[ingliz]

gramps gonna send those MLRS and HIMMARS systems

It looks like Ukraine is the 'phony war' before it all kicks off. I don't mind if you want to play silly buggers. I am old and have lived a life. But you young'uns are creeping closer and closer to armageddon, smiling. And for what? So NATO can play games in a corrupt shithole.

I can think of better things to die for.

[late]

It looks like Ukraine is the 'phony war' before it all kicks off. I don't mind if you want to play silly buggers. I am old and have lived a life. But you young'uns are creeping closer and closer to armageddon, smiling. And for what? So NATO can play games in a corrupt shithole.

I can think of better things to die for.

The question you should be asking, is this more like the beginning of WW1, or WW2?

Because if it's more like WW2, and it is, an ounce of prevention is worth more than a couple billion corpses...

[Igor Antunov]

Kiev is getting smashed. Zelensky admitted they lost (not captured, ded 2,000 men on sunday alone. I won't post the gore it is unkind to the ukrainians being forced to fight to the last ukrainian by their washington masters. Also it will trigger the malding cia shills here, they are too temperamental.

Russia simply adapted. There is no western answer to 2,000+ long range Russian artillery and rocket launchers blasting the puppet forces 24/7 non stop across a 600km front. Ukraine won't get its 200 meme MLRS systems for months, if they even make it without get butt blasted the second they cross the border.

No answer. Kiev dun goofed.

[JohnRawls]

@JohnRawls

Yeah, the NATO is a defensive pact, without single defensive action in 70 years of existence. It is known for its honor and firm word It bears responsibility for murders of millions of people after WW2.
They are nothing to be blamed for.

They just destroyed international order by its animalistic aggression on Yugoslavia in 1999, and they murdered like tens of millions of people world wide.
Nothing to blame, and nothing to see. Business as usual ....for a pack of hyenas.

You are stupid if you can't compare historic analogies honestly and blame Yugoslavia on NATO, considering your live in those parts.

So lets compare to make it straight for you, I won't write a wall of text because I have done so multiple times on the subject so I will keep it short.

Example 1: A country called USSR that voluntarily dissolved relatively peacefully. There were several reasons for the dissolution like in Yugoslavia but the primary reason was to make the country manageable again while prevent ethnic cleansing and genocide between peoples that were forcefully integrated in to the communist state over a long period of time. It was a success in both senses that it allowed independent development of several countries on top of the dissolution being peaceful in majority of places. The only conflict zones that remained were Nagorny Karobah and perhaps Chechnya which is a separate topic altogether in my opinion.

Example 2: A country called Yugoslavia that after the fall of communism wanted to reform but the people in power didn't want to let people decide for themselves how to reform nor did they want to loose control of all the country. So a ethnic based civil war started within the country and only after couple of years NATO intervened to stop the ethnic conflict by force.

Notice the difference? The problem is not that NATO intervened because an ethnic cleansing was already going on but that Yugoslavian leadership wanted to still maintain authoritarian control over all places even though the communist ideology was dead that allowed for that control. If you wanna blame it on anybody then blame your god damn leadership for being shit leaders basically.

As for NATO, if you think that NATO didn't know that people like you will use it as an excuse to explain the murder and so on in the country then your mistaken. If your going to say that it wasn't NATOs problem so why they intervened then I got news flash for you, it is Europe and most NATO members are European so externalities like refugees and so on is NATO members problems. In that time NATO waited a long time before it intervened but when it did then it was decided that some reputational losses from jackasses like you are miniscule compared to the problems caused by the continued ethnic violence.

[JohnRawls]

Kiev is getting smashed. Zelensky admitted they lost (not captured, ded 2,000 men on sunday alone. I won't post the gore it is unkind to the ukrainians being forced to fight to the last ukrainian by their washington masters. Also it will trigger the malding cia shills here, they are too temperamental.

Russia simply adapted. There is no western answer to 2,000+ long range Russian artillery and rocket launchers blasting the puppet forces 24/7 non stop across a 600km front. Ukraine won't get its 200 meme MLRS systems for months, if they even make it without get butt blasted the second they cross the border.

No answer. Kiev dun goofed.

MLRS has same/longer range with most basic package compared to most advanced Russian system. But Ukraine will get more than the basic package so they outrange Russian systems by a lot. What Ukraine will not get is probably ballistic missile package which is mostly irrelevant since Ukraine was not planning to bomb production facilities in Russia by the looks of it.

The reason they need those MLRS is because it puts concentration points and supply bases on Ukraine territory in their reach. If you can't concentrate and your supply bases are bombed then your offensive are not going to happen.

As for "Ukraine loosing" then I can only laugh. How is that 100 meters per day blitzkrieg going for you Igor?

[Independent_Srpska]

Yup.

It was intended to deter Soviet Russia, and what you just said is that it was a success.

Every alliance comes with a price tag that isn't money. But it kept WW3 from happening, and that's as big as a big, hairy deal gets. So, while you aren't totally wrong, between your exaggeration, and your failure or ignorance of what else was going on... your comment is bootless.

Let's go back further. Yugoslavia had been bilking the West for a generation. When the truth came out, things went downhill quickly. The emergence of ethnic violence was disappointing, but not exactly a surprise. The 'leaders' were incompetent, corrupt, thugs. Then there is the country you never blame, that was stirring the pot.

You see, we were worried the violence would spread. We could also see this settling into a violence that could last for centuries. Which was not good for anybody.

It took years to get the fighting to stop, but we finally got them to play nice...

Good job, mate.
You in fact did a great job preventing major conflicts.
We are now just one aggressive fool in Western-NATO matrix away from nuclear holocaust and end of life as we know it.

Bringing the world to the brink and calling that a success - that's really something. Nicely done, mate.

[late]

We are now just one aggressive fool in Western-NATO matrix away from nuclear holocaust and end of life as we know it.

Bringing the world to the brink and calling that a success - that's really something. Nicely done, mate.

Ever hear of the Cold War?

[Independent_Srpska]

You are stupid if you can't compare historic analogies honestly and blame Yugoslavia on NATO, considering your live in those parts.

So lets compare to make it straight for you, I won't write a wall of text because I have done so multiple times on the subject so I will keep it short.

Example 1: A country called USSR that voluntarily dissolved relatively peacefully. There were several reasons for the dissolution like in Yugoslavia but the primary reason was to make the country manageable again while prevent ethnic cleansing and genocide between peoples that were forcefully integrated in to the communist state over a long period of time. It was a success in both senses that it allowed independent development of several countries on top of the dissolution being peaceful in majority of places. The only conflict zones that remained were Nagorny Karobah and perhaps Chechnya which is a separate topic altogether in my opinion.

Example 2: A country called Yugoslavia that after the fall of communism wanted to reform but the people in power didn't want to let people decide for themselves how to reform nor did they want to loose control of all the country. So a ethnic based civil war started within the country and only after couple of years NATO intervened to stop the ethnic conflict by force.

Notice the difference? The problem is not that NATO intervened because an ethnic cleansing was already going on but that Yugoslavian leadership wanted to still maintain authoritarian control over all places even though the communist ideology was dead that allowed for that control. If you wanna blame it on anybody then blame your god damn leadership for being shit leaders basically.

As for NATO, if you think that NATO didn't know that people like you will use it as an excuse to explain the murder and so on in the country then your mistaken. If your going to say that it wasn't NATOs problem so why they intervened then I got news flash for you, it is Europe and most NATO members are European so externalities like refugees and so on is NATO members problems. In that time NATO waited a long time before it intervened but when it did then it was decided that some reputational losses from jackasses like you are miniscule compared to the problems caused by the continued ethnic violence.

Sorry, dude, that's all just a pile of mediocre crap. Parroting of western misunderstandings of events in Yugoslavia generally. Basically futile attempt of rationalization of immoral terroristic NATO war against civilians, children and people of Yugoslavia.

The NATO invasion and aggression of Yugoslavia, which is ,as a perfect excuse lavishly used by Putin in cases from Georgia to Ukraine, was just a land grab action to install the biggest NATO base in Europe closer to Russia.
Along, as an added value to establishing a city/base called Bondsteel in Serbian province of Kosovo, the NATO leaders like Wesley Clark manage to secure profit from resources in the occupied territories.
Pretty simple.

18/19th century "Go West " American mentality translated into late 20th century "Go East" movement. (Predecessor of NATO, Hitler called that "Drag nach Osten" in first half of 20th century).

[JohnRawls]

Sorry, dude, that's all just a pile of mediocre crap. Parroting of western misunderstandings of events in Yugoslavia generally. Basically futile attempt of rationalization of immoral terroristic NATO war against civilians, children and people of Yugoslavia.

The NATO invasion and aggression of Yugoslavia, which is ,as a perfect excuse lavishly used by Putin in cases from Georgia to Ukraine, was just a land grab action to install the biggest NATO base in Europe closer to Russia.
Along, as an added value to establishing a city/base called Bondsteel in Serbian province of Kosovo, the NATO leaders like Wesley Clark manage to secure profit from resources in the occupied territories.
Pretty simple.

18/19th century "Go West " American mentality translated into late 20th century "Go East" movement. (Predecessor of NATO, Hitler called that "Drag nach Osten" in first half of 20th century).

Did NATO go in and cause the ethnic cleansing and the ethnic conflict or did it start before NATO went in?

[Independent_Srpska]

Did NATO go in and cause the ethnic cleansing and the ethnic conflict or did it start before NATO went in?

NATO invented ethnic cleansing , just like it invented WMDs in Iraq, because it needed a false flag basis for its aggression to achieve geostrategic goals, like new base, oil, coal...

[JohnRawls]

NATO invented ethnic cleansing , just like it invented WMDs in Iraq, because it needed a false flag basis for its aggression to achieve geostrategic goals, like new base, oil, coal...

So your saying all of this is fake for example?

[Independent_Srpska]

So your saying all of this is fake for example?

This is 1992-1995 civil war in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

NATO raped Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro at that moment) in 1999 over Kosovo fake ethnic cleansing (in fact NATO supported secessionist uprising of ALbanians in Kosovo) and staged , so called, "Racak massacre".

[JohnRawls]

This is 1992-1995 civil war in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

NATO raped Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro at that moment) in 1999 over Kosovo fake ethnic cleansing (in fact NATO supported secessionist uprising of ALbanians in Kosovo) and staged , so called, "Racak massacre".

So you think that 92-95 has nothing to do with 99? Are you being serious now?

[Independent_Srpska]

So you think that 92-95 has nothing to do with 99? Are you being serious now?

Oh, absolutely it is connected!
It is connected even with Ukraine nowadays , as well with Iraq in 2003.

If you take a closer look, you will discover one single common denominator - the NATO aggressor.

[Rugoz]

Serbian and Russian imperialists whining about NATO thwarting their genocidal plans. Hilarious.

[Beren]

It looks like Ukraine is the 'phony war' before it all kicks off. I don't mind if you want to play silly buggers. I am old and have lived a life. But you young'uns are creeping closer and closer to armageddon, smiling. And for what? So NATO can play games in a corrupt shithole.

I can think of better things to die for.

Do you really have to post this under a Felix Dzerzhinsky avatar, whose 15-ton iron monument once dominated the Lubyanka Square in Moscow? Why don't you use a Putin portrait instead to make yourself even more authentic?

[JohnRawls]

Oh, absolutely it is connected!
It is connected even with Ukraine nowadays , as well with Iraq in 2003.

If you take a closer look, you will discover one single common denominator - the NATO aggressor.

What twisted reality do you live in to blame 1992-95 on NATO and not even considering that 99 NATO was a direct result to prevent previous multiple conflicts from happening again. Spoiler alert, NATO could have intervened in 92-95 but didn't because at that time NATO thought that it would be a minor conflict that it will sort itself out, it didn't. Knowing the consequences and waiting patiently for the madhouse to sort itself for many years, NATO only intervened in 1999 and that was the end of ethnical conflicts in the region.

So once again, take your head out of the sand and use it for thinking.

[ingliz]

@JohnRawls

The US president, Joe Biden, has said the United States will not send Ukraine rocket systems that can reach into Russia, Reuters reports. The comments followed reports that the Biden administration was preparing to send advanced long-range rocket systems to Kyiv.

— Guardian newspaper 30 May 2022

[Beren]

Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev said on Monday that Washington’s decision not to send Ukraine rocket systems that could reach into Russia was ‘rational.’

President Joe Biden said on Monday that the United States will not send Ukraine rocket systems that can reach into Russia, after it was reported on Washington was preparing to send advanced long-range rocket systems to Kyiv.

I wonder if they'll ever call each other genius.

[Rugoz]

I wonder if they'll ever call each other genius.

Ukraine already operates rocket systems (and obviously artillery) that can reach into Russia. Every military on this planet would. Just another fake controversy.