Russia MoD said they are on the verge of a direct armed conflict with the United States.
Ukraine fired HIMARS into Russia, hitting a military target. 7 dead, 40+ wounded soldiers.
Ukraine is doing what they promised Joe they wouldn't do. The irony.
Halturnerradioshow.com
Dear Russia,
The easiest way to get the U.S. and NATO to BTFO yo biddness is to separate Israel from the U.S. teat.
Sincerely, a more-or-less average U.S. Citizen fed up with Zionist/Sabbataen shenanigans.
UPDATE Last night in an appearance on FOX, Henry Kissinger stated that we will see direct conflict with Russia by August.
Why not tactically nuke Ukraine first. Problem solved. If there's no command structure, there's always Russian command structure. Because it isn't in Nato, or in the EU. Obviously it won't win them World opinion, in fact it completely threatens it. They'd become a hermit rogue state like North Korea. But a conflict with America, would only happen if other flanks get involved. They don't need them to win their supposed goals. But this conflict can only escalate. As it is with missiles hitting Russian homeland. Anybody else, and nukes would fly? Questioning why would they open another front. Instead of causing victory?
A direct war with America and Nato, can only occur, if they move into Ukraine, ground troops and no fly zones, or if more Russian partnerships become involved.
Presently how does Russia respond to the continuous flow of arms, increasing in the risk of escalation. At what point don't they fully remove Ukrainian command structures. And if they do, does it cause a counter offensive by NaTo? What is Russia's endgame? Partitioning Ukraine, and adopting gained territory into Russian law.
Of course angry Russians are demanding war with Nato and nukes. Currently Russia can still win without using nukes. But at what point doesn't this conflict escalate,
CORRECTION. Target was a Russian base that stages troops on the easter edge WITHIN Ukraine. NOT Russia.
Still HIMARS were used.
Catch is US intelligence used their world iewer-2 satellite, found the camp and forwarded coordinates to Kyev.
Currently 7 dead, 80+ wounded.
Basically US directed coordinates to US weapons in a war theater constitutes war.
Russia, to say the least, is pissed.
Yes, but it has been inside Russia previously, a few times now. Refinery and other depots. Even the sinking of the Moskva.
There is still the very present issue of weapons and Intel being supplied. Particularly missiles, and satellite coverage?
Russia has satellite killers. Why not attack satellites? But these could cause conflict if they're another nation's like Nato. Doubtful if they're operating in hostile airspace, but those rules don't tend to apply if they're in upper orbit. There are still rules, and treaties, regarding space. Speculative. But an increasing option. Or there's removing the Ukrainian command structure with a tactical strike. This is obviously a last resort, because it causes a worse response, and much greater potential for a larger conflict. Still largely unnecessary presently.
However going to war with America is largely a parody at this point. I doubt Russia would strike first, or indeed outside of the present conflict without much larger grounds to do so. Incidents like this increase the risk of it, or at the least the above. Perhaps they could on other involvement. Suggestably in defense of an allies. Speculative. But America or Nato could act inside Ukraine, and it remains an increasing escalation the longer this conflict continues.
I am only debating the topic. Not in support of. Trying to factor the odds.
Russia has already stated they have the ability to take out comms, GPS satellites out.
Also stated the ability to strike decision making centers not yet struck.
On Friday the Duma and National Security Council will decide on a declaration of a state of war.
If it happens, then what? Gives Putin right to strike outside of Ukraine.
How to kill a snake. Take its head off.
But they haven't. Yes it was obvious they had the ability and have demonstrated it. Used it presently in Ukraine. No. Communications becoming disrupted are pivotal to achieving victory and hindering an enemy's ability to successfully attack.
Striking Ukrainian command and power structures hasn't occurred. What are they in command of, where is their morale, once government is hit, what are they protecting, hindering their ability to wage war. Who listens. But it can become problematic, because it could draw other sides in to claim power. If he is even operating from there. Remarkably Parliament, and the presidential compounds haven't been hit, instead they continuously draw increasing aid, and visits?
They are two of the most fundamental ways to win almost any war. But haven't really occurred?
Striking outside the current conflict, often causes a larger conflict. If it hits Nato. Nato becomes more involved.
I am actually quite curious. Apart from it risks a larger conflict. Except it has already drawn other sides into it, too such degrees. I find it quite odd some of the achievable ways to win victory are still being debate, or haven't occurred, and contrary cause increasing opposition.
Russia has spent the better part of 500 years being Europe/ west whipping boy.
Believe they have had enough.
The one and only way to stop NATO ambition, one needs to take its head off, (US).
Take out the major decision maker, NATO crumbles. Sad fact.
Lavrov, Putin have stated this already.
That has me concerned a bit.
What is the actual red line we shouldn't cross? Did the HIMARS cross it?
putin already said THE red line would be the united states in direct conflict with russian soldiers. it's getting closer...
Not happening without Chinese involvement. Possibly others. They're not in position to move without China. Or another flank providing the opportunity. Could they strike at somewhere else. An escalating question. It's like a high stakes poker game. How much are they willing to gamble and will the other player fold. Unlikely. But they'll keep raising it. The pot is blowing steam. Despite the gas being off.
It's not about redlines anymore. Because they don't exist. Where are they? Obviously don't hit Russia. Okay that's Red. But hitting them in the Ukraine, is still debatable. I mean what have they done about it. Hit Ukraine more. Irony.
Hence the previous tactical debate.
there is LOTS of speculation that russia hasnt even been using a sliver of it's forces, and are actually doing what they said. not some "all out" thing on ukraine. eyes open
Yes I understand this. But it doesn't mean they can open another flank. America however can, because Europe will happily engage prior. If they're talking about Nukes despite Russian numbers it's another gangbang. Where Nato Europe and it's most nations, even one's you don't know about, will let them rip.
Despite your muling opinion. Russia will not engage America first in that scenario. Unless another opportunity becomes provided, by partners. Leaving a very tactical question of how far they escalate it in the Ukraine. It's mostly because it could draw more they haven't, and because tactically it doesn't win them partners. But at what point haven't they removed coms and targeted command structures. Possibly because it can internally rally more. Not at this point. Leaving a question of goal. Goal to cause a larger war perhaps? Or simply to win, by playing a longer game. The long game often causes a larger war. Winning is often getting ahead of the competition. A larp. Completely Speculative. They're using it as well, selling the renewables at premium rates, banning nitrates, eating bugs, and generally becoming even more annoying. No it's not necessarily a territory, where pacman will keep gobbling up the Ukraine.
You're buying into the rhetoric of the fall of the West. Where this war is buying time, and drawing out, as it has other geopolitical agendas. It could run into the Winter otherwise turning the gas off does mostly bullshit. Uncertainty causes chaos, where there is gain, or it simply gets worse. But decisively it's still toying with the food. It is drawing out.
Obviously from opposing perspective, they can still move on it, often at their leisure, they're not taking that hit. Markets, yawn. It's still Russia's fault. In fact, they can hit Russia easier from it. Topically. Sure there's all the theatre, and political shenanigans. But it doesn't change much in the face of conflict at all. It often simply provokes it.
the only ones doing the provoking here for the past 20 years, has been nato and the united states
Okay, but it doesn't mean Russia will engage them by direct warfare. If it does, it will likely because as stated, another flank has opened up, or it has been critically hit. In a war zone, specify, who did what. Ukraine definitely did. But, it was the Americans. That doesn't work, specifics, or release the nukes, and invade. Yea. Nope.
There is a lot of talk on it. It still might. Dubious. There's still a buffer. Nato. And Ukraine in the middle. An active conflict, it hasn't won. But in fact draws more fire.
Tactically it's still quite localised. But they'll keep raising it, and somebody will fold, bluff, or go all in. 2 more weeks.
no need to attack america. we are collapsing internally JUST FINE by ourselves
Play stupid games...
Win half of ukraine!