Here we go again-Ukraine once again - Page 680

Commander Wallace · 03-03-23, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vanjast

Hint:
The Ukraine war ended 6 months ago. (Errr = Russia won)
All you're seeing is videos/news of what they want you to see.
To make you believe that this war is on-going.. a distraction of sorts.
Russia doesn't engage in limited artillery/drone warfare.. they engage in scorched earth warfare - think about it.
The Ukrainian military are working with the Russians.

Some reality..
Joe Biden was executed in 2018/19. You're seeing a double (hint Truman show)
I think Putin is also a double (he was part of the NWO youth group) - remains to be clarified.

Think about this...
How many old 'world leaders' and others have you seen lately... Clintons, Obummers etc..
It's as if they've just disappeared.
Afraid not.. they've been executed.. gitmo trials etc..

Like the convid scam.. the ukraine scam has fooled many once again.
The alternative news (and MSM) is full junk.. but they are tellingyou right to your face what's happening.. and you cannot see it.

Yeah. Smoke another one.

August · 03-03-23, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vanjast

Hint:
The Ukraine war ended 6 months ago. (Errr = Russia won)
All you're seeing is videos/news of what they want you to see.
To make you believe that this war is on-going.. a distraction of sorts.
Russia doesn't engage in limited artillery/drone warfare.. they engage in scorched earth warfare - think about it.
The Ukrainian military are working with the Russians.

Some reality..
Joe Biden was executed in 2018/19. You're seeing a double (hint Truman show)
I think Putin is also a double (he was part of the NWO youth group) - remains to be clarified.

Think about this...
How many old 'world leaders' and others have you seen lately... Clintons, Obummers etc..
It's as if they've just disappeared.
Afraid not.. they've been executed.. gitmo trials etc..

Like the convid scam.. the ukraine scam has fooled many once again.
The alternative news (and MSM) is full junk.. but they are tellingyou right to your face what's happening.. and you cannot see it.

Dargo · 03-03-23, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

More and more repporters reporting from the vicinity of Bachmut say they see the Ukrainians pulling out important, valuable units from Bachmut, specialists and equipment that are too valuable to loose them, while the remaining bridge in the West the Ukrainians could use for supplying or retreatinging was bombed by Russian missiles, rebuild by Ukrainian engineers, and then bombed again. Reports are mounting in numbers saying that Ukrainian units at Bachmut have started to move West.

It looks to me that Bachmut is close to being given up by the Ukrainians. And this with Rasputitia having begun.

Ukraine has destroyed 2 more bridges in Bakhmut. One linked east Bakhmut to the center, suggesting the eastern withdrawal is almost done. The other splits, what was one of the last roads into the city. Russian forces are just a few hundred meters from seizing the last paved supply route. https://twitter.com/War_Mapper/statu...13160763006977

THE_MASK · 03-03-23, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vanjast

Hint:
The Ukraine war ended 6 months ago. (Errr = Russia won)
All you're seeing is videos/news of what they want you to see.
To make you believe that this war is on-going.. a distraction of sorts.
Russia doesn't engage in limited artillery/drone warfare.. they engage in scorched earth warfare - think about it.
The Ukrainian military are working with the Russians.

Some reality..
Joe Biden was executed in 2018/19. You're seeing a double (hint Truman show)
I think Putin is also a double (he was part of the NWO youth group) - remains to be clarified.

Think about this...
How many old 'world leaders' and others have you seen lately... Clintons, Obummers etc..
It's as if they've just disappeared.
Afraid not.. they've been executed.. gitmo trials etc..

Like the convid scam.. the ukraine scam has fooled many once again.
The alternative news (and MSM) is full junk.. but they are tellingyou right to your face what's happening.. and you cannot see it.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion . Thats all this is .

Buddahaid · 03-03-23, 09:14 PM

Stop feeding the troll.

Jimbuna · 03-04-23, 06:26 AM

Street fighting in Bakhmut but Russia not in control - deputy mayor

By Laura Gozzi
BBC News

Russian and Ukrainian forces are fighting in the streets of Bakhmut - but Russia does not control the eastern city, its deputy mayor has said.

Oleksandr Marchenko also told the BBC the remaining 4,000 civilians are living in shelters without access to gas, electricity or water.

Mr Marchenko said "not a single building" had remained untouched and that the city is "almost destroyed",

Bakhmut has seen months of fighting, as Russia tries to take charge.

"There is fighting near the city and there are also street fights," Mr Marchenko said.

Taking the city would be a rare battlefield success in recent months for Russia.

But despite that, the city's strategic value has been questioned. Some experts say any Russian victory could be pyrrhic - that is, not worth the cost.

Thousands of Russian troops have died trying to take Bakhmut, which had a pre-war population of around 75,000. Ukrainian commanders estimate that Russia has lost seven times as many soldiers as they have.

Now, after fierce shelling, Russian forces and troops from the Wagner private army appear to have surrounded much of Bakhmut.

On Saturday, UK military intelligence said Russian advances in the northern suburbs have left the Ukraine-held section of the city vulnerable to Russian attacks on three sides.

Mr Marchenko accused the Russians of having "no goal" to save the city and that it wanted to commit "genocide of the Ukrainian people".

"Currently there is no communication in the city so the city is cut out, the bridges are destroyed and the tactics the Russians are using is the tactic of parched land," Mr Marchenko told the Today programme.

The Institute for the Study of War said the Ukrainian army had blown up bridges in Bakhmut, which might indicate they are "seeking to inhibit Russian movement" as they make a "controlled fighting withdrawal".

Earlier this week, Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky said that the situation in the area was becoming "more and more difficult" - although the Ukrainian military said it had repelled numerous attacks since Friday.

The commander of Ukraine's ground forces, Col Gen Oleksandr Syrskyi, visited Bakhmut on Friday for meetings with local commanders.

"I believe we shouldn't give any inch of our land to the enemy," Mr Marchenko said. "We should protect our land, we should protect our people and we should protect the businesses that are on this land.

"And the reason why we shouldn't give it to them is because it will be very hard to take it back, to regain the control after Russians capture it."

Russia claimed the Donbas town of Soledar, about 10km (6.2 miles) from Bakhmut, in January following a long battle with the Ukrainian forces.

Soledar, too, was reportedly reduced to a wasteland of flattened buildings and rubble by the time the Ukrainian army retreated.

On Friday, President Zelensky stressed that artillery and shells were needed to "stop Russia".

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the country's latest package included high-precision Himars artillery rockets and howitzers "which Ukraine is using so effectively".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64846666

Jimbuna · 03-04-23, 06:33 AM

Jimbuna · 03-04-23, 06:48 AM

Skybird · 03-04-23, 06:48 AM

Neue Zürcher Zeitung:
-------------------------

Interview: "If you don't have grenades, you have to stop the enemy with people. This is very bloody": Yuri Butusov sees the fighting in Ukraine as part of a third world war

Ukraine's best-known military correspondent analyzes the fighting in Bachmut and the lack of competence of the government and army leadership. Resolute support of Kiev is clearly cheaper for the West than any alternative, he says. Yuri Butusov is Ukraine's best-known war reporter. The 46-year-old editor-in-chief of Censor.net, a portal financed largely by readers' contributions, spent many months on the front lines during the past year. Almost a quarter of a million people follow him on the messenger service Telegram. He sees himself, not without populist leanings, as the patriotic voice of the soldiers and the volunteers who support them. He does not shy away from harsh criticism of the army leadership and has repeatedly come into conflict with it.

Butusov made a name for himself as an investigative journalist at the turn of the millennium, and later provided journalistic support for the two democratic revolutions. After 2014, he was politically and journalistically active in the field of anti-corruption. In 2020, he also served as an advisor to the Ministry of Defense before withdrawing out of frustration with its lack of will to change.

Mr. Butuzov, you have compared the fighting for Bachmut with that of World War I. Has the war not changed in the last hundred years?

No, its nature has not changed. Even today there are people with assault rifles and hand grenades at the front. The greatest hero of this war is the infantryman who defends his homeland in the trenches. Nothing can replace him.

Doesn't that surprise you? The Russian army was considered to be highly modern, equipped with supposed superweapons.

The Russians were not ready for a long war of attrition. They did not expect us to resist. They are completely superior to us in practically all weapons categories and have accumulated large ammunition stockpiles over decades. But such a long front cannot be covered by any high-tech weapon in the world. Therefore, infantry warfare is inevitable.

Russia's war against Ukraine began in 2014, the full invasion more than a year ago. Many soldiers have been in the trenches for months. What does that do to their morale?

War makes stronger those who have strong character - and vice versa. Everything is black or white. In between runs the front, and people have to decide which side they are on. Ukrainians know that they are defending their homeland. Our motivation is higher than anyone would have expected. This allows us to beat back the attacks, even though Russia had been gearing up for this for a long time.

How well was Ukraine prepared for the war?

Poorly. It is clear: only an aggressor can really plan the war. Because he wants to attack. A peaceable country is never well prepared. But the state must have a system to quickly mobilize the population, train soldiers and make them ready to fight. Our state had hardly stockpiled ammunition, had not prepared a defense plan, and had not built sufficient fortifications.

In the days leading up to February 24, 2022, in the face of the imminent threat of war, one had the feeling that President Selensky was almost engaging in denial of reality.

In any democratic country, it is difficult to radically increase army spending during peacetime. But President Selensky told Ukrainians for three years that there would be no war - until the day before the Russian attack. That he did not prepare the population in any way was a huge mistake that is now having tragic consequences.

Has the administration corrected those mistakes since then?

The president makes a convincing appearance before the international community; he does it very well. But he doesn't understand anything about warfare or defense. This remains primitive and does not meet the requirements of modern war. Our commander-in-chief, unfortunately, is not very competent militarily. But Ukrainian society has a great capacity for self-organization. So incompetence is not a tragedy. It cannot stop us.

Does this incompetence also apply to the Ministry of Defense? The Ministry recently made headlines with alleged corruption in the purchase of food.

Such scandals are the result of poor organization. There is no professional leadership in the Ministry of Defense, partly because Minister Resnikov is fully absorbed with foreign policy. Meanwhile, at home, many issues remain unresolved. The logistics problems are solved by Ukrainian volunteers. Unfortunately, the Ukrainian army is in great need of reform.

Soviet traditions remain strong, despite a scant decade of cooperation with NATO?

People overestimate the modernization of our army. Reconstruction along NATO lines has only just begun, and the principles of combat are still Soviet. We have not professionalized NCO training, and there are no "after action reviews" in which lessons are systematically learned from missions. As a result, we often repeat mistakes.

Nevertheless, over 20,000 soldiers have been trained in Western countries since the war began. Does that change the mentality in the army?

An army is a hierarchical system. You have to change the mentality of the generals. And the politicians who lead them. The soldiers carry out orders. There is nothing wrong with their mentality. If people go to war under the prevailing conditions, they are already patriots. The decisive importance in the war is the commanders. They have to change.

What are the consequences if they do not?

Losses. If commanders don't get better at leadership, planning and intelligence, they lose people - and maybe the war. If you lose your forces, you become less effective. We have very large losses. But Ukrainians are more motivated and smarter than Russians. If people are motivated, you can quickly turn them into qualified soldiers - and commanders. The losses have less fatal consequences.

Nevertheless, the army is under a lot of pressure at the moment, especially in Bachmut.

In Bachmut we have a lot of good soldiers. They are doing everything they can not only to stop the Russian army, but to crush it. Bachmut is excellent for defensive fighting: there are very many positions from which you can effectively destroy the enemy. But to exploit this advantage, systematic decisions are needed at the leadership level. We need to get better tactically.
How.

The key to success is to inflict losses on the enemy that they cannot replace. You need to hit the best and most motivated units, the competent officers and NCOs. Without them, the army loses the ability to attack and fight. This can be as great as it is, but it achieves nothing if it has no people to lead units in battle.

The Russians suffered enormous losses in the first year of the war especially in this group.

That's why we broke through last fall in Balaklija and Isjum. The Russians had more tanks than we did, they had an air force, and they knew approximately where we would attack. But they were tactically unable to do anything about it. That's what happens when an army loses its fighting ability in heavy battles. In Kherson, on the other hand, the Russians were able to withdraw in an orderly fashion.

Since then, the front has largely stagnated. Have the Russians adapted to Ukrainian warfare?

Yes, already for the second time. They first tried blitzkrieg and failed at Kiev. Then they tried to destroy our best units in the Donbass with artillery. They suffered a defeat as we destroyed their huge ammunition depots near the front thanks to the Himars rocket launchers. Now Putin is using his soldiers as cannon fodder to break through our defenses in Bachmut.

The question of mobilizing enough soldiers preoccupies both sides. True, the Ukrainian government always stresses that it needs weapons from the West more urgently than troops. But these days, posters for recruitment are hanging all over the country.

In a war this big, there are never enough forces. We are fighting against a country of 140 million and an army of 1.5 million. We could only avoid mobilization if we had a superiority in ammunition. If you don't have grenades, you have to stop the enemy with people. That is very bloody.

Is the West's help enough?

The West always remains one step behind Putin, as it was behind Hitler in 1938. It is true that states have learned lessons from the mistakes of appeasement at that time: they support Ukraine with weapons and thus prevent Putin from advancing further toward Europe. And yet, there is a lack of understanding on this continent that the active phase of the third world war has begun in our country.

The third world war, really?

Yes, a world war in which Russia seeks to secure its sphere of influence through military force and nuclear blackmail. The fighting in Ukraine is long past regional. China and Iran are poised to change the balance of power in their regions of the world. Therefore, the West must not cut back its military aid. By doing so, it signaled to the revisionist powers that it cannot defend its interests. That would be fatal.

In Europe, people believe that the war must be limited to Ukraine in order to prevent escalation.

Yes, that is understandable. But by trying to avoid risks, politicians end up putting much more at risk. If the Russians conclude that sanctions will not stop their war and the West continues to trade with them, they will behave even more aggressively. Putin can threaten anyone he wants with nuclear war, including NATO. After all, there are enough unresolved territorial issues, for example with the Baltic states. The EU should therefore make it clear that it will not accept Russia using force to influence Europe.

But this is difficult to convey because Russia only threatens the EU indirectly.

Maybe. But the Russians are learning a lot from this war. They invest their money in those areas of the military that are successful. The West does not have a similarly large arms production. It remains technologically superior to Russia, especially in air power. But in drones and electronic warfare, the Russians and Chinese have developed technical solutions for large-scale warfare. Incidentally, Swiss ammunition for the German Gepard anti-aircraft tanks would be the best means of defense against drone attacks.

Switzerland is blocking this delivery with reference to neutrality and the War Material Act, which prohibits exports to belligerent states . . .

. . . but that has not stopped it from making such deliveries in the past. And it's not about Ukraine asking for aerial bombs. It's about defense. Not delivering increases costs for Switzerland.

Why?

If Russia threatens Europe, Switzerland will also have to upgrade its army at a cost of tens of billions of francs. It is much cheaper for the Europeans if each country delivers munitions to Ukraine for a few billion. Staying out of this war will not lead to peace. Russia will not become weaker. But the threat remains more controllable if it is stopped here.
Butusov believes that Putin also threatens Europe if he is not stopped in Ukraine.
Butusov believes Putin also threatens Europe if not stopped in Ukraine.
John Moore / Getty

How will the war unfold in the near future?

On the front lines, there will be a battle for the initiative, not big offensive operations, but a war of positions. Both sides will try to disintegrate the enemy's order of battle in order to create conditions for breakthroughs.

With what goal for Moscow?

The Russians want to capture the entire Donbass in 2023. After that, they aim to conquer all of Ukraine on the left bank of the Dnipro River and the south. They want to destroy Ukrainians as an enemy - and as an independent state.
----------------------------

Jimbuna · 03-04-23, 07:00 AM

Skybird · 03-04-23, 07:08 AM

Neue Zürcher Zeitung:
-------------------------
Expansion of the zone of hardship - under the catastrophic effect of the Russian war of aggression, the political weights of Europe are shifting.

The Russian war of annihilation against Ukraine has created a new political dynamic in Europe. Berlin and Paris refuse to lead, the South stays away, but Poland, the Baltic states, the Scandinavians and the British take the reins.

A new political geography of Europe is emerging. One year after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the political balance in Europe is shifting. Whereas the euro crisis had opened up a front line between the south and the north and the migration crisis of 2015 had created a rift between Berlin and Brussels on the one hand and the eastern member states of the EU on the other, the continent is now experiencing a third spatial alliance formation in a short period of time: In the north and northeast of the continent, a group of states is forming that takes the Russian threat seriously and sees the war against Ukraine for what it is: a frontal assault by Russia on liberal Europe.

Since the beginning of the war against Ukraine, several states have emerged that are shaping security strategies in Europe along the lines of the United States: These are Poland and Finland within the EU and Great Britain outside the Union. Grouped around these states are other countries that share the analysis of Russian policy made in London, Warsaw, and Helsinki: These are Sweden, Norway, the Baltic countries, Denmark, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia.

This group of states is currently united by a common security interest and also because of concerns about the inadequate political leadership by the largest states of the EU, Germany, France and also Italy, which is weaker in this field.

They are also united by deeds: they continuously supply Ukraine with weapons on a large scale, and they determine the European discussion on the expansion of military aid to Kiev, as recently the Netherlands, which advocates the handover of urgently needed fighter jets to Ukraine. Or the newly elected Czech president, who wants to provide Ukraine with everything it needs except nuclear weapons.

A year after the Russian invasion, it has become clear that Berlin and Paris are struggling to move beyond political rhetoric and take a firm stand against Russia as a fundamental threat to the continent. The slogan of the government in Berlin that it wants to prevent a defeat of Ukraine must be taken seriously here. Russia must not be humiliated under any circumstances, they say in Paris. In the final analysis, Berlin and Paris are unable to break away from their decades-long policy toward Russia, either in the idea that Europe could be shaped without Russia or in the lucrative business ties, many of which have still not been cut.

The party-political disputes in Berlin over the extent of support for Ukraine have unsettled all those states that feel threatened by Russia. Whether Germany can really be relied upon in an emergency remains questionable in view of the state of the Bundeswehr, but also the widespread combination of anti-Americanism, Russophilia and pacifism.

Beyond the German debate, hardly anyone will follow the German government's reading of the junket between the simultaneous pledge of German and American tanks as a display of the chancellor's statesmanship. Should further Russian offensives lead to Ukrainian defeats, it would become clear that the denial of heavy weapons requested by Ukraine was the deliberate omission of the German government. What is troubling is the lack of coordination between Paris and Berlin and the inability of the two governments to demonstrate real unity even in symbolic acts such as the 60th anniversary celebration of the Élysée Treaty.

Ukraine, which is struggling for survival, is the victim of Franco-German weakness. It and all of Russia's neighbors must also take note of the fact that Italy and Spain accept the war in the east as the basic noise of European policy and themselves provide military assistance only in homeopathic doses.

The further west and south a country is, the less the Russian threat is considered to be. Added to this are countries such as openly Russia-friendly Hungary or Austria, which sends out easily misunderstood signals and is not unjustly regarded by Russia's neighbors as an insecure cantonist.

While in Western Europe and in the German-speaking countries it is readily believed that finely tuned survival aid to Ukraine is sufficient to limit the war spatially, numerous other states follow a different interpretation of Russian aggression: Most of them have a painful experience with their Russian neighbor, either because they were occupied by the Soviet Union for decades like the Baltic states, fought for their survival against the Red Army like Finland, were vassals of Moscow like Poland and the Czech Republic, had to put up with crimes like the shooting down of a Malaysia Airlines passenger plane by pro-Russian militias like the Netherlands, or see elementary state interests threatened by Moscow like Sweden and Norway despite all efforts to be good neighbors.

Finally, Great Britain follows the centuries-old logic of its foreign policy that its security is not defended at the English Channel, but on the continent, within the framework of an alliance structured by London. In the case of the aforementioned states, membership in the EU and NATO overlap only to a limited extent, since Norway and Great Britain are not members of the Union, and Sweden and Finland are not (yet) members of NATO.

The European Union is strongly built around the Berlin-Paris axis, and both governments have, if not creative power, then considerable preventive power. It is not easy to build alliances around these two states, and it would be better if such a case did not arise at all. But the hesitation and low reliability of Paris and Berlin force all those countries to adopt an active policy that must protect their security vis-à-vis Russia for sheer reasons of state.

Thus, Finland stepped out of its role as a silent partner, applied for NATO membership and began to act as a foreign policy actor in the wider Baltic Sea region. In fact, Finland, which has the largest army in the Baltic and Scandinavia with very good equipment and has been preparing extensively for a Russian attack for years, is also a protective power of the northern Baltic. This is far more than the modest German troop presence in the region. The Finns also contrast in their mental preparedness with the testy debating German society, which has little sustainability in terms of defense policy.

The Baltic states know that their existence is threatened: This explains the enormous efforts of Estonia, for example, to supply Ukraine with armaments, as well as the uncompromising stance of Latvia and Lithuania, which, unlike parts of the German public, know that Russian expansion can fundamentally endanger the existence of entire societies.

Poland, which had been divided four times by Prussia/Germany and Russia between 1772 and 1939, realigned its previously tense relationship with Ukraine after 1989: Without a stable and democratic Ukraine, there is no sustainable security for Poland. And Ukraine's stability has been increasingly threatened by one country for three decades, and that is Russia. The disputes about constitutionally questionable measures of the national-conservative government in Warsaw with the European Commission and also with Berlin have tied up many forces and have not served Poland's position.

However, distrust of the German government and especially of the SPD is justified in Poland, both across party lines and in terms of content. It should therefore come as no surprise that Poland is consistently aligning itself with the U.S. in terms of security policy and is currently also entering into arms policy partnerships outside Europe, such as with South Korea, where Poland purchased armaments for around six billion dollars in the summer of 2022 and initiated a defense cooperation whose volume is probably more than twice as large.

As the most populous country in the east of the EU and a traditional middle power in the region, Poland is called upon to take the lead. The coordination with the Baltic states is particularly close, which also has a long history. The old rivals in the Baltic, Sweden and Poland, now find themselves on the same side for the first time, and the accession of Sweden and Finland, which will take place soon or in the medium term, will transform the Baltic into an almost closed NATO area.

Europe's security depends heavily on the ability of the aforementioned states to quickly come together as an association of interests capable of acting in close coordination with the United States. And this is urgently needed: The military situation in Ukraine is serious. The suffering of the civilian population, which is enduring under Russia's bombing terror, is often forgotten. Russia is apparently preparing for a full-scale attack. It is the European Northeast that is standing together to oppose it. And it would be good if Paris and Berlin followed its lead.

The author Oliver Jens Schmitt is a professor of Eastern European history at the University of Vienna.
----------------------

Skybird · 03-04-23, 08:58 AM

Rheinmetall is in negotiations with Kyiv to build a tank factory inside ukraine with the capacity to build 400 KF51 Panther MBTs per year. Rheinmetall says they hope for a decision within the next 2 months.

It was not specified whether they want to build it with the war still raging, or after a possible end of the war. In case of the first I am wondering what they think why Russia would not paint a big fat crosshair onto the plant like on the many others of the Ukrainian arms industry that had been bombed into oblivion meanwhile.

Maybe its all a marketing gag by Rheinmetall to promote their new tank model. Rheinmetall is locked in kind of an infight with KMW who produces the Leopard-2. That RM offers a new tank on chassis basis of the Leopard-2 while partnering with KMW in producing the Leo-2A6/A7 is taken not well by KMW.

Jimbuna · 03-04-23, 11:13 AM

Scholz told Biden that Germany would support Ukraine as long as needed

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said during a meeting at the White House with US President Joseph Biden that Germany will support Ukraine as long as necessary

This is reported by CNN, Censor.NET informs.

"This is a very, very important year because of the very dangerous threat to the world that comes from Russia invading Ukraine, and it is very important that we acted together, that we organized in step, and that we made it possible that we could give the necessary support Ukraine during all this time," said Scholz at the meeting on Friday.

In turn, Biden noted that Scholz's support for Ukraine "was of great importance" during the war.

"As NATO allies, we are making the alliance stronger and more capable," the American leader added. Source: https://censor.net/en/n3403617

Russia has no intention of sincerely negotiating peace with Ukraine - Canadian intelligence

Russia’s actions directly contradict its statements about its alleged openness to peace talks with Ukraine.

As Censor.NET informs, this is stated in the message of the intelligence department of the Armed Forces of Canada on Twitter.

"Russia regularly states that it is open to negotiations to end the war in Ukraine. According to our analysis, Russia continues to demonstrate commitment to its maximalist military goals, which contradicts its declared openness to a negotiated settlement of the conflict," Canadian intelligence said.

According to its representatives, a clear example of this is Russia's insistence on preserving the four temporarily occupied regions of Ukraine as part of the Russian Federation as a prerequisite for a peace agreement.

"Russia knows that its conditions are unacceptable for Ukraine, which proves Russia's reluctance to sincerely negotiate a peace agreement," the Canadian Armed Forces noted. Source: https://censor.net/en/n3403635

Russia must pay for aggression against Ukraine, - von der Leyen said

Russia and its leadership must be held accountable for the crimes committed in Ukraine.

This is stated in the statement of the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, on the establishment of the International Center for Prosecution of Crimes of Aggression against Ukraine, Censor.NET reports with reference to Interfax-Ukraine.

"Russia's invasion has brought untold suffering to Ukraine... More and more evidence is emerging of direct attacks on the civilian population, as well as on energy and other infrastructure facilities. Russian forces are known to have used torture, ill-treatment, sexual violence and executions without due process. Even children are not spared. Russia must be held accountable for these heinous crimes. Putin must be held accountable. We must do everything in our power to bring those responsible to justice," the statement said.

According to von der Leyen, the EU supports the role of the International Criminal Court. "We also believe that a special tribunal is needed to prosecute Russia for the crime of aggression. And I am proud that at this conference, as a first step, you will sign an agreement to establish an International Center for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression in The Hague. The European Union, together with our partners, will continue to work to make Russia pay," she said.

"We are united in the fight for justice for Ukraine," the head of the European Commission emphasized. Source: https://censor.net/en/n3403662

Jimbuna · 03-04-23, 11:42 AM

Total combat losses of Russian Federation since beginning of war - about 152,190 people (+820 per day), 302 planes, 3,409 tanks, 2,414 artillery systems, 6,683 armored vehicles. INFOGRAPHICS

As of the morning of March 4, 2023, the losses of the Russian occupiers are approximately 152,190 people.

This is reported by Censor.NET with reference to the press center of the General Staff.

As noted, the total combat losses of the enemy from 24.02.22 to 03.04.23 are approximately:

personnel - about 152,190 (+820) people were eliminated,
tanks - 3409 (+4) units,
armored combat vehicles - 6683 (+10) units,
artillery systems - 2414 (+12) units,
MLRS - 487 (+3) units,
air defense equipment - 247 (+0) units,
aircraft - 302 (+1) units,
helicopters - 289 (+0) units,
UAVs of operational-tactical level - 2066 (+5),
cruise missiles - 873 (+0),
ships/boats - 18 (+0) units,
automotive equipment and tank trucks - 5289 (+8) units,
special equipment - 230 (+0). Source: https://censor.net/en/n3403626

Russian Federation lost more than 200,000 people. 1,800 officers were killed and wounded, - NATO commander in Europe, Kavoli

Christopher Cavoli, NATO’s commander-in-chief in Europe, said that Russia had lost more than 200,000 people killed and wounded in Ukraine.

As Censor.NET informs with reference to Spiegel, Cavoli said this at the traditional Matiae meal at the Hamburg Town Hall.

According to him, after the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, NATO needs to adapt to the new reality.

He noted that the scale of the war against Ukraine is incredible, and the Russians have lost more than 2,000 main battle tanks.

Cavoli also noted that more than 200,000 people were killed or wounded, including more than 1,800 officers.

Also, as the general stated, the Russian army produces more than 23,000 artillery shells per day.

"If somebody comes with a tank, you have to have a tank too. But one of the lessons of the Cold War is that the accuracy of the weapon is what counts. In addition, the production capacity of the defense industry is important. The war will be won by the one who can produce the fastest," he said. Source: https://censor.net/en/n3403648

Jimbuna · 03-04-23, 01:18 PM

03-03-23, 09:14 PM	#10190
Buddahaid Shark above Space Chicken Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 9,333 Downloads: 162 Uploads: 0	Stop feeding the troll. __________________ "However vast the darkness, we must provide our own light." Stanley Kubrick "Tomorrow belongs to those who can hear it coming." David Bowie

03-04-23, 06:26 AM	#10191
Jimbuna Chief of the Boat Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 250 metres below the surface Posts: 191,142 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 13	Street fighting in Bakhmut but Russia not in control - deputy mayor By Laura Gozzi BBC News Russian and Ukrainian forces are fighting in the streets of Bakhmut - but Russia does not control the eastern city, its deputy mayor has said. Oleksandr Marchenko also told the BBC the remaining 4,000 civilians are living in shelters without access to gas, electricity or water. Mr Marchenko said "not a single building" had remained untouched and that the city is "almost destroyed", Bakhmut has seen months of fighting, as Russia tries to take charge. "There is fighting near the city and there are also street fights," Mr Marchenko said. Taking the city would be a rare battlefield success in recent months for Russia. But despite that, the city's strategic value has been questioned. Some experts say any Russian victory could be pyrrhic - that is, not worth the cost. Thousands of Russian troops have died trying to take Bakhmut, which had a pre-war population of around 75,000. Ukrainian commanders estimate that Russia has lost seven times as many soldiers as they have. Now, after fierce shelling, Russian forces and troops from the Wagner private army appear to have surrounded much of Bakhmut. On Saturday, UK military intelligence said Russian advances in the northern suburbs have left the Ukraine-held section of the city vulnerable to Russian attacks on three sides. Mr Marchenko accused the Russians of having "no goal" to save the city and that it wanted to commit "genocide of the Ukrainian people". "Currently there is no communication in the city so the city is cut out, the bridges are destroyed and the tactics the Russians are using is the tactic of parched land," Mr Marchenko told the Today programme. The Institute for the Study of War said the Ukrainian army had blown up bridges in Bakhmut, which might indicate they are "seeking to inhibit Russian movement" as they make a "controlled fighting withdrawal". Earlier this week, Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky said that the situation in the area was becoming "more and more difficult" - although the Ukrainian military said it had repelled numerous attacks since Friday. The commander of Ukraine's ground forces, Col Gen Oleksandr Syrskyi, visited Bakhmut on Friday for meetings with local commanders. "I believe we shouldn't give any inch of our land to the enemy," Mr Marchenko said. "We should protect our land, we should protect our people and we should protect the businesses that are on this land. "And the reason why we shouldn't give it to them is because it will be very hard to take it back, to regain the control after Russians capture it." Russia claimed the Donbas town of Soledar, about 10km (6.2 miles) from Bakhmut, in January following a long battle with the Ukrainian forces. Soledar, too, was reportedly reduced to a wasteland of flattened buildings and rubble by the time the Ukrainian army retreated. On Friday, President Zelensky stressed that artillery and shells were needed to "stop Russia". US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the country's latest package included high-precision Himars artillery rockets and howitzers "which Ukraine is using so effectively". https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64846666 __________________ Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. Oh my God, not again!!

03-04-23, 06:33 AM	#10192
Jimbuna Chief of the Boat Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 250 metres below the surface Posts: 191,142 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 13	__________________ Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. Oh my God, not again!!

03-04-23, 06:48 AM	#10193
Jimbuna Chief of the Boat Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 250 metres below the surface Posts: 191,142 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 13	__________________ Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. Oh my God, not again!!

03-04-23, 06:48 AM	#10194
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,736 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Neue Zürcher Zeitung: ------------------------- Interview: "If you don't have grenades, you have to stop the enemy with people. This is very bloody": Yuri Butusov sees the fighting in Ukraine as part of a third world war Ukraine's best-known military correspondent analyzes the fighting in Bachmut and the lack of competence of the government and army leadership. Resolute support of Kiev is clearly cheaper for the West than any alternative, he says. Yuri Butusov is Ukraine's best-known war reporter. The 46-year-old editor-in-chief of Censor.net, a portal financed largely by readers' contributions, spent many months on the front lines during the past year. Almost a quarter of a million people follow him on the messenger service Telegram. He sees himself, not without populist leanings, as the patriotic voice of the soldiers and the volunteers who support them. He does not shy away from harsh criticism of the army leadership and has repeatedly come into conflict with it. Butusov made a name for himself as an investigative journalist at the turn of the millennium, and later provided journalistic support for the two democratic revolutions. After 2014, he was politically and journalistically active in the field of anti-corruption. In 2020, he also served as an advisor to the Ministry of Defense before withdrawing out of frustration with its lack of will to change. Mr. Butuzov, you have compared the fighting for Bachmut with that of World War I. Has the war not changed in the last hundred years? No, its nature has not changed. Even today there are people with assault rifles and hand grenades at the front. The greatest hero of this war is the infantryman who defends his homeland in the trenches. Nothing can replace him. Doesn't that surprise you? The Russian army was considered to be highly modern, equipped with supposed superweapons. The Russians were not ready for a long war of attrition. They did not expect us to resist. They are completely superior to us in practically all weapons categories and have accumulated large ammunition stockpiles over decades. But such a long front cannot be covered by any high-tech weapon in the world. Therefore, infantry warfare is inevitable. Russia's war against Ukraine began in 2014, the full invasion more than a year ago. Many soldiers have been in the trenches for months. What does that do to their morale? War makes stronger those who have strong character - and vice versa. Everything is black or white. In between runs the front, and people have to decide which side they are on. Ukrainians know that they are defending their homeland. Our motivation is higher than anyone would have expected. This allows us to beat back the attacks, even though Russia had been gearing up for this for a long time. How well was Ukraine prepared for the war? Poorly. It is clear: only an aggressor can really plan the war. Because he wants to attack. A peaceable country is never well prepared. But the state must have a system to quickly mobilize the population, train soldiers and make them ready to fight. Our state had hardly stockpiled ammunition, had not prepared a defense plan, and had not built sufficient fortifications. In the days leading up to February 24, 2022, in the face of the imminent threat of war, one had the feeling that President Selensky was almost engaging in denial of reality. In any democratic country, it is difficult to radically increase army spending during peacetime. But President Selensky told Ukrainians for three years that there would be no war - until the day before the Russian attack. That he did not prepare the population in any way was a huge mistake that is now having tragic consequences. *Has the administration corrected those mistakes since then?* The president makes a convincing appearance before the international community; he does it very well. But he doesn't understand anything about warfare or defense. This remains primitive and does not meet the requirements of modern war. Our commander-in-chief, unfortunately, is not very competent militarily. But Ukrainian society has a great capacity for self-organization. So incompetence is not a tragedy. It cannot stop us. Does this incompetence also apply to the Ministry of Defense? The Ministry recently made headlines with alleged corruption in the purchase of food. Such scandals are the result of poor organization. There is no professional leadership in the Ministry of Defense, partly because Minister Resnikov is fully absorbed with foreign policy. Meanwhile, at home, many issues remain unresolved. The logistics problems are solved by Ukrainian volunteers. Unfortunately, the Ukrainian army is in great need of reform. Soviet traditions remain strong, despite a scant decade of cooperation with NATO? People overestimate the modernization of our army. Reconstruction along NATO lines has only just begun, and the principles of combat are still Soviet. We have not professionalized NCO training, and there are no "after action reviews" in which lessons are systematically learned from missions. As a result, we often repeat mistakes. Nevertheless, over 20,000 soldiers have been trained in Western countries since the war began. Does that change the mentality in the army? An army is a hierarchical system. You have to change the mentality of the generals. And the politicians who lead them. The soldiers carry out orders. There is nothing wrong with their mentality. If people go to war under the prevailing conditions, they are already patriots. The decisive importance in the war is the commanders. They have to change. What are the consequences if they do not? Losses. If commanders don't get better at leadership, planning and intelligence, they lose people - and maybe the war. If you lose your forces, you become less effective. We have very large losses. But Ukrainians are more motivated and smarter than Russians. If people are motivated, you can quickly turn them into qualified soldiers - and commanders. The losses have less fatal consequences. Nevertheless, the army is under a lot of pressure at the moment, especially in Bachmut. In Bachmut we have a lot of good soldiers. They are doing everything they can not only to stop the Russian army, but to crush it. Bachmut is excellent for defensive fighting: there are very many positions from which you can effectively destroy the enemy. But to exploit this advantage, systematic decisions are needed at the leadership level. We need to get better tactically. How. The key to success is to inflict losses on the enemy that they cannot replace. You need to hit the best and most motivated units, the competent officers and NCOs. Without them, the army loses the ability to attack and fight. This can be as great as it is, but it achieves nothing if it has no people to lead units in battle. The Russians suffered enormous losses in the first year of the war especially in this group. That's why we broke through last fall in Balaklija and Isjum. The Russians had more tanks than we did, they had an air force, and they knew approximately where we would attack. But they were tactically unable to do anything about it. That's what happens when an army loses its fighting ability in heavy battles. In Kherson, on the other hand, the Russians were able to withdraw in an orderly fashion. Since then, the front has largely stagnated. Have the Russians adapted to Ukrainian warfare? Yes, already for the second time. They first tried blitzkrieg and failed at Kiev. Then they tried to destroy our best units in the Donbass with artillery. They suffered a defeat as we destroyed their huge ammunition depots near the front thanks to the Himars rocket launchers. Now Putin is using his soldiers as cannon fodder to break through our defenses in Bachmut. The question of mobilizing enough soldiers preoccupies both sides. True, the Ukrainian government always stresses that it needs weapons from the West more urgently than troops. But these days, posters for recruitment are hanging all over the country. In a war this big, there are never enough forces. We are fighting against a country of 140 million and an army of 1.5 million. We could only avoid mobilization if we had a superiority in ammunition. If you don't have grenades, you have to stop the enemy with people. That is very bloody. Is the West's help enough? The West always remains one step behind Putin, as it was behind Hitler in 1938. It is true that states have learned lessons from the mistakes of appeasement at that time: they support Ukraine with weapons and thus prevent Putin from advancing further toward Europe. And yet, there is a lack of understanding on this continent that the active phase of the third world war has begun in our country. The third world war, really? Yes, a world war in which Russia seeks to secure its sphere of influence through military force and nuclear blackmail. The fighting in Ukraine is long past regional. China and Iran are poised to change the balance of power in their regions of the world. Therefore, the West must not cut back its military aid. By doing so, it signaled to the revisionist powers that it cannot defend its interests. That would be fatal. In Europe, people believe that the war must be limited to Ukraine in order to prevent escalation. Yes, that is understandable. But by trying to avoid risks, politicians end up putting much more at risk. If the Russians conclude that sanctions will not stop their war and the West continues to trade with them, they will behave even more aggressively. Putin can threaten anyone he wants with nuclear war, including NATO. After all, there are enough unresolved territorial issues, for example with the Baltic states. The EU should therefore make it clear that it will not accept Russia using force to influence Europe. But this is difficult to convey because Russia only threatens the EU indirectly. Maybe. But the Russians are learning a lot from this war. They invest their money in those areas of the military that are successful. The West does not have a similarly large arms production. It remains technologically superior to Russia, especially in air power. But in drones and electronic warfare, the Russians and Chinese have developed technical solutions for large-scale warfare. Incidentally, Swiss ammunition for the German Gepard anti-aircraft tanks would be the best means of defense against drone attacks. Switzerland is blocking this delivery with reference to neutrality and the War Material Act, which prohibits exports to belligerent states . . . . . . but that has not stopped it from making such deliveries in the past. And it's not about Ukraine asking for aerial bombs. It's about defense. Not delivering increases costs for Switzerland. Why? If Russia threatens Europe, Switzerland will also have to upgrade its army at a cost of tens of billions of francs. It is much cheaper for the Europeans if each country delivers munitions to Ukraine for a few billion. Staying out of this war will not lead to peace. Russia will not become weaker. But the threat remains more controllable if it is stopped here. Butusov believes that Putin also threatens Europe if he is not stopped in Ukraine. Butusov believes Putin also threatens Europe if not stopped in Ukraine. John Moore / Getty How will the war unfold in the near future? On the front lines, there will be a battle for the initiative, not big offensive operations, but a war of positions. Both sides will try to disintegrate the enemy's order of battle in order to create conditions for breakthroughs. With what goal for Moscow? The Russians want to capture the entire Donbass in 2023. After that, they aim to conquer all of Ukraine on the left bank of the Dnipro River and the south. They want to destroy Ukrainians as an enemy - and as an independent state. ---------------------------- __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

03-04-23, 07:00 AM	#10195
Jimbuna Chief of the Boat Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 250 metres below the surface Posts: 191,142 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 13	__________________ Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. Oh my God, not again!!

03-04-23, 07:08 AM	#10196
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,736 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Neue Zürcher Zeitung: ------------------------- *Expansion of the zone of hardship - under the catastrophic effect of the Russian war of aggression, the political weights of Europe are shifting.* The Russian war of annihilation against Ukraine has created a new political dynamic in Europe. Berlin and Paris refuse to lead, the South stays away, but Poland, the Baltic states, the Scandinavians and the British take the reins. A new political geography of Europe is emerging. One year after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the political balance in Europe is shifting. Whereas the euro crisis had opened up a front line between the south and the north and the migration crisis of 2015 had created a rift between Berlin and Brussels on the one hand and the eastern member states of the EU on the other, the continent is now experiencing a third spatial alliance formation in a short period of time: In the north and northeast of the continent, a group of states is forming that takes the Russian threat seriously and sees the war against Ukraine for what it is: a frontal assault by Russia on liberal Europe. Since the beginning of the war against Ukraine, several states have emerged that are shaping security strategies in Europe along the lines of the United States: These are Poland and Finland within the EU and Great Britain outside the Union. Grouped around these states are other countries that share the analysis of Russian policy made in London, Warsaw, and Helsinki: These are Sweden, Norway, the Baltic countries, Denmark, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia. This group of states is currently united by a common security interest and also because of concerns about the inadequate political leadership by the largest states of the EU, Germany, France and also Italy, which is weaker in this field. They are also united by deeds: they continuously supply Ukraine with weapons on a large scale, and they determine the European discussion on the expansion of military aid to Kiev, as recently the Netherlands, which advocates the handover of urgently needed fighter jets to Ukraine. Or the newly elected Czech president, who wants to provide Ukraine with everything it needs except nuclear weapons. A year after the Russian invasion, it has become clear that Berlin and Paris are struggling to move beyond political rhetoric and take a firm stand against Russia as a fundamental threat to the continent. The slogan of the government in Berlin that it wants to prevent a defeat of Ukraine must be taken seriously here. Russia must not be humiliated under any circumstances, they say in Paris. In the final analysis, Berlin and Paris are unable to break away from their decades-long policy toward Russia, either in the idea that Europe could be shaped without Russia or in the lucrative business ties, many of which have still not been cut. The party-political disputes in Berlin over the extent of support for Ukraine have unsettled all those states that feel threatened by Russia. Whether Germany can really be relied upon in an emergency remains questionable in view of the state of the Bundeswehr, but also the widespread combination of anti-Americanism, Russophilia and pacifism. Beyond the German debate, hardly anyone will follow the German government's reading of the junket between the simultaneous pledge of German and American tanks as a display of the chancellor's statesmanship. Should further Russian offensives lead to Ukrainian defeats, it would become clear that the denial of heavy weapons requested by Ukraine was the deliberate omission of the German government. What is troubling is the lack of coordination between Paris and Berlin and the inability of the two governments to demonstrate real unity even in symbolic acts such as the 60th anniversary celebration of the Élysée Treaty. Ukraine, which is struggling for survival, is the victim of Franco-German weakness. It and all of Russia's neighbors must also take note of the fact that Italy and Spain accept the war in the east as the basic noise of European policy and themselves provide military assistance only in homeopathic doses. The further west and south a country is, the less the Russian threat is considered to be. Added to this are countries such as openly Russia-friendly Hungary or Austria, which sends out easily misunderstood signals and is not unjustly regarded by Russia's neighbors as an insecure cantonist. While in Western Europe and in the German-speaking countries it is readily believed that finely tuned survival aid to Ukraine is sufficient to limit the war spatially, numerous other states follow a different interpretation of Russian aggression: Most of them have a painful experience with their Russian neighbor, either because they were occupied by the Soviet Union for decades like the Baltic states, fought for their survival against the Red Army like Finland, were vassals of Moscow like Poland and the Czech Republic, had to put up with crimes like the shooting down of a Malaysia Airlines passenger plane by pro-Russian militias like the Netherlands, or see elementary state interests threatened by Moscow like Sweden and Norway despite all efforts to be good neighbors. Finally, Great Britain follows the centuries-old logic of its foreign policy that its security is not defended at the English Channel, but on the continent, within the framework of an alliance structured by London. In the case of the aforementioned states, membership in the EU and NATO overlap only to a limited extent, since Norway and Great Britain are not members of the Union, and Sweden and Finland are not (yet) members of NATO. The European Union is strongly built around the Berlin-Paris axis, and both governments have, if not creative power, then considerable preventive power. It is not easy to build alliances around these two states, and it would be better if such a case did not arise at all. But the hesitation and low reliability of Paris and Berlin force all those countries to adopt an active policy that must protect their security vis-à-vis Russia for sheer reasons of state. Thus, Finland stepped out of its role as a silent partner, applied for NATO membership and began to act as a foreign policy actor in the wider Baltic Sea region. In fact, Finland, which has the largest army in the Baltic and Scandinavia with very good equipment and has been preparing extensively for a Russian attack for years, is also a protective power of the northern Baltic. This is far more than the modest German troop presence in the region. The Finns also contrast in their mental preparedness with the testy debating German society, which has little sustainability in terms of defense policy. The Baltic states know that their existence is threatened: This explains the enormous efforts of Estonia, for example, to supply Ukraine with armaments, as well as the uncompromising stance of Latvia and Lithuania, which, unlike parts of the German public, know that Russian expansion can fundamentally endanger the existence of entire societies. Poland, which had been divided four times by Prussia/Germany and Russia between 1772 and 1939, realigned its previously tense relationship with Ukraine after 1989: Without a stable and democratic Ukraine, there is no sustainable security for Poland. And Ukraine's stability has been increasingly threatened by one country for three decades, and that is Russia. The disputes about constitutionally questionable measures of the national-conservative government in Warsaw with the European Commission and also with Berlin have tied up many forces and have not served Poland's position. However, distrust of the German government and especially of the SPD is justified in Poland, both across party lines and in terms of content. It should therefore come as no surprise that Poland is consistently aligning itself with the U.S. in terms of security policy and is currently also entering into arms policy partnerships outside Europe, such as with South Korea, where Poland purchased armaments for around six billion dollars in the summer of 2022 and initiated a defense cooperation whose volume is probably more than twice as large. As the most populous country in the east of the EU and a traditional middle power in the region, Poland is called upon to take the lead. The coordination with the Baltic states is particularly close, which also has a long history. The old rivals in the Baltic, Sweden and Poland, now find themselves on the same side for the first time, and the accession of Sweden and Finland, which will take place soon or in the medium term, will transform the Baltic into an almost closed NATO area. Europe's security depends heavily on the ability of the aforementioned states to quickly come together as an association of interests capable of acting in close coordination with the United States. And this is urgently needed: The military situation in Ukraine is serious. The suffering of the civilian population, which is enduring under Russia's bombing terror, is often forgotten. Russia is apparently preparing for a full-scale attack. It is the European Northeast that is standing together to oppose it. And it would be good if Paris and Berlin followed its lead. The author Oliver Jens Schmitt is a professor of Eastern European history at the University of Vienna. ---------------------- __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

03-04-23, 08:58 AM	#10197
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,736 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Rheinmetall is in negotiations with Kyiv to build a tank factory inside ukraine with the capacity to build 400 KF51 Panther MBTs per year. Rheinmetall says they hope for a decision within the next 2 months. It was not specified whether they want to build it with the war still raging, or after a possible end of the war. In case of the first I am wondering what they think why Russia would not paint a big fat crosshair onto the plant like on the many others of the Ukrainian arms industry that had been bombed into oblivion meanwhile. Maybe its all a marketing gag by Rheinmetall to promote their new tank model. Rheinmetall is locked in kind of an infight with KMW who produces the Leopard-2. That RM offers a new tank on chassis basis of the Leopard-2 while partnering with KMW in producing the Leo-2A6/A7 is taken not well by KMW. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

03-04-23, 11:13 AM	#10198
Jimbuna Chief of the Boat Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 250 metres below the surface Posts: 191,142 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 13	Scholz told Biden that Germany would support Ukraine as long as needed German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said during a meeting at the White House with US President Joseph Biden that Germany will support Ukraine as long as necessary This is reported by CNN, Censor.NET informs. "This is a very, very important year because of the very dangerous threat to the world that comes from Russia invading Ukraine, and it is very important that we acted together, that we organized in step, and that we made it possible that we could give the necessary support Ukraine during all this time," said Scholz at the meeting on Friday. In turn, Biden noted that Scholz's support for Ukraine "was of great importance" during the war. "As NATO allies, we are making the alliance stronger and more capable," the American leader added. Source: https://censor.net/en/n3403617 Russia has no intention of sincerely negotiating peace with Ukraine - Canadian intelligence Russia’s actions directly contradict its statements about its alleged openness to peace talks with Ukraine. As Censor.NET informs, this is stated in the message of the intelligence department of the Armed Forces of Canada on Twitter. "Russia regularly states that it is open to negotiations to end the war in Ukraine. According to our analysis, Russia continues to demonstrate commitment to its maximalist military goals, which contradicts its declared openness to a negotiated settlement of the conflict," Canadian intelligence said. According to its representatives, a clear example of this is Russia's insistence on preserving the four temporarily occupied regions of Ukraine as part of the Russian Federation as a prerequisite for a peace agreement. "Russia knows that its conditions are unacceptable for Ukraine, which proves Russia's reluctance to sincerely negotiate a peace agreement," the Canadian Armed Forces noted. Source: https://censor.net/en/n3403635 Russia must pay for aggression against Ukraine, - von der Leyen said Russia and its leadership must be held accountable for the crimes committed in Ukraine. This is stated in the statement of the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, on the establishment of the International Center for Prosecution of Crimes of Aggression against Ukraine, Censor.NET reports with reference to Interfax-Ukraine. "Russia's invasion has brought untold suffering to Ukraine... More and more evidence is emerging of direct attacks on the civilian population, as well as on energy and other infrastructure facilities. Russian forces are known to have used torture, ill-treatment, sexual violence and executions without due process. Even children are not spared. Russia must be held accountable for these heinous crimes. Putin must be held accountable. We must do everything in our power to bring those responsible to justice," the statement said. According to von der Leyen, the EU supports the role of the International Criminal Court. "We also believe that a special tribunal is needed to prosecute Russia for the crime of aggression. And I am proud that at this conference, as a first step, you will sign an agreement to establish an International Center for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression in The Hague. The European Union, together with our partners, will continue to work to make Russia pay," she said. "We are united in the fight for justice for Ukraine," the head of the European Commission emphasized. Source: https://censor.net/en/n3403662 __________________ Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. Oh my God, not again!!

03-04-23, 11:42 AM	#10199
Jimbuna Chief of the Boat Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 250 metres below the surface Posts: 191,142 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 13	Total combat losses of Russian Federation since beginning of war - about 152,190 people (+820 per day), 302 planes, 3,409 tanks, 2,414 artillery systems, 6,683 armored vehicles. INFOGRAPHICS As of the morning of March 4, 2023, the losses of the Russian occupiers are approximately 152,190 people. This is reported by Censor.NET with reference to the press center of the General Staff. As noted, the total combat losses of the enemy from 24.02.22 to 03.04.23 are approximately: personnel - about 152,190 (+820) people were eliminated, tanks - 3409 (+4) units, armored combat vehicles - 6683 (+10) units, artillery systems - 2414 (+12) units, MLRS - 487 (+3) units, air defense equipment - 247 (+0) units, aircraft - 302 (+1) units, helicopters - 289 (+0) units, UAVs of operational-tactical level - 2066 (+5), cruise missiles - 873 (+0), ships/boats - 18 (+0) units, automotive equipment and tank trucks - 5289 (+8) units, special equipment - 230 (+0). Source: https://censor.net/en/n3403626 Russian Federation lost more than 200,000 people. 1,800 officers were killed and wounded, - NATO commander in Europe, Kavoli Christopher Cavoli, NATO’s commander-in-chief in Europe, said that Russia had lost more than 200,000 people killed and wounded in Ukraine. As Censor.NET informs with reference to Spiegel, Cavoli said this at the traditional Matiae meal at the Hamburg Town Hall. According to him, after the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, NATO needs to adapt to the new reality. He noted that the scale of the war against Ukraine is incredible, and the Russians have lost more than 2,000 main battle tanks. Cavoli also noted that more than 200,000 people were killed or wounded, including more than 1,800 officers. Also, as the general stated, the Russian army produces more than 23,000 artillery shells per day. "If somebody comes with a tank, you have to have a tank too. But one of the lessons of the Cold War is that the accuracy of the weapon is what counts. In addition, the production capacity of the defense industry is important. The war will be won by the one who can produce the fastest," he said. Source: https://censor.net/en/n3403648 __________________ Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. Oh my God, not again!!

03-04-23, 01:18 PM	#10200
Jimbuna Chief of the Boat Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 250 metres below the surface Posts: 191,142 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 13	__________________ Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. Oh my God, not again!!