203
Reports: Russia Hits NATO Member Romania With Kamikaze Drone
(www.kyivpost.com)
A Russian kamikaze drone on Wednesday flew into NATO air space and detonated near a Romanian village, Ukrainian news reports said, but official Bucharest said the fact of the strike wasn’t confirmed and that they would check.
Ukrainian social media video recorded in the river port city of Izmail, opposite Plaura, showed an orange flash lighting up the night horizon and a booming blast on the Romanian side of the river. Flames and smoke reaching hundreds of meters into the sky were visible following the explosion. A Russian kamikaze drone strike against Izmail had been in progress at the time.
This whole war was 100% avoidable and you think that escalating it would make it end faster... dude...
Every war was just as avoidable as this one. Yet we live in a world where not everyone wants to avoid war.
War is what happens when those who want to avoid it are forced into interaction with those who don’t.
If those who don’t want war simply choose not to fight, then a state worse than war exists.
avoidable how? Putin wants his old territories, like crimea, back. How is his land grab 100% avoidable?
Crimea had been in Russian hands for nearly a decade when Russia invaded.
Right, and Putin wanted more than just Crimea.
Nearly a decade since they took it from Ukraine. So the solution to avoid war is handing Russia all territory they want? Where does that stop? At the polish border? At the German border? French border? At the Atlantic?
The point here is that you don't even know the basic facts you're talking about. Russia didn't want Crimea in 2022; they already had it.
It's also laughable -- genuinely embarrassing -- to suggest Russia is trying to conquer all of Europe. Pure fantasy plucked straight out of thin air.
As for deterrence, that's already been accomplished, especially if you believe the casualty numbers Ukranian propaganda puts out. Clearly there is a cost to war. The goal now is to end the fighting on as favorable of terms as you can realistically get.
Well yeah, they had it in 2022 because they wanted it in 2014 when they took it from the sovereign country of Ukraine.
And I am not suggesting anything, I was asking where they will stop after conquering Crimea and currently trying to conquer Ukraine. So, where will they stop - if at all?
I think different parties have different goals in this war. And in general I think the goal of a sovereign country, to stay sovereign within their own borders is not an illegitimate goal.
You were wrong and are doubling down instead of acknowledging that maybe there are some gaps in your knowledge.
And you're trying to walk back ridiculous fear mongering (where will they stop??? the Atlantic????) instead of acknowledging that Russia isn't going to start invading the whole planet for no reason.
Ah damn it. Didn't see which instance this was posted to. Never mind
It was all about Ukraine joining nato. Had there been a promise that Ukraine would not join nato, this war would not have happened. The people in charge knew this and decided to do seek Ukraine joining nato anyways, why would they do this if they knew it would cause war?
Bullshit. Crimea was invaded mere days after the change of power in 2014, far before anyone of note was seriously talking about Ukraine joining NATO. Support for separatists elsewhere soon followed. It was about Russia exerting a "sphere of influence" that it felt entitled to. The Russian leadership can't seem to get that countries are joining NATO because of Russian imperialism, past and present.
Russia took over Crimea due to the overthrow of the Pro russian government with a pro west government, a thing they also found as direct provocation. Why did Russia invade Georgia?
They could have waited or tried to make a deal with the new government. They did neither and immediately invaded without making an attempt at an arrangement.
Are you trying to get me to say NATO? Because that conflict far predates NATO involvement.
That is not true, in the 2008 Bucarest summit in April they discussed how they wanted Ukraine and Georgia to join nato, and then in August Russia invaded Georgia to stop this and put in a Russia puppet government. Why would Nato indicate they wanted to have Ukraine join Nato when they knew it was a serious provocation? Before this war no one gave a shit about Ukraine, and most americans probably couldnt point to it on the map, why was it so important to have it join nato if it risked a war?
The August 2008 invasion of Georgia was just the culmination of years of Russian provocations towards Georgia. Georgia's leaders knew Russia was itching for a fight. As for Ukraine, many Ukrainians realized that if they ever adopted a more pro-Western stance then Russia would invade. I've heard one account of Ukrainians fighting in the Georgia-Russia War because "we're next."
And all that had to happen is for NATO to mind its own business and the wars would not have happened. Why was it so important for two countries that we dont actually care at all about to join NATO if it was going to cause wars?
Did you miss the bit where Russia kept harassing Georgia? It was going to invade sooner or later. Russia likes its former imperial conquests to be kept under its thumb.
Yeah because they didnt want them to join nato. Why wouldnt nato just say "we have no interest in having Georgia and Ukraine in nato" to prevent wars?
No, they were harassing them just for being friendly with the West. Exiting the Russian sphere of influence, not joining NATO, was the cardinal sin.
Yes, being friendly with the west and exiting the russian sphere is considered a threat against russia to them. You can no like it, but I am all about avoiding war and dead people. Those countries mean nothing to us and we should have no part in their politics.
Nato entering would basically be an overwhelming force against Russia. It's going to end real quick after that.
That would kill millions at minimum and likely result in nuclear war. It's utterly psychopathic to cheerlead this and totally detached from the horrors you're wishcasting. Disgusting.
Okay so you want a hot war between Russia and NATO and you think that would be less violent?
Where are you getting your information from?
So then russia uses tactical nukes, then what?
Putin would know fully well that M.A.D. isnt worth it over the russo-ukranian war.
You apparently don't
Are you aware that he has threatened this multiple times? Who do you think Ukraine is more imporant to Russia (its neighbor) or the US (a country on the other side of the world where a good portion of people couldnt point to it on a map)?
Yeah because only USA is part of NATO (yeah disregard all EU member states of NATO why don't you) and only on a flat map is it on the other side of the world. It's literally across the Bering strait.
The US is the main driver of NATO by far. The far reaches of russia are right next to the far reaches of the US, but Ukraine is on the other side of the planet. Why would Russia have less incentive than the US to lose?
Because we have long memories. The last nation to attempt forceful annexation of neighboring countries like this was Nazi Germany.
Oh wow, the comparison to nazi germany... Do you honestly believe that a country with the GDP of one of americas states is a risk to take over Europe like germany did?
Most European nations fit that description. Yeah I think it's possible.
If that is true then Ukraine had zero chance of winning. So then considering that, you are in favor of using the deaths of tens of thousands of dead Ukrainian soldiers and civilians to mildly harm the Russian military?
First Georgia now Ukraine. It's time for the world make it known that shit ain't gonna fly.
So that is a yes, you want Ukrainians to die for a narative that is not proven and doesnt seem logical?
Ukrainians are already dying because Russia is attempting to invade their country. Wtf?
Apparently you are not aware that the war could have ended two years ago but Boris Johnson flew in and offered them weapons to keep fighting. What your logic seems to be saying is - you are in favor of giving weapons to Ukraine so they can fight and weaken Russia, but they never had a chance of winning because Russia is strong enough to semi-replicate what Nazi germany did. So you are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of Ukrainians to weaken Russia. What part about this is not what you believe?
Cool, that is not what we are talking about right now.
What your logic seems to be saying is - you are in favor of giving weapons to Ukraine so they can fight and weaken Russia, but they never had a chance of winning because Russia is strong enough to semi-replicate what Nazi germany did. So you are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of Ukrainians to weaken Russia. What part about this is not what you believe?
Russia is strong, but not nearly strong enough to “semi-replicate” what Nazi Germany did, not that it really matters since Russia has no interest in replicating it.
I'm in favor of giving Ukraine weapons so they can defend themselves. You trying to put statements in my mouth because what I'm actually saying is inconvenient for you changes nothing.
If Russia is probably capable of doing what Nazi Germany did, why would giving them weapons to defend themselves end in a win?
Mildly harm? The battle reports don't look so mildly for Russia.
Who do you get accurate battle reports from?
Damn you really can't point out Ukraine on a map lmao
He’s thinking of Kamchatka.