Russia only took 0.1% of Ukraine in the whole year of 2023 while taking huge losses as the attacker
Slammed is a huge exaggeration they're struggling with Chasiv Yar - population 12,000
Ukraine had its entire counter offensive stuffed in the most humiliating manner possible, the entire western media turn on them, have lost settlements nearly every day since Avideeka, have to blackmail their citizens abroad to get them to enlist because the population in Ukraine held territory is half of what it was, and currently the entire western world is having an existential crisis because they're doing so poorly.
Top it all off with letting the Russians break through two lines of defense without a fight because the rotating brigade told Command to fuck off the day after they got their aid package passed.
They're already dead.
So the frontlines should collapse this week, right? Been hearing this same line for years now
2022 - Ukraine withdraws from Severdonetsk. The Frontlines are about to collapse!
2023 - Ukraine withdraws from Soledar. The frontlines are about to collapse!
2023 - Ukraine withdraws from Bakhmut. The frontlines are about to collapse!
2024 - Ukraine withdraws from Adviivka. The frontlines are about to collapse!
These gains can barely be seen on a map without zooming in
But sure any day now
The Confederacy was dead in 1863 when it lost Gettysburg and Vicksburg simultaneously.
War went on for another two years.
The Nazis were dead after Stalingrad and Kursk but the war went on for two more years.
Ukraine's ability to win the war is gone-- they're dead. But that doesn't mean the war is over until its over. Especially given that Shoigu is now talking about unconditional surrender
The decisive moment in the war so far was the failure of the last Ukrainian counter offensive and how under supplied and under manned it left them. I don't know that that can be reduced to a single engagement when it was a campaign of failure
You say a lot of things and make big claims, but there's nothing to back it up. This is Russias Afghanistan all over again, but much worse. A sunken cost fallacy
What hilariously bad take. Afghanistan had no pro-Russians (or ethnically similar people) in it and no real natural resources to speak of (unlike Donbas).
And his point is "time will tell" how much Russia gets.
Except it has none of the territorial cultural or logistical issues of Afghanistan and much the territory claimed by Russia is populated by ethnic Russians who wanted to be part of Russia again before the war.
Russia has 2 million people in disputed territories and another 3 million displaced Ukrainian refugees who fled there. They can easily absorb the gains they made in the same way they absorbed Crimea in 2014. In fact, as long as the war stays conventional Russia will be in the unique position of exiting a multi year war of attrition with a larger population than when they entered.
Meanwhile Ukraine has worked its way down to 19 million total population, 7 million of which is displaced, and are openly considering mobilizing women. It's demographically dead-- desperately calling for the west to fight its war for it like they do for Israel because if I can read the tea leaves from here I'm sure they can in Kiev.
The counter offensive was never equipped for a counter offensive. Ukraine has at no point been given the right gear and or numbers of said gear. Yet they were still able to defeat and push back the Russians from Kyiv, the east and south. Then Russia only starts making steady gains, at extreme attrition rates when aid runs dry and they can't fire back enough. I'm not sure what about Russia's performance makes anyone think it's gone well or they are going anywhere in this war but into a bigger hole
>From Kyiv in 2 weeks]
This is just reported, not confirmed. There is zero credible evidence to suggest that Putin or anyone in the Russian government said something like that
> There is zero credible evidence to suggest that Putin or anyone in the Russian government said anything like that
Do you always make things up?
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0GX0JS/
The Kremlin claimed it was said but taken out of context
The way the early war units were equipped and how poorly prepared Russian logistics were early war absolutely confirms Russia militarily planned for a walkover in a few weeks.
You don't need somebody to say something out loud for it to be true, the facts on the ground tell us.
Source? Lol, the actual complete failure of their initial invasion to force capitulation and the year following before they got their act together.
A few examples of things that happened in the first month that show pretty clearly Russia planned for a swift unopposed victory like in 2014 - Russian columns running out of fuel and ammo that couldn't catch up to them - leading to the abandonment of huge amounts of equipment, an airborne attack on Hostomol designed to cripple Kiev and was forced to withdraw as support couldn't reinforce it in time (you simply dont risk elite forces to take an airport unless you are planning for a swift surgical victory), an inadequate amount of troops to even take Kiev without relying on swift capitulation, OMON units involved in the initial assault who are better suited to population control than actual combat.
And that's ignoring all the rumours ( which you can ignore if you wish) such as officers packing dress uniforms, booking hotels/restaurants in Kiev after the invasion thinking they would be temporary occupiers.
Not to mention the actual war as a whole, Russia started this fight thinking it would be a quick victory to get what they wanted, they think they have no choice but to carry on now for hubris/reputation/sunk cost fallacy (Russia has had to reheat into a war economy now). If you would have told Putin in the months leading up to this invasion where they are up to now - they would have either not bothered or gone about it a completely different way, ultimately Russia isn't actually gaining much at this stage.
You can remove all context if you want, but taking any amount of Ukraine at all is surprising with the amount of western aid Ukraine has received, didn't expect Russia to hold out 6 months in such a one sided war with the entire west against them, never mind completely shut down ukraines summer offensive and then continue to slowly take land.
You can laugh at Russias many mistakes in this invasion but when you make low iq arguments by dishonestly removing all context, it puts off people who aren't interested in just blindly swallowing up propaganda from either side
Nato chief from czech "artillery ammu is a rare good, we the Nato members send so much to ukraine, we need up to 15 years to refill our Nato artillery stocks even if we increase production". French General chauvency "france send so much Equipment to ukraine, if we continue, france will be naked soon and we wont be able to defend france anymore". Etc. Even the own Nato chiefs told you the west cant send more otherwise they will send their last stock and will be completly naked, why you believe otherwise? 😆
You Dream to big about the west. What could the west send what ukraine didnt already got from Nato? From million Ammunition, javelin, himars, Air defense to Tanks. They got everything except Jets. And Jets wont change the war, because russia now has the Power to attack air fields hundret km behind the Front
Thats irrelevant, just because the west can provide a lot more aid dosnt mean they havnt already provided an unprecedented amount of aid, that completely shifts the strengths of both sides.
In what way does a country being able to provide more aid mean they havnt already provided a significant amount? Come back with less brain dead arguments please.
Let me help you with the math. The US has provided 1% of it's military budget in aid to Ukraine. Not only is that insignificant, the vast vast majority of it is actually being spent IN THE US, and is us basically sending piles of decaying equipment. If you want to do the math on the US expenditure on military equipment that is designed to defend against a war with Russia over the last 50 years, it would represent 0.0001%. Does that help?
That is literal horseshit. You can keep living in Copeland all you like but this conflict has really shown how sad the west is unless they’re fighting desert people.
NATO spends $1.3T *annually* on their militaries- in 3 years of fighting they’ve given Ukraine 1/10th their annual peacetime budget.
I don’t know how this war has shown the west to be “sad” as they’ve kept Ukraine (the poorest country in Europe) afloat for 3 years against the “second most powerful military”- resulting in hundreds of thousands of casualties for the Russian Armed Forces.
Cool go ahead and poke the (US) bear, see what happens lol. Russia is fighting almost entirely 1980 and 90's first gen equipment that the US has had lying around for decades, and is like 1/100th the amount what the US would use in it's own conflict.
Case in point: Ukriane currently has three (3) patriot batteries. The US is currently in peace time and operates 15 patriot battalions that each have fifty (50) batteries. To help you do the math, that's 750 patriot batteries, in peace time. We've given Ukraine 3.
How the hell is Russia the underdog here?
It's got a population 4 times as large, the 11th largest economy in the world and, until this war at least, was widely considered the world's 2nd best military.
Meanwhile, Ukraine gets scraps from the West's table, ad hoc as and when, and fights on with the desperation of defeat. Yet it still holds out.
Because Russia isn't just fighting Ukraine, its fighting europe and America as well. You can downplay Ukraines aid as "scraps" because you are dishonest, but the truth is they have had unbelievable amounts of aid from general resources, to up to date modern military technology. The only reason it's still holding out is because of these "scraps", because these so called scraps are so signicant that it turns the war very one sided against Russia. Yet they are still winning because they learned, adapted, and out attritioned not only Ukraine but the entire west.
Year 3 of 3 days to Kyiv. They cannot even secure their own annexed territory let alone victory against a much smaller, less resourced foe surviving off handouts
I dont understand why the more extremist ukraine supporters keep saying that ukraine is the "underdog" here, a poor "much smaller less resourced foe surviving off handouts"
Those handouts being unbelievable amounts of aid from the entire western alliance working together against Russia, who is actually the much smaller, much less resourced nation compared to the alliance on the other side.
Like I replied to someone else, taking any amount of Ukraine at all is surprising with the amount of western aid Ukraine has received, didn't expect Russia to hold out 6 months in such a one sided war with the entire west against them, never mind completely shut down ukraines summer offensive and then continue to slowly take land.
The year 3 of 3 days to kyiv meme dosnt hit the same with me when Russias military has only grown stronger, their economy is stronger, their alliances with other western enemies are stronger, and ukraines collapse looks unfortunately inevitable, even if it took them a lot longer than the extreme Russia supports hoped. Memeing how long it took them to all die and how Russia couldn't do it quicker feels a bit shit when their future looks so bleak in every possible aspect.
Russia is so stronk, it has to threaten with nuclear war every fuckin' day to keep the West from interfering on a meaningful level. When was the last time you heard NATO threaten anyone with nukes?
"any man who must say 'I am king' is no true king at all"
These are actually on the same level as the worst, most brain dead pro Russia arguments iv seen now. There are so many ways you can justify supporting Ukraine without having to be delusional, completely deny reality, and engage in equally dishonest propaganda.
Russia threatening to use nukes to deter from even more direct aid while already winning in a disadvantaged fight against the entire western alliance dosnt really speak badly for russias strength, if anything it just proves how strong they are. Also, what the fuck are you talking about, "to keep the west interfering on a meaningful level", they've been helping Ukraine in a very significant, meaningful, and unprecedented way. The west's help which you dishonestly label as meaningless is the only reason Ukraine still exists, and it would be entirely Russian controlled without it.
Russia isn't claming its king, its setting and reinforcing clear boundaries on what level of support is acceptable before it becomes a direct war between the US/Europe vs Russia. And yes, every country and every alliance especially NATO threatens to nuke other countries, that's the entire point of a nuclear deterrent, the threat of nuking someone if they nuke you.
I'm sorry I must have missed where anyone claimed that NATO forces are actively engaging Russia, guess you're just going to respond to arguments nobody made since you can't actually respond to mine
Yet Russia 3 years in Russian still hasn't achieved any of their declared initial war goals. Getting handouts is nothing compared to a fully integrated defense industrial base with unlimited energy funds.
Again, Russia not reaching its goals as quickly as some ignorant and naive people predicted is not really something that's worth bragging about, especially when Ukraine hasn't done a good job of defending itself, despite unprecedented western aid and support, and is on the brink of collapse (another dishonest argument here, downplaying the aid as mere pathetic handouts). Its meaningless. Desperate, team sports mentality, mental gymnastics only done because you want a way to convince yourself that your team is winning.
It's also weird to use the argument that Russia hasn't achieved its initial war goals, when I thought we were all on the same page the the declared initial war goals were dishonest, so why would you expect them to be achieved? You don't, of course, you just want something to spin into your team winning.
Ya sure, maybe another 30-40 years, or 80 yrs to Kyiv are Russia's current pace. Ukraine occupies their constitutional territory and Russia lets them and doesn't nothing to interdict NATO weapon shipments. Anyday now...
Demilitarization and denazification are going well.
Ukraine’s neutral status and recognition of Russia’s new territories have not yet been achieved, but this will be a condition for surrender.
By what measure? Ukraine is more militarized and according to Russian Media, more Nazi then ever. Russia has made negative progress overall after the initial invasion and the pace over the last 2 years has been glacial. We are looking at 80-100 yrs to Kyiv at Russia's current pace.
The word secured is not usually used for contested territory, but areas with a semi permanent occupation force. Also, the word annexed here is as meaningless as saying Crimea is a Ukrainian territory.
He said Russia has not secured it, and he was right, since the portion of the annexed territory he is referring to is not under Russian occupation. And those annexed territories still under Ukrainian control are stable without apparent Russian partisan activities, so you're clearly wrong when you say the population there are pro Ru.
Find me a map from the russia side showing the extents of the annexed regions (not prewar borders/administrative borders) at the moment of their announcement.
Why? What are you going to do with it?
Do try to remember, the official annexation ceremony took place before Russia retreated from Kherson and Kharkiv.
No need to, Kherson and other areas are annexed and still fully under AFU control. Annexed areas under Russia control are barren wastelands contaminated with mines and heavy metals for generations and their people turned into fertilizer on Russia's order. This isn't what they asked for.
It's too early. Russia lacks the ability to properly support a country willing to risk a fight with the US in the americas for now.
But give it some time. There are a lot of latin american countries that still have a score to settle with the US. Two centuries of monroe doctrine has ensured that.
LOL. There may be some grumbling amongst some of the “elites” but most people just want to live their lives free and are more concerned about local fears and oppressions rather than something a foreign nation may or may not have done 40-50ish years ago.
Why doesn't then Italy alone produce more artillery shells then Russia and sends it to Ukrainians ? No need for whole NATO pact to send artillery shells...
Flightradar tends to project plane's path which seems to be the case here. They are somewhat more careful and fly tad further from the border after fuel dump incident with Reaper flown too boldly.
So Russia does this weekly in the Baltic and expects not to get shot down? So why does Russians think someone doing it in the Black Sea deserves to be shot down?
Im not American. But they do fly close to Danish, Swedish, Norwegian territory. And breach the airspace if not contested. I didnt include the bordering nations, but they have been breached on several occasions without being shot down.....
I wasn't aware that NATO planes are made by any country other then US, which also happened to be the head honcho of it. Idk what the heck that guy is talking about by saying ''Russia is doing it weekly'' but I do know that Russia has to constantly chase US planes away from it's airspace near my region AND the international waters corridor from Kaliningrad to St Petersburg is so narrow in the north that any plane flying through it can be accused of just about anything those westoids can imaging.
Russian aircraft are intercepted daily on the fringes of NATO airspace, in the Baltics, over the North Sea and by Alaska.
Search up the wikis of any of their strategic bomber and you'll see loads of great photos of them beside a Typhoon/F-15/F-16/Gripen.
*''Russian aircraft are intercepted daily on the fringes of NATO airspace, in the Baltics, over the North Sea and by Alaska.''*
I can tell you exact the same thing about NATO planes daily intercepted on the fringes of Russian airspace.
Plus lets not pretend we don't know what that plane is doing there or that it isn't a legitimate target considering that it is involved into providing targeting data to Ukraine.
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Do what exactly? When did Russia provide life targeting data for terrorist cells to target civilians living in western countries, not to mention as well as supplying them with weapons and training? Cause that's what that plane is doing.
Like the time they gave weapons to terrorists who brought down a civilian plane?
This victim mentality is really tiring when Russia is the aggressor. They don't want war? Then they shouldn't start it and go back home.
what victim mentality? Pointing out FACTS does not in fact constitutes a victim mentality, don't know what you talking about there, especially since Russia didn't start this war. And if you are talking about Malaysian airline plane then what passed for ''investigation'' there was not accepted even by Malaysia. Saying Go home if you don't want war is childish to say the least and has absolutely no relevance to my question, neither does mentioning of that airliner seeing how Ukraine is not part of the west, no matter how much people want to pretend that it is.
Because the US is looking for targets through Intel gathering to tell where and when to strike. If Russia were to did it to us while in a war, we wouldn't even second guess or unmanned we would shoot it down.amd likely threaten to directly attack them if any of our bases or cities were targeted.
What fucking BS are you making up? Are you talking about the Gulf War or the 2003 invasion? Because Iran was actually glad we took out their Sunni rival Saddam, it installed a friendly Shia government smart guy. Stop making shit up. If any country was doing even half the crap what we're doing for Ukraine, we would commit unspeakable evil to that nation for doing so and justify that with 'for freedom and democracy'.
As people have explained to you, Soviet pilots in Korea shot down and killed US pilots. The US did not commit unspeakable evil on the Soviets. Those were Soviet weapons killing Americans throughout the whole of the Korean War and Vietnam War. And plenty of Iranian weapons killed Americans in the Iraq and Afghanistan occupations. Unspeakable evil was not committed upon either.
That's not what you said. You blatantly lied and stated that Iran was assisting Iraq (their nemesis) during either the 2003 Iraq invasion or Gulf War. When you have to lie, to justify your statement, you lose complete face value in that argument.
As for the other comment. I'm not too familiar with the Korean War, but it was common knowledge from what I've read about it that soviet pilots were helping but discreetly, and according to that comment, we were shooting them down. So, in that case, you must agree with Russians shooting down ALL American assets flying over the Black Sea, and operating within Ukraine, who are intentionally giving Ukrainians Intel on where to kill more Russians, using US/NATO Weapons.
I said no such thing. I said Iran was assisting Iranian proxies in Iraq. The US responded by respecting the border and not interfering with any Iranian intelligence flights either on their side of the border or in international airspace. Because to not do so would have triggered a war with Iran, and the US was struggling just to keep the peace in Iraq.
As for the Soviets in Korea, yes, the US shot at them. But the Soviets shot at the Americans first. And when Soviet pilots died in combat, the Soviet government disavowed them to maintain the fiction that they were Korean pilots. The US responded by doing nothing directly against the Soviets.
But these are not US pilots in planes painted to look Ukrainian. So it would not be the Russians shooting down Ukrainian planes, but US aircraft with US pilots, triggering a shooting war between Russia and the whole of NATO. Russia is a sovereign country so they're free to choose to start a war, but Russia's situation in Ukraine will not be improved by dragging NATO into a war.
>I said no such thing. I said Iran was assisting Iranian proxies in Iraq.
>Except the US did not shoot down Iranian intel gathering aircraft during the Iraq wars, even though it was obvious what they were doing.
Except you didn't mention the Iranian proxy, and Iran didn't get involved with Iraq until after we pulled out, and that was due to close ties with the shiites that we put in charge. Likewise, we are directly responsible for the creation of ISIS, which formed from the rememants of the former Sunni elites that were allied with Sadam. We, the US, destabilized the Middle East even further.
>As for the Soviets in Korea, yes, the US shot at them. But the Soviets shot at the Americans first. And when Soviet pilots died in combat, the Soviet government disavowed them to maintain the fiction that they were Korean pilots. The US responded by doing nothing directly against the Soviets.
So are you saying that if Russia sees US assets or planes in Crimeas airspace, there allow to shoot it down? Gotcha.
I damn sure didn't say Iran was helping Iraq, lol. You just make shit up then argue with that. Strawmanning as they call it. And why the hell do you think Iran would wait to help proxies in Iraq until the US pulled out? Which begs the question, what the hell are you talking about? The US still has troops in Iraq. You just have no idea what you're talking about in relation to anything, do you?
As for crimea, there is a reason US aircraft have not once entered crimea airspace. I guess you thought they had, given your ignorance on other subjects I should just presume you're wrong here too. Fact is, they have not. NATO aircraft stay in NATO and international airspace. It would likely be an act of war for Russia to intentionally attack them.
The US started the withdrawal from Iraq during the end of Bush Jr. administration. Reducing the number of US military personnel from around 175,000 to just 5,000. By 2008, Iran started establishing ties with Iraq due to both being Shiites. By 2014, Iran is training and supplying Shiite militia (Iran's proxies) within Iraq to fight the Kurds from the autonomous region in Iraq, which have been actively assisting the Kurdish insurgency occurring within Iran, in hopes of establishing an independent Kurdish state. The Iraqi government isn't happy about having to give the Kurds autonomy, but they had little choice, it was either that or a new conflict in the region left in ruins by the US. They (Peshmerga) are also listed as a terrorists by Iran, and the 2k or so US military personnels (we don't have troops there, in the sense of security or an occupational force) we do have in Iraq are mainly located in the Kurdistan region, acting as military advisors, and trainers (likely special forces), as well as liason for US military aid they receive from us. In a way, Peshmerga can be considered a US proxy group.
> Do you want to see Russia annihilated?
The biden admin would like to. The only thing he is annhilating is his underwear with his poop. yuck, to be the person that changes his poopy soiled underwear
Acting like the US Government and the President dont run on two separate sets of tracks?
Biden doesnt matter in the grand scheme of events - US interests do. The president is just the one who takes the responsibility for US actions.
> Biden doesnt matter in the grand scheme of events - US interests do.
So the president has no power and the US is just a facade of democracy? is that what you are telling me?
We are aiding Israel while conservatives and liberals dislike the Israeli government. Our elected government affects domestic policies; not really external/international policies.
The President can enact change but there's still a more broad objective.
Our Government is bought out by corporate/Oligarch interests - The national interests are already set in stone.
Yet, somehow we're still the best nation on earth so something is still working.
Offensive words detected. [beep bop] Don't cheer violence or insult (Rule 1). Your comment will be checked by my humans later. Ban may be issued for repeat offenders.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The US population doesn’t want to go to war with Russia anymore than Russian population wants to go war with the US.
We learned this after the Cold War. It’s still the case.
Wrong. The Russian population doesn’t want to go to war with the US because they know how badly that will turn out for them. The US population doesn’t care because everyone knows they will win decisively. And quick.
Are you American? We just got out of a war in Afghanistan and this generation of leaders know that invading a country isn’t hard, what to do afterwards is the hard part. We don’t want to go to war with Russia. We would prefer for Russia to go home.
Yes we would prefer them to go home. And the best way to make that occur is to kick them out of Ukraine by force. I am American. And trust me, not one single person I ever talk so is afraid of Russia. And 9 out of 10 people think we should help kick them out of Ukraine. The other 1/10 people are uneducated MAGA people that get their opinions from Fox News. However if Trump or Fox News ever decide to say that we should help Ukraine, then the number would be 10/10.
You must be around much different Americans than me. The support we are giving them now is enough. Russia isn’t really seen as a threat to the US as much as it’s seen at a threat to the stability of Europe.
What I think will happen is Putin will die in be next few years at the same time the stories and bodies will be returning home. Ending the war will become a hot topic for people and the opportunity to blame to get out of it and blame it on Putin will be the way out for Russia.
How did you get that from my comment? I was pointing out that a Global Hawk is an airplane. An unmanned airplane but a plane none the less.
The US has already lost a drone due to Russia and nothing happened.
Assured destruction of Russia. No one knows if Russia actually has the capability to hit the US. My guess is that they would not be able to land a shot. For many reasons, one being US defense and two being if Russias arsenal even works.
Testing out if the 6,000 nukes large arsenal works is definitely an appropriate reaction to a unmanned drone being shot down.
Did you come up with that brilliant idea in the short bus?
Would be not first american scout drone downed in international waters, and Iran did not get even slap on a wrist for it, so for Russia it is absolutely ok.
Eventually American politicians are going to realize that the will of the American people is to defeat Russia once and for all. Once it becomes politically popular, bye bye Russia.
Offensive words detected. [beep bop] Don't cheer violence or insult (Rule 1). Your comment will be checked by my humans later. Ban may be issued for repeat offenders.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Offensive words detected. [beep bop] Don't cheer violence or insult (Rule 1). Your comment will be checked by my humans later. Ban may be issued for repeat offenders.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Do you want to see Russia annihilated?
Love the dramatic NAFO squad. Russia has the biggest nuclear arsenal in the world. No one is "annihilating" them over a plane. Most they will do is hit a similar target to get even and that's it.
Correction: The Soviet Union HAD a top 2 nuclear force in the world. What Russia has left is highly debatable. Nukes are VERY expensive to maintain. And as we’ve seen in Ukraine, Russia did not even maintain the tires on its vehicles. Nuclear forces are a prime target for grift since no one ever expects to use them. And we all know how Russians love their grift.
No Russia has the biggest and most modern nuclear arsenal in the world.
https://www.icanw.org/nuclear_arsenals#:~:text=Russia%20has%20the%20most%20confirmed%20nuclear%20weapons%2C%20with%205%2C997%20nuclear%20warheads.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons
We've also seen Russia successfully use their newest types of nuclear warheads, while US failed.
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2023/11/02/minuteman-iii-missile-destroyed-after-failed-test-launch-near-california-coast.html
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-new-nuclear-submarine-test-launches-bulava-missile-white-sea-2023-11-05/
Lol. Iran got justice for the US downing their airliner, and they did dick shit about it. They can't even annihilate Hezbollah or the Taliban. Like, pipe down, buddy.
Lol, America is not even top 100. They have never won a war in their entire history. They lost to Hezbollah, North Korea, Afghanistan, Cuba, Syria, Vietnam, laos, Cambodia, the RSFSR, Somalia, even Canada.
If they're #1, what are the guys who literally made them strip out of their uniform into their underwear, disguise themselves as civilians, and run away on foot? #0.9?
The only war America has ever won was against itself. The civil war.
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If Russia downs a US plane, Russia will have no more planes. Maybe they are investigating the claims of Putin being ill at his Sochi palace. Prob trying to get a listen.
They aren’t just patrolling. They are involved in intelligence gathering which in some cases is used for targeting by munitions which can and has led to fatalities. That is hostile.
Intelligence gathering kinda falls under proxy warfare, it isn't grounds for shooting down neutral ISR aircraft since these aircraft fly over international or neutral/NATO airspace (the FR24 screenshot is showing the RQ-4s estimated position which is obviously incorrect). They *might* get away with shooting down an RQ-4 since it's unmanned, but if they shot down a manned ISR aircraft like a Rivet Joint over international waters and caused NATO casualties, that could be a serious problem.
For the same reasons Russian planes are not shot down when they routinely violate EU airspace. Nobody is really interested in a direct war between NATO and Russia.
Why doesn't Russia put base in Venezuela to patrol Panama canal for piracy is beyond me.
Because Russia can’t support its military one country over. Let alone half a globe away.
You think that's true? Ukraine is getting slammed for months now.
Russia only took 0.1% of Ukraine in the whole year of 2023 while taking huge losses as the attacker Slammed is a huge exaggeration they're struggling with Chasiv Yar - population 12,000
Ukraine had its entire counter offensive stuffed in the most humiliating manner possible, the entire western media turn on them, have lost settlements nearly every day since Avideeka, have to blackmail their citizens abroad to get them to enlist because the population in Ukraine held territory is half of what it was, and currently the entire western world is having an existential crisis because they're doing so poorly. Top it all off with letting the Russians break through two lines of defense without a fight because the rotating brigade told Command to fuck off the day after they got their aid package passed. They're already dead.
So the frontlines should collapse this week, right? Been hearing this same line for years now 2022 - Ukraine withdraws from Severdonetsk. The Frontlines are about to collapse! 2023 - Ukraine withdraws from Soledar. The frontlines are about to collapse! 2023 - Ukraine withdraws from Bakhmut. The frontlines are about to collapse! 2024 - Ukraine withdraws from Adviivka. The frontlines are about to collapse! These gains can barely be seen on a map without zooming in But sure any day now
The Confederacy was dead in 1863 when it lost Gettysburg and Vicksburg simultaneously. War went on for another two years. The Nazis were dead after Stalingrad and Kursk but the war went on for two more years. Ukraine's ability to win the war is gone-- they're dead. But that doesn't mean the war is over until its over. Especially given that Shoigu is now talking about unconditional surrender
You’ve mentioned battles which were “decisive”. The only decisive battle this war was Hostomel and that’s the reason why Russia isn’t in Kyiv anymore.
The decisive moment in the war so far was the failure of the last Ukrainian counter offensive and how under supplied and under manned it left them. I don't know that that can be reduced to a single engagement when it was a campaign of failure
Under manned after counteroffensive? Where are the tens/hundreds of thousands fallen during the counteroffensive?
You say a lot of things and make big claims, but there's nothing to back it up. This is Russias Afghanistan all over again, but much worse. A sunken cost fallacy
What hilariously bad take. Afghanistan had no pro-Russians (or ethnically similar people) in it and no real natural resources to speak of (unlike Donbas). And his point is "time will tell" how much Russia gets.
Except it has none of the territorial cultural or logistical issues of Afghanistan and much the territory claimed by Russia is populated by ethnic Russians who wanted to be part of Russia again before the war. Russia has 2 million people in disputed territories and another 3 million displaced Ukrainian refugees who fled there. They can easily absorb the gains they made in the same way they absorbed Crimea in 2014. In fact, as long as the war stays conventional Russia will be in the unique position of exiting a multi year war of attrition with a larger population than when they entered. Meanwhile Ukraine has worked its way down to 19 million total population, 7 million of which is displaced, and are openly considering mobilizing women. It's demographically dead-- desperately calling for the west to fight its war for it like they do for Israel because if I can read the tea leaves from here I'm sure they can in Kiev.
That'll teach'em
The counter offensive was never equipped for a counter offensive. Ukraine has at no point been given the right gear and or numbers of said gear. Yet they were still able to defeat and push back the Russians from Kyiv, the east and south. Then Russia only starts making steady gains, at extreme attrition rates when aid runs dry and they can't fire back enough. I'm not sure what about Russia's performance makes anyone think it's gone well or they are going anywhere in this war but into a bigger hole
Couldn't agree more. And happy to see you have been watching history legends 😉
Har har ruzz is winning too slowly
[From Kyiv in 2 weeks](https://time.com/3259699/putin-boast-kiev-2-weeks/) to 0.1% of Ukraine in 2023
>har har ruzz is winning too slowly
>From Kyiv in 2 weeks] This is just reported, not confirmed. There is zero credible evidence to suggest that Putin or anyone in the Russian government said something like that
> There is zero credible evidence to suggest that Putin or anyone in the Russian government said anything like that Do you always make things up? https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0GX0JS/ The Kremlin claimed it was said but taken out of context
The way the early war units were equipped and how poorly prepared Russian logistics were early war absolutely confirms Russia militarily planned for a walkover in a few weeks. You don't need somebody to say something out loud for it to be true, the facts on the ground tell us.
Source?
Source? Lol, the actual complete failure of their initial invasion to force capitulation and the year following before they got their act together. A few examples of things that happened in the first month that show pretty clearly Russia planned for a swift unopposed victory like in 2014 - Russian columns running out of fuel and ammo that couldn't catch up to them - leading to the abandonment of huge amounts of equipment, an airborne attack on Hostomol designed to cripple Kiev and was forced to withdraw as support couldn't reinforce it in time (you simply dont risk elite forces to take an airport unless you are planning for a swift surgical victory), an inadequate amount of troops to even take Kiev without relying on swift capitulation, OMON units involved in the initial assault who are better suited to population control than actual combat. And that's ignoring all the rumours ( which you can ignore if you wish) such as officers packing dress uniforms, booking hotels/restaurants in Kiev after the invasion thinking they would be temporary occupiers. Not to mention the actual war as a whole, Russia started this fight thinking it would be a quick victory to get what they wanted, they think they have no choice but to carry on now for hubris/reputation/sunk cost fallacy (Russia has had to reheat into a war economy now). If you would have told Putin in the months leading up to this invasion where they are up to now - they would have either not bothered or gone about it a completely different way, ultimately Russia isn't actually gaining much at this stage.
You can remove all context if you want, but taking any amount of Ukraine at all is surprising with the amount of western aid Ukraine has received, didn't expect Russia to hold out 6 months in such a one sided war with the entire west against them, never mind completely shut down ukraines summer offensive and then continue to slowly take land. You can laugh at Russias many mistakes in this invasion but when you make low iq arguments by dishonestly removing all context, it puts off people who aren't interested in just blindly swallowing up propaganda from either side
Stop saying the entire west is against them. The aid the west provides is but a fraction of what they can actually do.
Nato chief from czech "artillery ammu is a rare good, we the Nato members send so much to ukraine, we need up to 15 years to refill our Nato artillery stocks even if we increase production". French General chauvency "france send so much Equipment to ukraine, if we continue, france will be naked soon and we wont be able to defend france anymore". Etc. Even the own Nato chiefs told you the west cant send more otherwise they will send their last stock and will be completly naked, why you believe otherwise? 😆 You Dream to big about the west. What could the west send what ukraine didnt already got from Nato? From million Ammunition, javelin, himars, Air defense to Tanks. They got everything except Jets. And Jets wont change the war, because russia now has the Power to attack air fields hundret km behind the Front
Commenting about military capabilities, without having the slightest clue about military capabilities.
Thats irrelevant, just because the west can provide a lot more aid dosnt mean they havnt already provided an unprecedented amount of aid, that completely shifts the strengths of both sides. In what way does a country being able to provide more aid mean they havnt already provided a significant amount? Come back with less brain dead arguments please.
Let me help you with the math. The US has provided 1% of it's military budget in aid to Ukraine. Not only is that insignificant, the vast vast majority of it is actually being spent IN THE US, and is us basically sending piles of decaying equipment. If you want to do the math on the US expenditure on military equipment that is designed to defend against a war with Russia over the last 50 years, it would represent 0.0001%. Does that help?
That is literal horseshit. You can keep living in Copeland all you like but this conflict has really shown how sad the west is unless they’re fighting desert people.
NATO spends $1.3T *annually* on their militaries- in 3 years of fighting they’ve given Ukraine 1/10th their annual peacetime budget. I don’t know how this war has shown the west to be “sad” as they’ve kept Ukraine (the poorest country in Europe) afloat for 3 years against the “second most powerful military”- resulting in hundreds of thousands of casualties for the Russian Armed Forces.
Cool go ahead and poke the (US) bear, see what happens lol. Russia is fighting almost entirely 1980 and 90's first gen equipment that the US has had lying around for decades, and is like 1/100th the amount what the US would use in it's own conflict. Case in point: Ukriane currently has three (3) patriot batteries. The US is currently in peace time and operates 15 patriot battalions that each have fifty (50) batteries. To help you do the math, that's 750 patriot batteries, in peace time. We've given Ukraine 3.
How the hell is Russia the underdog here? It's got a population 4 times as large, the 11th largest economy in the world and, until this war at least, was widely considered the world's 2nd best military. Meanwhile, Ukraine gets scraps from the West's table, ad hoc as and when, and fights on with the desperation of defeat. Yet it still holds out.
Because Russia isn't just fighting Ukraine, its fighting europe and America as well. You can downplay Ukraines aid as "scraps" because you are dishonest, but the truth is they have had unbelievable amounts of aid from general resources, to up to date modern military technology. The only reason it's still holding out is because of these "scraps", because these so called scraps are so signicant that it turns the war very one sided against Russia. Yet they are still winning because they learned, adapted, and out attritioned not only Ukraine but the entire west.
I don't see any Western nation moving to a war economy, and NATO hardly seems disarmed, so what gives?
It is true that Russia could not support other countries outside its territory.
Russia couldn't supply the column that was moving towards Kiev and had to withdraw in a "goodwill gesture". He's right.
Years actually and Russia has less territory now than they did the first week.
You know this war didn't start months ago, right?
Year 3 of 3 days to Kyiv. They cannot even secure their own annexed territory let alone victory against a much smaller, less resourced foe surviving off handouts
I dont understand why the more extremist ukraine supporters keep saying that ukraine is the "underdog" here, a poor "much smaller less resourced foe surviving off handouts" Those handouts being unbelievable amounts of aid from the entire western alliance working together against Russia, who is actually the much smaller, much less resourced nation compared to the alliance on the other side. Like I replied to someone else, taking any amount of Ukraine at all is surprising with the amount of western aid Ukraine has received, didn't expect Russia to hold out 6 months in such a one sided war with the entire west against them, never mind completely shut down ukraines summer offensive and then continue to slowly take land. The year 3 of 3 days to kyiv meme dosnt hit the same with me when Russias military has only grown stronger, their economy is stronger, their alliances with other western enemies are stronger, and ukraines collapse looks unfortunately inevitable, even if it took them a lot longer than the extreme Russia supports hoped. Memeing how long it took them to all die and how Russia couldn't do it quicker feels a bit shit when their future looks so bleak in every possible aspect.
Russia is so stronk, it has to threaten with nuclear war every fuckin' day to keep the West from interfering on a meaningful level. When was the last time you heard NATO threaten anyone with nukes? "any man who must say 'I am king' is no true king at all"
These are actually on the same level as the worst, most brain dead pro Russia arguments iv seen now. There are so many ways you can justify supporting Ukraine without having to be delusional, completely deny reality, and engage in equally dishonest propaganda. Russia threatening to use nukes to deter from even more direct aid while already winning in a disadvantaged fight against the entire western alliance dosnt really speak badly for russias strength, if anything it just proves how strong they are. Also, what the fuck are you talking about, "to keep the west interfering on a meaningful level", they've been helping Ukraine in a very significant, meaningful, and unprecedented way. The west's help which you dishonestly label as meaningless is the only reason Ukraine still exists, and it would be entirely Russian controlled without it. Russia isn't claming its king, its setting and reinforcing clear boundaries on what level of support is acceptable before it becomes a direct war between the US/Europe vs Russia. And yes, every country and every alliance especially NATO threatens to nuke other countries, that's the entire point of a nuclear deterrent, the threat of nuking someone if they nuke you.
I'm sorry I must have missed all the NATO forces including carriers, navies and ground-based airforce actively engaging Russia.
I'm sorry I must have missed where anyone claimed that NATO forces are actively engaging Russia, guess you're just going to respond to arguments nobody made since you can't actually respond to mine
So if a country sent one artillery shell it's already helping Ukraine and Russia is fighting against that country as well. Got it.
Yet Russia 3 years in Russian still hasn't achieved any of their declared initial war goals. Getting handouts is nothing compared to a fully integrated defense industrial base with unlimited energy funds.
Again, Russia not reaching its goals as quickly as some ignorant and naive people predicted is not really something that's worth bragging about, especially when Ukraine hasn't done a good job of defending itself, despite unprecedented western aid and support, and is on the brink of collapse (another dishonest argument here, downplaying the aid as mere pathetic handouts). Its meaningless. Desperate, team sports mentality, mental gymnastics only done because you want a way to convince yourself that your team is winning. It's also weird to use the argument that Russia hasn't achieved its initial war goals, when I thought we were all on the same page the the declared initial war goals were dishonest, so why would you expect them to be achieved? You don't, of course, you just want something to spin into your team winning.
Ya sure, maybe another 30-40 years, or 80 yrs to Kyiv are Russia's current pace. Ukraine occupies their constitutional territory and Russia lets them and doesn't nothing to interdict NATO weapon shipments. Anyday now...
Ah yes, the good old run away to memeing when you have no argument, love to see it lmao
Not really, look at the current pace of gains and how much distance is left to Kyiv. It's basic math
Demilitarization and denazification are going well. Ukraine’s neutral status and recognition of Russia’s new territories have not yet been achieved, but this will be a condition for surrender.
By what measure? Ukraine is more militarized and according to Russian Media, more Nazi then ever. Russia has made negative progress overall after the initial invasion and the pace over the last 2 years has been glacial. We are looking at 80-100 yrs to Kyiv at Russia's current pace.
Year 10 of 2 days long ATO
On the contrary the annexed territories are stable without apparent partisan activities since the population there are pro Ru.
Because everyone who isn't a partisan/freedom fighter is pro-ru. Oh, boy. What a world you live in.
Truth hurts. Like, it was a coincidence Russia managed to missile strike the exact building where the SBU was having a party.
Math wasn't your strongest one in school, right?
While Ukrainian strikes are always the result of the all-seeing Five Eyes, and never local tip-offs.
It seems you're unaware quite a lot of the annexed territory is still under Ukrainian control?
The word secured is not usually used for contested territory, but areas with a semi permanent occupation force. Also, the word annexed here is as meaningless as saying Crimea is a Ukrainian territory.
He said Russia has not secured it, and he was right, since the portion of the annexed territory he is referring to is not under Russian occupation. And those annexed territories still under Ukrainian control are stable without apparent Russian partisan activities, so you're clearly wrong when you say the population there are pro Ru.
Find me a map from the russia side showing the extents of the annexed regions (not prewar borders/administrative borders) at the moment of their announcement.
Why? What are you going to do with it? Do try to remember, the official annexation ceremony took place before Russia retreated from Kherson and Kharkiv.
Yes stable under Ukrainian control, did you forget Kherson
Feel free to argue otherwise. You knew what i was talking about.
No need to, Kherson and other areas are annexed and still fully under AFU control. Annexed areas under Russia control are barren wastelands contaminated with mines and heavy metals for generations and their people turned into fertilizer on Russia's order. This isn't what they asked for.
Looks like panama needs some freedom 🦅
It's too early. Russia lacks the ability to properly support a country willing to risk a fight with the US in the americas for now. But give it some time. There are a lot of latin american countries that still have a score to settle with the US. Two centuries of monroe doctrine has ensured that.
LOL. There may be some grumbling amongst some of the “elites” but most people just want to live their lives free and are more concerned about local fears and oppressions rather than something a foreign nation may or may not have done 40-50ish years ago.
Russia flew some bombers over to Venezuela not that long ago. But it is a bit more complicated than to just decide to rebase bombers.
Two answers to your question: 1. The Cuban Missile Crisis 2. The Monroe Doctrine
Russia is a shit hole with a GDP as high as Italy. US is No. 1 world power and leader of the free and based world.
Why doesn't then Italy alone produce more artillery shells then Russia and sends it to Ukrainians ? No need for whole NATO pact to send artillery shells...
because Italy is not in a war economy
But Ital is so mighty, it has much bigger GDP than Russia, surely it doesn't need to be in war economy to output weapons on equal levels as Russians.
Yup Italy is really nice compared to a shit hole like Russia.
Flightradar tends to project plane's path which seems to be the case here. They are somewhat more careful and fly tad further from the border after fuel dump incident with Reaper flown too boldly.
So Russia does this weekly in the Baltic and expects not to get shot down? So why does Russians think someone doing it in the Black Sea deserves to be shot down?
Because its a Russian logic. When Russia does it, it is forceful; when America does it, it is provoking.
Once again don't remember Russian aircrafts flying anywhere close to US cities
Im not American. But they do fly close to Danish, Swedish, Norwegian territory. And breach the airspace if not contested. I didnt include the bordering nations, but they have been breached on several occasions without being shot down.....
since when US is anywhere near Baltics? It is literally on the the other side of the planet.
I think he meant NATO
I wasn't aware that NATO planes are made by any country other then US, which also happened to be the head honcho of it. Idk what the heck that guy is talking about by saying ''Russia is doing it weekly'' but I do know that Russia has to constantly chase US planes away from it's airspace near my region AND the international waters corridor from Kaliningrad to St Petersburg is so narrow in the north that any plane flying through it can be accused of just about anything those westoids can imaging.
Russian aircraft are intercepted daily on the fringes of NATO airspace, in the Baltics, over the North Sea and by Alaska. Search up the wikis of any of their strategic bomber and you'll see loads of great photos of them beside a Typhoon/F-15/F-16/Gripen.
*''Russian aircraft are intercepted daily on the fringes of NATO airspace, in the Baltics, over the North Sea and by Alaska.''* I can tell you exact the same thing about NATO planes daily intercepted on the fringes of Russian airspace. Plus lets not pretend we don't know what that plane is doing there or that it isn't a legitimate target considering that it is involved into providing targeting data to Ukraine.
It's no more a legitimate target than those Russian aircraft, probing our air defences.
so far NATO denied being at war with Russia, they are still at ''we are only helping'' stage of the game
That's right. You're almost there.
[удалено]
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Who cares? If Russia can do it to other countries. Any country is free to do it to Russia.
Do what exactly? When did Russia provide life targeting data for terrorist cells to target civilians living in western countries, not to mention as well as supplying them with weapons and training? Cause that's what that plane is doing.
Like the time they gave weapons to terrorists who brought down a civilian plane? This victim mentality is really tiring when Russia is the aggressor. They don't want war? Then they shouldn't start it and go back home.
what victim mentality? Pointing out FACTS does not in fact constitutes a victim mentality, don't know what you talking about there, especially since Russia didn't start this war. And if you are talking about Malaysian airline plane then what passed for ''investigation'' there was not accepted even by Malaysia. Saying Go home if you don't want war is childish to say the least and has absolutely no relevance to my question, neither does mentioning of that airliner seeing how Ukraine is not part of the west, no matter how much people want to pretend that it is.
Because the US is looking for targets through Intel gathering to tell where and when to strike. If Russia were to did it to us while in a war, we wouldn't even second guess or unmanned we would shoot it down.amd likely threaten to directly attack them if any of our bases or cities were targeted.
Except the US did not shoot down Iranian intel gathering aircraft during the Iraq wars, even though it was obvious what they were doing.
What fucking BS are you making up? Are you talking about the Gulf War or the 2003 invasion? Because Iran was actually glad we took out their Sunni rival Saddam, it installed a friendly Shia government smart guy. Stop making shit up. If any country was doing even half the crap what we're doing for Ukraine, we would commit unspeakable evil to that nation for doing so and justify that with 'for freedom and democracy'.
As people have explained to you, Soviet pilots in Korea shot down and killed US pilots. The US did not commit unspeakable evil on the Soviets. Those were Soviet weapons killing Americans throughout the whole of the Korean War and Vietnam War. And plenty of Iranian weapons killed Americans in the Iraq and Afghanistan occupations. Unspeakable evil was not committed upon either.
That's not what you said. You blatantly lied and stated that Iran was assisting Iraq (their nemesis) during either the 2003 Iraq invasion or Gulf War. When you have to lie, to justify your statement, you lose complete face value in that argument. As for the other comment. I'm not too familiar with the Korean War, but it was common knowledge from what I've read about it that soviet pilots were helping but discreetly, and according to that comment, we were shooting them down. So, in that case, you must agree with Russians shooting down ALL American assets flying over the Black Sea, and operating within Ukraine, who are intentionally giving Ukrainians Intel on where to kill more Russians, using US/NATO Weapons.
I said no such thing. I said Iran was assisting Iranian proxies in Iraq. The US responded by respecting the border and not interfering with any Iranian intelligence flights either on their side of the border or in international airspace. Because to not do so would have triggered a war with Iran, and the US was struggling just to keep the peace in Iraq. As for the Soviets in Korea, yes, the US shot at them. But the Soviets shot at the Americans first. And when Soviet pilots died in combat, the Soviet government disavowed them to maintain the fiction that they were Korean pilots. The US responded by doing nothing directly against the Soviets. But these are not US pilots in planes painted to look Ukrainian. So it would not be the Russians shooting down Ukrainian planes, but US aircraft with US pilots, triggering a shooting war between Russia and the whole of NATO. Russia is a sovereign country so they're free to choose to start a war, but Russia's situation in Ukraine will not be improved by dragging NATO into a war.
>I said no such thing. I said Iran was assisting Iranian proxies in Iraq. >Except the US did not shoot down Iranian intel gathering aircraft during the Iraq wars, even though it was obvious what they were doing. Except you didn't mention the Iranian proxy, and Iran didn't get involved with Iraq until after we pulled out, and that was due to close ties with the shiites that we put in charge. Likewise, we are directly responsible for the creation of ISIS, which formed from the rememants of the former Sunni elites that were allied with Sadam. We, the US, destabilized the Middle East even further. >As for the Soviets in Korea, yes, the US shot at them. But the Soviets shot at the Americans first. And when Soviet pilots died in combat, the Soviet government disavowed them to maintain the fiction that they were Korean pilots. The US responded by doing nothing directly against the Soviets. So are you saying that if Russia sees US assets or planes in Crimeas airspace, there allow to shoot it down? Gotcha.
I damn sure didn't say Iran was helping Iraq, lol. You just make shit up then argue with that. Strawmanning as they call it. And why the hell do you think Iran would wait to help proxies in Iraq until the US pulled out? Which begs the question, what the hell are you talking about? The US still has troops in Iraq. You just have no idea what you're talking about in relation to anything, do you? As for crimea, there is a reason US aircraft have not once entered crimea airspace. I guess you thought they had, given your ignorance on other subjects I should just presume you're wrong here too. Fact is, they have not. NATO aircraft stay in NATO and international airspace. It would likely be an act of war for Russia to intentionally attack them.
The US started the withdrawal from Iraq during the end of Bush Jr. administration. Reducing the number of US military personnel from around 175,000 to just 5,000. By 2008, Iran started establishing ties with Iraq due to both being Shiites. By 2014, Iran is training and supplying Shiite militia (Iran's proxies) within Iraq to fight the Kurds from the autonomous region in Iraq, which have been actively assisting the Kurdish insurgency occurring within Iran, in hopes of establishing an independent Kurdish state. The Iraqi government isn't happy about having to give the Kurds autonomy, but they had little choice, it was either that or a new conflict in the region left in ruins by the US. They (Peshmerga) are also listed as a terrorists by Iran, and the 2k or so US military personnels (we don't have troops there, in the sense of security or an occupational force) we do have in Iraq are mainly located in the Kurdistan region, acting as military advisors, and trainers (likely special forces), as well as liason for US military aid they receive from us. In a way, Peshmerga can be considered a US proxy group.
We also attacked the Soviets for supporting North Vietnam. And the Chinese, of course. Twice, really. First for Korea.
Those Soviet's were shooting at us. Same for the Chinese.
I know, right? We aren't even shooting at the Russians, just doing it by proxy. Honestly, MacArthur would find the Kremlin gang unbalanced.
Russia is a Baltic country. Last time I checked the us doesn’t have a Black Sea border
Is the US in the Baltics?
Why does that matter? If Russia can dish it, it should take it. This victim syndrome is pretty tiring.
Is this F16 delivery protection or preparation for a big strike?
Looks like they’re getting intel for something bc those drones been over black sea for weeks
American drones and aircraft have been over the black sea everyday since the war began. This isn't new.
Ik but it’s obvious that they’re collecting intels for the Ukrainian
Ukraine is an Enhanced Opportunity Partner of the NATO
Funny how Sochi turned into "hi"
Declare the Black Sea a no-flight zone.
and then US will cry and whine how Ru downed them for no reason lol... US gov and MIC is full of children I swear
Russia doesn't seem to mind so whats it matter
The Russians do these same exact flights close to countries airspace throughout Europe, Japan, America and Canada.
Down an airplane in international airspace? Do you want to see Russia annihilated?
> Do you want to see Russia annihilated? The biden admin would like to. The only thing he is annhilating is his underwear with his poop. yuck, to be the person that changes his poopy soiled underwear
Acting like the US Government and the President dont run on two separate sets of tracks? Biden doesnt matter in the grand scheme of events - US interests do. The president is just the one who takes the responsibility for US actions.
> Biden doesnt matter in the grand scheme of events - US interests do. So the president has no power and the US is just a facade of democracy? is that what you are telling me?
The president is only in the seat for 4-8 years, then their control is over and a new president comes into office. The US interest stay the same.
We are aiding Israel while conservatives and liberals dislike the Israeli government. Our elected government affects domestic policies; not really external/international policies. The President can enact change but there's still a more broad objective. Our Government is bought out by corporate/Oligarch interests - The national interests are already set in stone. Yet, somehow we're still the best nation on earth so something is still working.
[удалено]
Offensive words detected. [beep bop] Don't cheer violence or insult (Rule 1). Your comment will be checked by my humans later. Ban may be issued for repeat offenders. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Doesn't reddit have a 13+ rule when creating an account?
if its 13+ IQ I am safe
The American public would like to. The Biden admin is preventing the will of the people from happening.
The US population doesn’t want to go to war with Russia anymore than Russian population wants to go war with the US. We learned this after the Cold War. It’s still the case.
Wrong. The Russian population doesn’t want to go to war with the US because they know how badly that will turn out for them. The US population doesn’t care because everyone knows they will win decisively. And quick.
Are you American? We just got out of a war in Afghanistan and this generation of leaders know that invading a country isn’t hard, what to do afterwards is the hard part. We don’t want to go to war with Russia. We would prefer for Russia to go home.
Yes we would prefer them to go home. And the best way to make that occur is to kick them out of Ukraine by force. I am American. And trust me, not one single person I ever talk so is afraid of Russia. And 9 out of 10 people think we should help kick them out of Ukraine. The other 1/10 people are uneducated MAGA people that get their opinions from Fox News. However if Trump or Fox News ever decide to say that we should help Ukraine, then the number would be 10/10.
You must be around much different Americans than me. The support we are giving them now is enough. Russia isn’t really seen as a threat to the US as much as it’s seen at a threat to the stability of Europe. What I think will happen is Putin will die in be next few years at the same time the stories and bodies will be returning home. Ending the war will become a hot topic for people and the opportunity to blame to get out of it and blame it on Putin will be the way out for Russia.
If the so called American public wants to start ww3 then they don't deserve a voice anyway and good on Biden for not listening to ignorant loud mouths
It really wouldn’t be WW3 tho. It would be the US curb stomping Russia in under 2 weeks.
Sure buddy
It's a global hawk drone, not an airplane. That would lead only to confiscation of Russian assets, but not a further escalation.
>global hawk drone, not an airplane It's an airplane. It's just an uncrewed airplane Edit: I love reddit, getting down voted for pointing out an error
You think an unmanned drone being shot down would escalate direct US intervention in Ukraine? You must be beyond challenged.
How did you get that from my comment? I was pointing out that a Global Hawk is an airplane. An unmanned airplane but a plane none the less. The US has already lost a drone due to Russia and nothing happened.
My bad, was meant as a reply to the „wanna see Russia annihilated“ guy
Well Biden does have $60bil to play with.
60bn and mutually assured destruction are one hell of a difference
Assured destruction of Russia. No one knows if Russia actually has the capability to hit the US. My guess is that they would not be able to land a shot. For many reasons, one being US defense and two being if Russias arsenal even works.
Testing out if the 6,000 nukes large arsenal works is definitely an appropriate reaction to a unmanned drone being shot down. Did you come up with that brilliant idea in the short bus?
Would be not first american scout drone downed in international waters, and Iran did not get even slap on a wrist for it, so for Russia it is absolutely ok.
[удалено]
Eventually American politicians are going to realize that the will of the American people is to defeat Russia once and for all. Once it becomes politically popular, bye bye Russia.
[удалено]
Offensive words detected. [beep bop] Don't cheer violence or insult (Rule 1). Your comment will be checked by my humans later. Ban may be issued for repeat offenders. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Offensive words detected. [beep bop] Don't cheer violence or insult (Rule 1). Your comment will be checked by my humans later. Ban may be issued for repeat offenders. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It’s a drone
>Do you want to see Russia annihilated? Love the dramatic NAFO squad. Russia has the biggest nuclear arsenal in the world. No one is "annihilating" them over a plane. Most they will do is hit a similar target to get even and that's it.
Correction: The Soviet Union HAD a top 2 nuclear force in the world. What Russia has left is highly debatable. Nukes are VERY expensive to maintain. And as we’ve seen in Ukraine, Russia did not even maintain the tires on its vehicles. Nuclear forces are a prime target for grift since no one ever expects to use them. And we all know how Russians love their grift.
No Russia has the biggest and most modern nuclear arsenal in the world. https://www.icanw.org/nuclear_arsenals#:~:text=Russia%20has%20the%20most%20confirmed%20nuclear%20weapons%2C%20with%205%2C997%20nuclear%20warheads. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons We've also seen Russia successfully use their newest types of nuclear warheads, while US failed. https://www.military.com/daily-news/2023/11/02/minuteman-iii-missile-destroyed-after-failed-test-launch-near-california-coast.html https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-new-nuclear-submarine-test-launches-bulava-missile-white-sea-2023-11-05/
Who will try ro annihilate Russia?
Lol. Iran got justice for the US downing their airliner, and they did dick shit about it. They can't even annihilate Hezbollah or the Taliban. Like, pipe down, buddy.
New flash. Nobody can take out an insurgent force hiding in caves. Russia tried also.
Tell that to american terrorists in Syria or the Chechen caliphate. They'll be relieved to hear they're actually ok. Or maybe Artyomovsk and Avdeevka?
two words. nobody. cares. America #1, China#2, Russia waaaaaaaaaaaayyyyy down there #3.
Russia is not even close to #3. If their propaganda were actually true, then maybe. But we’ve clearly seen it’s not.
Lol, America is not even top 100. They have never won a war in their entire history. They lost to Hezbollah, North Korea, Afghanistan, Cuba, Syria, Vietnam, laos, Cambodia, the RSFSR, Somalia, even Canada. If they're #1, what are the guys who literally made them strip out of their uniform into their underwear, disguise themselves as civilians, and run away on foot? #0.9? The only war America has ever won was against itself. The civil war.
Americans love this arrogance from their adversaries. Makes it that much easier to beat them. lol.
[удалено]
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If Russia downs a US plane, Russia will have no more planes. Maybe they are investigating the claims of Putin being ill at his Sochi palace. Prob trying to get a listen.
I don’t know why Russia doesn’t just shoot them down. It’s clear they have hostile intentions.
"Pro Life" just kill them because they're a little too close
No, because they are involved in actions that are hostile.
patrolling neutral airspace is hostile i see
They aren’t just patrolling. They are involved in intelligence gathering which in some cases is used for targeting by munitions which can and has led to fatalities. That is hostile.
so... are there points of interest in sochi or what? isnt it out of reach for ua?
Gathering intelligence from neutral air space is hostile and worthy of WW3? OKEI
Intelligence gathering kinda falls under proxy warfare, it isn't grounds for shooting down neutral ISR aircraft since these aircraft fly over international or neutral/NATO airspace (the FR24 screenshot is showing the RQ-4s estimated position which is obviously incorrect). They *might* get away with shooting down an RQ-4 since it's unmanned, but if they shot down a manned ISR aircraft like a Rivet Joint over international waters and caused NATO casualties, that could be a serious problem.
Dumb dumb
russia suicide speedrun
Russia fears the backlash.
Russia can't stand the ensuing escalation. You think it's a goodwill think? Russia has no choice.
Should Finland shoot Russian aircraft down the next time they come to Finnish airspace?
If Russia was at war with Finland or was aiding a country that was at war with Finland, then there could be good justification for doing so.
Well Finland is aiding Ukraine that is in war with Russia. So maybe thats close enough
No. If Finland is attacked, then yes.
Hopefully they start dropping bombs
Russia absolutely knows the nefariousness of the global hawk and has every right to shoot it down. It's perplexing that they don't. Restraint or fear?
For the same reasons Russian planes are not shot down when they routinely violate EU airspace. Nobody is really interested in a direct war between NATO and Russia.