Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments PART 2

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

I look at the numbers and the details and the iraqis were beaten so lopsidedly that a few hundreds of javelins and manpads would not have greatly affected the outcome. Let alone beaten the coalition in two months.

Iraqi air defense shot down plenty of Coalition aircraft. If they were supplied and had sufficient ammo they would have won Gulf war.

Coalition Fixed-Wing Attrition in Desert Storm

www.rjlee.org

 

[Viet]

Not true, Russians always opposed expansion of NATO.

90 percent correct. Yes, Russia is against NATO expansion however Jelzin accepted the inevitable. He signed the deal with the Nato in 1997. for money. Probably he had no choice. He needed the money. Russia was on brink of collapse. militarily, economically weakened.
People can argue, hey, Russia accepted Nato expansion. Which is correct.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

90 percent correct. Yes, Russia is against NATO expansion however Jelzin accepted the inevitable. He signed the deal with the Nato in 1997. for money. Probably he had no choice. He needed the money. Russia was on brink of collapse. militarily, economically weakened.
People can argue, hey, Russia accepted Nato expansion. Which is correct.

Money is printed. If you need money, just print it. Only government can print money. Civilians cannot.

 

[ZeGerman]

If Taliban got 1/10 of the support Ukraine is getting US would have left Afghanistan in 2 months. You don't know what you are talking about, ask some real military experts what would have happened if taliban had 1/10th of the advanced weapons Ukraine is getting, weapons like ATGM's, SAM's, Snipers etc
Iraq was attacked two times by full power of US and its many allies, Iraq had outdated Soviet equipment, if Iraq had received even half of support Ukraine is receiving with advanced weapons and intelligence, Iraq would have beaten US or atleast defended against the invasion.

You sound like baghdad bob.

The USA had a technological advantage, yet kept spending more on defence then the rest of the world combined for decades…
It is a behemoth.


In 2 months, with a small force of 6000, together with northern alliance allies, they easily ousted taliban. Suffering 13 casualties….
America could have easily amassed 10 times the force. Yet this was not necessary.

And here you are stating that if taliban just got 1/10, meaning few hundreds javelin/manpads, handfull of tanks/artillery….they would have beaten the US in 2 months?


In iraq gulf war coalition had 950.000 men and lost..300?
such an imbalance in force would not be overcome with donation of some javelins and stingers….

Change your username please. Add “no” before it.

 

[Thinker3]

90 percent correct. Yes, Russia is against NATO expansion however Jelzin accepted the inevitable. He signed the deal with the Nato in 1997. for money. Probably he had no choice. He needed the money. Russia was on brink of collapse. militarily, economically weakened.
People can argue, hey, Russia accepted Nato expansion. Which is correct.

What is the proof of Jelzin signing a deal for NATO expansion?

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1565324471698874369

https://twitter.com/x/status/1565323101688283138

 

[Thinker3]

You sound like baghdad bob.

The USA had a technological advantage, yet kept spending more on defence then the rest of the world combined for decades…
It is a behemoth.


In 2 months, with a small force of 6000, together with northern alliance allies, they easily ousted taliban. Suffering 13 casualties….
America could have easily amassed 10 times the force. Yet this was not necessary.

And here you are stating that if taliban just got 1/10, meaning few hundreds javelin/manpads, handfull of tanks/artillery….they would have beaten the US in 2 months?


In iraq gulf war coalition had 950.000 men and lost..300?
such an imbalance in force would not be overcome with donation of some javelins and stingers….

Change your username please. Add “no” before it.

I don't argue with the ignorant.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1565318906553720834

 

[Viet]

What is the proof of Jelzin signing a deal for NATO expansion?

“Nato/Russia master file on basic principles”

Signed by Jelzin and all members of the Nato

You can google it.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1565321848396587009

 

[Tornado23]

I look at the numbers and the details and the iraqis were beaten so lopsidedly that a few hundreds of javelins and manpads would not have greatly affected the outcome. Let alone beaten the coalition in two months.

point stands.



Next time dont waste serverspace with shitposts….

Iraq did not possess any credible AT weaponry to destroy enemy tanks. All their equipment was heavily outdated and obsolete by the time it came to the first gulf War.

What is a base RpG7 supposed to do against an Abrams? Their tanks were obsolete using obsolete ammo. I mean the only credible thing they had wad their AD which shot down some 45 coalition jets down. (Total coalition losses come to 75).

You clearly didn't go into the details. You probably looked at numbers on the Wikipedia page and thought " omg muh nato so stronk"

 

[Thinker3]

Iraq did not possess any credible AT weaponry to destroy enemy tanks. All their equipment was heavily outdated and obsolete by the time it came to the first gulf War.

What is a base RpG7 supposed to do against an Abrams? Their tanks were obsolete using obsolete ammo. I mean the only credible thing they had wad their AD which shot down some 45 coalition jets down. (Total coalition losses come to 75).

You clearly didn't go into the details. You probably looked at numbers on the Wikipedia page and thought " omg muh nato so stronk"

Their Airdefence was also outdated, if they had the likes of S300 and other late Soviet weapons, or even late era Soviet manpads things would have been much different. Their Airforce was also outdated and obsolete.

 

[Thinker3]

“Nato/Russia master file on basic principles”

Signed by Jelzin and all members of the Nato

You can google it.

View attachment 875417

I can't find anything saying Jelzin agreed to NATO expansion, if you have something credible kindly share here.

 

[Viet]

I can't find anything saying Jelzin agreed to NATO expansion, if you have something credible kindly share here.

Here from the Nato
The Nato/Russia agreement of May 27, 1997
in 3 languages English, Russian and French

https://www.nato.int/nrc-website/media/59451/1997_nato_russia_founding_act.pdf

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Stop beat around the bush, Just go in and librate UKR, Lets see. Bet ya Amreak will only rely on proxies and terrorists.. Just go in I dare you... LMAO..

Makes me think of a pro-verb:

• It is ridiculous listening to lice coughing.

Why do you think anyone that makes decisions cares what You think more than they care about those lice?

Do you think it is smart to ”dare a thread participant” who observes but does not participate in decision making?

Or is it simply childish?

I can't find anything saying Jelzin agreed to NATO expansion, if you have something credible kindly share here.

Check the 1997 Foundation Act signed by Russia and NATO. It clearly states that it is up to each sovereign country to seek membership, and each NATO country has the sovereign right to accept and reject membership.
Russia ackowledges in that document that the NATO membership process is none of their business.