugs.

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Participates
6.1.1  arkpdx  replied to  devangelical @6.1    2 weeks ago
reposition ukraine's russian POW camps downwind of the nuke plants and in the flood plain of the dam putin is threatening to blow up. but first, grab some chain and cut up some rail so those russians can have some nice ankle bracelets.

Good idea ( Gees I can believe I  saying that to you) but do you really think Putin gives a damn about those POWS? 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
6.1.2  devangelical  replied to  arkpdx @6.1.1    2 weeks ago

no, and as far as I'm concerned they're grain field compost anyway.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
6.1.3  Ronin2  replied to  devangelical @6.1    2 weeks ago

We should send everyone that wants all out war with Russia to Ukraine after removing their US citizenship. I am sure Ukrainians will welcome the new members of their country with open arms.

We won't even need to supply the newly minted Ukrainians with all of the financial and military aide we have given.

Time for the big talkers to put up. Ukraine needs you, not your rhetoric.

I am sure Putin won't drop any nukes on Ukraine with all the ex-US pats flooding the country.

This isn't a game. There are no radiation resistant humans. We won't morph into ghouls and super mutants. We won't have epic adventures across the radioactive US wasteland fighting deformed insects, animals, and plants. WWIII will be nuclear and it will end the planet.

Time for the war mongers to grow up.

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Participates
6.1.4  arkpdx  replied to  Ronin2 @6.1.3    2 weeks ago

Tell me, do you think we should back down from every two bit dictator and tyrant (think the PRC, Iran and NK) that has nukes in his back pocket? What makes you think they won't shout them off just for the hell of it or because the team lost a game. 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
6.1.5  devangelical  replied to  Ronin2 @6.1.3    2 weeks ago

meh, there's enough enemies of democracy to kill a lot closer to me than that, and I'm too old to play in the snow. my nephew already did 2+ months in ukraine 6 months ago. he loved it. he says it helped get his head screwed on straight, fixed his ptsd, and gave him closure from iraq and afghanistan. they wanted him to come back to train urban assault, but his new bride put her foot down. my cousin's kid is already deployed in eastern europe with army airborne as a chopper pilot.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
6.1.6  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @6.1.5    2 weeks ago
there's enough enemies of democracy to kill a lot closer to me than that

It may be time to call the FBI

 
 
 
shona1
Junior Participates
6.1.7  shona1  replied to  Ronin2 @6.1.3    2 weeks ago

The only war monger here is Putin..

There are 50 odd nationalities fighting in Ukraine at the moment..so Putin has actually managed to miff off most of the world..not a bad effort!!

 
 
 
independent Liberal
Freshman Quiet
6.1.8  independent Liberal  replied to  shona1 @6.1.7    2 weeks ago
The only war monger here is Putin.

The West is ecstatic over this war. The Military industrial complex is making money hand over fist and they love to pull the strings of the millions of people virtue signaling on social media with Ukrainian emojis thinking they are making a difference. They are making a difference, their public opinion is pushing the ridiculous spending on weapons, the real benefactor, your arms producers.

The masses have become shills for the war corporations. They had you all at Putin. Most would give up anything for these disturbing corporations.

 
 
 
shona1
Junior Participates
6.1.9  shona1  replied to  independent Liberal @6.1.8    2 weeks ago

Morning independent..I support Ukraine by $$$...from kitting out soldiers for winter 4 at the moment and to sponsoring injured Ukraine soldiers..two at the moment.

Plus 4 metal detectors to seek out Russian land mines so they can be destroyed...thousands have been sent over..and paid for a couple of thousand bullets..I do hope they hit their mark.

If Putin stayed in his own bloody country none of this crap would be going on full stop..

Can assure you we certainly aren't ecstatic there is another bloody war..you would have thought after two World Wars the human race would have learnt something..

But no, there always had to be one dick head..and at the moment Putin is it..🇦🇺🇺🇦

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
6.1.10  devangelical  replied to  devangelical @6.1.2    2 weeks ago
no, and as far as I'm concerned they're grain field compost anyway.

meh, on second thought forget that. they're the war reparation squad that will be happy to live in tents, eat the same meal 3 times a day and be the free labor squad that will do the rebuild. they can walk home from the border when they're done. somebody call home depot.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
6.1.11  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  devangelical @6.1.10    2 weeks ago

Why do you find it fun to trash draftees that will likely die?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.12  Texan1211  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @6.1.11    2 weeks ago
Why do you find it fun to trash draftees that will likely die?

Probably the sole reason is that they are Russian.

Maybe he feels those drafted there should resist.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
6.1.13  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.6    2 weeks ago
It may be time to call the FBI
enemies of democracy

I can certainly understand why you might be concerned...

...oh wait, I thought the FBI and DOJ were corrupt tools of the deep state, isn't that what you said before? cool. dial away...

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
6.1.14  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.12    2 weeks ago

Exactly, they could use their 2nd Amendment and overturn Putin. I'm sure that is what our tough man here would do if he had been born there instead of here.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
6.1.15  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  independent Liberal @6.1.8    2 weeks ago

jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
6.1.16  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  independent Liberal @6.1.8    2 weeks ago

Ah, what I've been saying all along.  The only beneficiaries of keeping the war going are the arms manufacturers, and they are rubbing their hands together in glee, and I'm sure their thoughts echo this meme:

R-C.ba06d1a0e348e5a31532b525bb735587?rik=Y8zS6hijl8W5CA&riu=http%3a%2f%2fwww.chequermead.org.uk%2fimages%2fshows%2f286263%2ffullsize%2f1111aaa.jpg&ehk=sLSbtqeJ40dXDXtcAHiMjri2Briuc6PEq%2f42C%2bLt7bQ%3d&risl=&pid=ImgRaw&r=0

This war is not going to end anytime soon because of continually feeding it, throwing fuel on the fire, so maybe NATO should invoke Article 5 and go in there with massive human and physical resources and once and for all end it.  I guess it's a gamble as to whether Putin will then use nukes, but I wonder if he really wants to touch off WW3 and have all major Russian cities obliterated. 

 
 
 
GregTx
Junior Participates
6.1.17  GregTx  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @6.1.16    2 weeks ago
Ah, what I've been saying all along. The only beneficiaries of keeping the war going are the arms manufacturers, and they are rubbing their hands together in glee,

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
6.1.18  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  GregTx @6.1.17    2 weeks ago

Can you verify if those items were obtained after the war started, if not before?  The article does not indicate it, but it makes a not unexpected criticism of China.  After all, what's good for General Bullmoose is good for the world and if you're not WITH the USA, you're against it, right?

 
 
 
GregTx
Junior Participates
6.1.19  GregTx  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @6.1.18    2 weeks ago

No doubt, just like if you're not for China you're against it right?

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
6.1.20  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  GregTx @6.1.19    2 weeks ago

No, not right.  Neither I nor the Chinese government or anyone here I know has ever said such a thing, but the American Ambassador to the UN CLEARLY said it about all the abstentions following the American accusations against Russia.  Her saying it was well covered by video news. 

 
 
 
GregTx
Junior Participates
6.1.21  GregTx  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @6.1.20    2 weeks ago

Really?....  One China or not?

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
6.1.22  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Ronin2 @6.1.3    2 weeks ago

I recall people saying Putin would not attack Ukraine as well.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
6.1.23  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  GregTx @6.1.21    2 weeks ago
"Really?....  One China or not?"

Oh, THAT'S what you meant.  That's a principle adhered to by the United Nations, but if a nation doesn't accept it that doesn't mean it is an enemy of China.  The point I had made by "either you're with us or else you're against us" is that those are the only two choices and if you're against us (the USA) you're the enemy.  That is not the same as accepting or not accepting the One China Principle. 

 
 
 
GregTx
Junior Participates
6.1.24  GregTx  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @6.1.23    2 weeks ago

Mmmmkay..

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
6.1.25  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  shona1 @6.1.9    2 weeks ago

Good morning Shona. Well said.

 
 
 
shona1
Junior Participates
6.1.26  shona1  replied to  independent Liberal @6.1.8    2 weeks ago

Evening independent.....there you go..I have just decked out another Ukrainian soldier with winter clothes from top to bottom... jacket, boots, thermals the lot.

So the Ukraine emojis are certainly making a difference to the Land Down Under..

🇦🇺🦘🇺🇦

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
6.1.27  Ronin2  replied to  arkpdx @6.1.4    2 weeks ago

No, I think we should get our foreign policy off stuck on stupid; and stop trying to flip former Soviet satellite states. The line was drawn in the sand long ago; Putin made no secrets about it. But like all of the dumb fucks before him (and those that will assuredly follow); Obama just had to support a coup of a pro Russian government in Ukraine. 

Remember the Cuban missile crisis? Same difference. We wouldn't tolerate a pro Russian (or China now) state that was a military threat. Why would we expect Russia to behave any differently? Also, NATO is no longer just a defensive force. Kosovo, Iraq, Syria, and Libya have proven that beyond a shadow of a doubt.  

Ukraine doesn't love us. They just need our money and weapons. We will see neither again once this is over. But Ukraine will be there hand out expecting the US to pay for their rebuilding. 

I will never support any pro Fascist government that arrests political opponents and shuts down media that doesn't agree with government positions. That instead of disbanding Fascist militias rolls the largest one into the government military and gives it's leaders high ranking positions.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
6.1.28  devangelical  replied to  Ronin2 @6.1.27    2 weeks ago
I will never support any pro Fascist government that arrests political opponents and shuts down media that doesn't agree with government positions.

changing your political affiliation from R to I soon are you?

 
 
 
shona1
Junior Participates
6.2  shona1  replied to  Sean Treacy @6    2 weeks ago

Hmm bit like the mistake that Putin wasn't drowned the day he was born..along with a few other despots I can think of.

 
 
 
shona1
Junior Participates
6.3  shona1  replied to  Sean Treacy @6    2 weeks ago

But but...that can't be right. I recall at the start of the Russian invasion they don't make mistakes..

Putin said their missiles were pin point accurate..they do not hit civilian targets..so the burnt out schools, apartment buildings, hospitals were all Western propaganda.

The cheek of your comment the Russians can make a mistake after Putin said that was impossible...

 
 
 
evilgenius
Professor Guide
7  evilgenius    2 weeks ago

I'm surprised it took this long. This will Russia's choice of warfare during the winter. It will be whack-a-mole on the electrical and heating infrastructure all winter long. I wonder if Patriot units would be able to intercept these missiles? I think Poland has a bunch of US Patriot teams right now.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
7.1  devangelical  replied to  evilgenius @7    2 weeks ago

I think the easiest solution is to rattle his underlings and let them do the heavy lifting. enough people have fallen out of windows by now that there's probably some interesting discussions happening at the kremlin water cooler.

 
 
 
shona1
Junior Participates
7.2  shona1  replied to  evilgenius @7    2 weeks ago

Morning..yes the Ukrainians will do it tough through winter but so will Putin's troops..

The Ukrainian people are very inventive when push comes to shove..and they will survive.

Zelenskyy has asked us for ship loads of coal and generators...so I am certain that will be hitting the high seas as we have done previously..and with our blessings..🇦🇺🇺🇦

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
8  Kavika     2 weeks ago

These missiles were part of the 80 or so launched at civilian targets by Russia which is a signatory to the Geneva convention which states that attacks on civilian infrastructure are a war crime. 

IMO, it's a complex situation but if we do not continue supporting Ukraine and Russia wins it will just be the first step for Russia next up Georgia and Moldova.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
8.1  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Kavika @8    2 weeks ago

Like other totalitarian states, the Geneva conventions are invoked or adhered to only when it suits them.

 
 
 
dennissmith
Freshman Silent
8.1.1  dennissmith  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @8.1    2 weeks ago

If it was a Russian weapon that hit Poland would NATO respond according to Article 5?

If it was a Ukraine weapon that hit Poland would NATO respond according to Article 5?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8.1.2  TᵢG  replied to  dennissmith @8.1.1    2 weeks ago

One would expect NATO to calmly evaluate the actual circumstances (as they did here) and react accordingly.

If a Russian weapon hit Poland the logical reaction depends upon presumed intent.   For example, if it is plausible that the weapon was the result of Russian incompetence / inaccuracy then Poland  / NATO would take diplomatic actions (some expression of warning).   If it was determined that the weapon was deliberate and was a command from Putin, then that would be an act of war.   NATO would still work to resolve the situation.   If, however, the Russian weapon attacks continued, NATO would likely engage in force (progressively, carefully, strategically applied).

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.1.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @8.1.2    2 weeks ago
One would expect NATO to calmly evaluate the actual circumstances (as they did here) and react accordingly.

Yup, as somebody famous would say: "follow the facts."

And most importantly avoid Article 5 being invoked!

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
8.1.4  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  TᵢG @8.1.2    2 weeks ago

Good morning TiG. Only just saw this post and was getting ready to respond when I saw your answer to dennis.  As I was phrasing a answer I read yours and determined that yours answered him far more eloquently than anything I could have said. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8.1.5  TᵢG  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @8.1.4    2 weeks ago

Happy to be of service, Ed.

 
 
 
dennissmith
Freshman Silent
8.1.6  dennissmith  replied to  TᵢG @8.1.2    one week ago

So it was all blather by Biden saying Article 5 would be invoked if 1 inch of NATO territory was attacked means nothing. 

NATO not upholding its committment now means nothing.

 
 
 
dennissmith
Freshman Silent
8.1.7  dennissmith  replied to  TᵢG @8.1.2    one week ago

One would expect NATO to apply Article 5?

So when does Article 5 apply?

Biden said an attack against one NATO country was an attack on all NATO countries and Article 5 would be invoked. Was that a lie or a gaffe

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8.1.8  TᵢG  replied to  dennissmith @8.1.6    one week ago
So it was all blather by Biden saying Article 5 would be invoked if 1 inch of NATO territory was attacked means nothing. 

Do you have any concept of what is at stake for the planet if NATO nations declare war on Russia?

Do you think it wise to leap into war without fully understanding the circumstances and determining that war, with all of its negatives, is the best choice?

Biden said an attack against one NATO country was an attack on all NATO countries and Article 5 would be invoked.

Are you aware that it turned out that the projectile came from Ukraine missile defense and not from Russia?

Imagine the state of the world if you were PotUS instead of Biden at this point.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
8.1.9  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  dennissmith @8.1.6    one week ago

It was a tragic accident on the part of Ukraine and not a deliberate "attack" on Poland. You seem to keep missing that. Article 5 only applies to deliberate attacks.

 
 
 
George
Freshman Participates
8.2  George  replied to  Kavika @8    2 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
GregTx
Junior Participates
9  GregTx    2 weeks ago

What a weak ineffectual pos he is...

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
10  Tacos!    2 weeks ago

If the last year in Ukraine hasn't demonstrated how inept the Russian military is, I don't know what it takes. I'm sure the missiles that made it into Poland were probably intended for some location far away from there in Ukraine.

That's assuming they weren't even launched by accident. You never know.

That doesn't mean there shouldn't be some consequence. I'm not suggesting war, but Russia should have to pay some price. Poland shouldn't be subject to living as never-ending collateral damage.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Principal
10.1  Split Personality  replied to  Tacos! @10    2 weeks ago

You have two countries using the same questionable Russian equipment.

Russia firing 100 missiles from three directions at Ukraine.

Ukraine firing Russian made S300 missiles at the incoming ballistic missiles to intercept them or

chase them down from behind.

What could wrong with missiles that have a 30% failure rate?

Totally shocked that this is only the second incident.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Principal
10.1.1  Split Personality  replied to  Split Personality @10.1    2 weeks ago
“Ukraine’s defense was launching their missiles in various directions and it is highly probable that one of these missiles unfortunately fell on Polish territory,” Duda said. “There is nothing, absolutely nothing to suggest that it was an intentional attack on Poland.”

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, at a meeting of the military alliance in Brussels, said a preliminary analysis suggests that the incident was likely caused by a Ukrainian air defense missile fired to defend Ukrainian territory against Russian cruise missile attacks.

Deadly missile not 'an intentional attack on Poland,' Polish leader says; Ukraine air defense improves: Live updates (msn.com)
 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
11  Kavika     2 weeks ago

Poland said this morning that the missile was a Ukrainian missile.

The drama is over for now and those that were complaining that Biden said it probably wasn't Russian can go back to the cave.

 
 
 
George
Freshman Participates
11.1  George  replied to  Kavika @11    2 weeks ago

I don’t see anyone complaining that Putin’s cock holster said it wasn’t him. 
maybe those blaming Russia and Putin without all the facts [deleted]

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
11.1.1  Kavika   replied to  George @11.1    2 weeks ago
I don’t see anyone complaining that Putin’s cock holster said it wasn’t him. 

Ah yes, the typical childish response. 

 
 
 
George
Freshman Participates
11.1.2  George  replied to  Kavika @11.1.1    2 weeks ago

Remember when you claimed without facts that those missiles were part of 80 launched by [Russia..deleted]

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
11.1.3  Kavika   replied to  George @11.1.2    2 weeks ago

[deleted]

What is a ''show-in governor?''. If you're attempting to name Hofmeister, she lost as I have stated to you before but Sharice Davids (D) was re-elected in her district and the republicans did their re-districting thingy and she beat them again.

Now that is damn cool don't you think?

 
 
 
George
Freshman Participates
11.1.4  George  replied to  Kavika @11.1.3    2 weeks ago

Did those missiles come from Russia? 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
11.1.5  TᵢG  replied to  George @11.1.2    2 weeks ago

We (civilians) can only go by reports.   The early reports suggested that these were Russian missiles.   Given Russia was engaged in a massive bombing attack on Ukraine and Russia does not care much about collateral damage, those early reports were reasonable.   

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Principal
11.1.6  Split Personality  replied to  George @11.1.4    2 weeks ago

Did those missiles come from Russia? 

They were manufactured in Russia prior to 1991, so yes, they were Russian missiles.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
11.1.7  devangelical  replied to  Split Personality @11.1.6    2 weeks ago

it would have been more fun if they were launched from belarus...

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
11.1.8  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  George @11.1.4    2 weeks ago

You asked the wrong question. What you should have asked was were those missiles "fired by" Russia?

 
 
 
squiggy
Junior Quiet
12  squiggy    2 weeks ago

... or we could start the theory that Poland agreed to take one to prevent WW3.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
12.1  TᵢG  replied to  squiggy @12    2 weeks ago

That is a very good hypothesis.   It is rational for Poland to not leap to war over Russia's sloppy (and, by the way, inexcusable) military action.   Good thing too because the missiles might have come from Ukraine's anti-ballistic system (per latest findings).

 
 
 
dennissmith
Freshman Silent
13  dennissmith    one week ago

No matter who fired weapons that attacked Poland, NATO has failed in its committment to adhere to Article 5.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
13.1  TᵢG  replied to  dennissmith @13    one week ago
No matter who fired weapons that attacked Poland, NATO has failed in its committment to adhere to Article 5.

What do you want NATO to do?     Do you want them to declare war on Russia (or Ukraine) in a blind, literal, unthinking, rash fashion?    Good grief, think.

 
 
 
dennissmith
Freshman Silent
13.1.1  dennissmith  replied to  TᵢG @13.1    one week ago

I expect them to do what article 5 says. They are doing nothing but allowing an atack on a NATO ally with no consequences.

 
 
 
independent Liberal
Freshman Quiet
13.1.2  independent Liberal  replied to  dennissmith @13.1.1    one week ago

NATO should retaliate against Ukraine as it's been determined a Ukrainian air defense missile hit Polish soil?

NATO is largely funding the Ukrainian war effort. On what planet would that make sense?

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
13.1.3  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  independent Liberal @13.1.2    one week ago

Planet Earth.

 
 
 
independent Liberal
Freshman Quiet
13.1.4  independent Liberal  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @13.1.3    one week ago

Well that is so true. I am not sure why so many  are willing to support war under such asinine circumstances? Nothing amazes me anymore.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
13.1.5  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  independent Liberal @13.1.4    one week ago

What is your alternative there?

 
 
 
independent Liberal
Freshman Quiet
13.1.6  independent Liberal  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @13.1.5    one week ago

NATO who likely paid for the Missile needs to train their Ukrainian proxy fighters better in the effort against Russia. Ukraine can send some sheep and grain to Poland and call it even.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
13.1.7  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  independent Liberal @13.1.6    one week ago
NATO who likely paid for the Missile

I read that it was an old Soviet missile.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
13.1.8  TᵢG  replied to  dennissmith @13.1.1    one week ago
I expect them to do what article 5 says. They are doing nothing but allowing an atack on a NATO ally with no consequences.

Your desire is insane.   It shows no consideration of circumstances and no judgment.  It is blind execution of a guideline with the most literal possible interpretation.

On top of that, the indication is that this was NOT an attack on Poland.  You would plunge the planet into WWIII for this?

As I noted, we are very fortunate that cooler minds than yours prevail.

 
 
 
dennissmith
Freshman Silent
13.1.9  dennissmith  replied to  TᵢG @13.1.8    one week ago

People were killed in Poland by either Russia or Ukraine and you say it was NOT an attack on Poland so no one is at fault. Doubt the dead and their families agree. 

What in your opinion would it take for NATO to invoke Article 5?

Nato has failed to live up to its committment. How difficult is that to understand?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
13.1.10  TᵢG  replied to  dennissmith @13.1.9    one week ago
People were killed in Poland by either Russia or Ukraine and you say it was NOT an attack on Poland so no one is at fault.

I am not the one claiming that it was not an attack;  I am repeating the news.   Do you pay any attention to what is going on in the world?   For example:

Poland’s president and NATO say Ukrainian defense against a Russian barrage likely caused the deadly blast.

Get a clue.

What in your opinion would it take for NATO to invoke Article 5?

Confirmation that Poland was deliberately and repeatedly attacked.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
13.1.11  TᵢG  replied to  dennissmith @13.1.9    one week ago

also see Ed @8.1.9

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
13.1.12  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @13.1.7    one week ago

S-300 PMU1/2 variant to be more accurate. NATO code name "Gargoyle".

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
13.1.13  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  independent Liberal @13.1.6    one week ago

Designed and made in Russia years ago. Predecessor of currently used S-400 series of missiles. 

 
 
 
dennissmith
Freshman Silent
13.1.14  dennissmith  replied to  TᵢG @13.1.10    one week ago

Does Article 5 state that an attack must be deliberately and repeatedly attacked or is that your interpretation? 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
13.1.15  TᵢG  replied to  dennissmith @13.1.14    one week ago

You asked me:

13.1.9 ☞ What in your opinion would it take for NATO to invoke Article 5?

I gave you my opinion:

13.1.10 ☞ Confirmation that Poland was deliberately and repeatedly attacked.

Do you understand that I have stated that a blind execution of a guideline (such as what you are advocating) with the most literal possible interpretation is madness as it would plunge us into WWIII on a technicality??

Further, do you understand that NATO has not deemed this an 'armed attack' and thus article 5 does not even apply??

Would you attack Russia in response to this apparent accident (which seems to be an accident by Ukraine)?

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Principal
13.1.16  Split Personality  replied to  dennissmith @13.1.14    one week ago
According to the NATO website, Article 5 specifically lays out:

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area .

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security .”
Basically, Article 5 is a principle, not a rule.
Ultimately NATO, with Poland's input, gets to decide what constitutes an
"armed conflict" and what constitutes an accident...
I hope this helps relieve you.
 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
13.1.17  Kavika   replied to  dennissmith @13.1.9    one week ago

Poland, if they wanted to take this further would invoke Article 4 before moving to article 5.

They have not at this point.

Experts note that Article 4 must be invoked before the process begins that could, potentially, lead to the invocation of Article 5 – which enshrines NATO's principle of collective defence.
 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
13.1.18  TᵢG  replied to  dennissmith @13.1.14    one week ago

Adding to this given Kavika's comment:

If Russia were determined to have attacked the territory of a member state, the focus would then shift to Article 5, the cornerstone of the founding treaty of NATO.   

As noted, there has been no determination that Poland was even attacked, much less by Russia.

It is contemplative, adult reasoning that keeps us out of WWIII (for now).

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
13.1.19  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @13.1.10    one week ago
I am not the one claiming that it was not an attack;  I am repeating the news.   Do you pay any attention to what is going on in the world?   For example:

Poland’s president and NATO say Ukrainian defense against a Russian barrage likely caused the deadly blast.

Get a clue.

We know that but the Ukrainian leader is saying just the opposite. He said it was a Russian missile:




Two questions:

Who is right?   Definitive evidence might help.

Wouldn't the errant Ukrainian Missile idea take NATO off the hook?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
13.1.20  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.19    one week ago
Who is right?   

Not knowable without hard evidence.   But it does not matter.   It is NATO who makes the call.    If NATO does not deem this to be an attack then it is not an attack per NATO.  

Definitive evidence might help. Wouldn't the errant Ukrainian Missile idea take NATO off the hook?

Of course definitive evidence is always desirable.


Now, Vic, per Dennis' view, are you in favor of NATO invoking article 5 given what we know?   To wit, are you in favor of initiating WWIII because of this single event?

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Principal
13.1.21  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.19    one week ago
We know that but the Ukrainian leader is saying just the opposite. 

timesofisrael

That article is now going on 6 days old.

Every article from the 16th & 17th has NATO concluding it was an accident of war.

He said it was a Russian missile:

The vast majority of missiles being used are all Russian S300's either left behind in Ukraine in 2009 or since donated to Ukraine by the Chech's Slovakia, Greece and others.

That's exactly why there is confusion.

Of course Zelinsky would want it to be an attack on Poland, but it wasn't

and now the issue has all but disappeared except on social media.


Wouldn't the errant Ukrainian Missile idea take NATO off the hook?

It already has, hence the frustration of this continued dead horse beat down.

As Ed Navy Doc tried to make the point days ago.

It's a matter of who fired the Russian missile, not the fact that it was made in Russia decades ago and failed to operate correctly last week.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
13.1.22  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @13.1.20    one week ago
Now, Vic, per Dennis' view, are you in favor of NATO invoking article 5 given what we know? 

We have two opposite explanations of what happened. Poland and the US defense Dept say, without showing evidence that it was most likely an errant Ukrainian defensive missile. The leader of the Ukraine, without showing evidence, says unequivocally that it was a Russian missile. To answer your pointed question: I wouldn't be in favor of NATO invoking article 5 if what Poland and the Pentagon are saying is true. To be totally honest, if push came to shove I don't think NATO would EVER invoke article 5. Thus I think this conclusion about a Ukrainian missile lets NATO avoid making such a decision.

BTW, I don't think Joe Biden would EVER use nuclear weapons even if the US was attacked with nuclear weapons.

I hope that answers your question.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
13.1.23  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @13.1.21    one week ago
Every article from the 16th & 17th has NATO concluding it was an accident of war.

And every article still has Zelensky contradicting it.


Of course Zelinsky would want it to be an attack on Poland, but it wasn't

Just like NATO would want to avoid WWIII


It already has, hence the frustration of this continued dead horse beat down.

NATO dodged a bullet, but without showing everyone the evidence, it will leave doubt in people's minds..

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
13.1.24  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.22    one week ago
To answer your pointed question: I wouldn't be in favor of NATO invoking article 5 if what Poland and the Pentagon are saying is true.

Which is my position.   Article 4 and 5 do not apply per that scenario.

To be totally honest, if push came to shove I don't think NATO would EVER invoke article 5. Thus I think this conclusion about a Ukrainian missile lets NATO avoid making such a decision.

They might not.   But the bar should be much higher than two errant missiles in isolation.    Dennis, however, thinks that is sufficient to invoke article 5.   I find that beyond irresponsible.

BTW, I don't think Joe Biden would EVER use nuclear weapons even if the US was attacked with nuclear weapons.

Likely not.   But we are not talking nuclear war.

 
 
 
dennissmith
Freshman Silent
13.1.25  dennissmith  replied to  Split Personality @13.1.16    one week ago

Thank you for the info.   

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Principal
13.1.26  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.23    4 days ago
Every article from the 16th & 17th has NATO concluding it was an accident of war.
And every article still has Zelensky contradicting it.

Zelensky maintains that whatever happens due to the Russian invasion is legally Russia's responsibility. 

On the other hand do you believe at all the garbage that Putin is pushing about 

this being a Russian defensive move and /or deNazification?

Really?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
13.1.27  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @13.1.26    yesterday
Zelensky maintains that whatever happens due to the Russian invasion is legally Russia's responsibility. 

I don't think that is what he is saying about the missile. He is saying that it belongs to Russia.


On the other hand do you believe at all the garbage that Putin is pushing about 

this being a Russian defensive move and /or deNazification?

Not a bit of it.

Nor do I believe Poland or NATO's explanation of the missile being Ukrainian without evidence.

 
 

Who is online

Wishful_thinkin
Vic Eldred
devangelical
SteevieGee


21 visitors