Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

The figure of 14,000 killed since the start of the civil war in 2014 is the generally accepted figure. But that's both sides of the front line, military and civilian in total. I've never seen figures breaking it down into numbers for each opposing side.

 

The Nazi element does exist, but is nowhere near as big as Russia makes out. They blow it out of all proportion for propaganda purposes. Some militia units have a considerable Nazi element, the Azov Battalion being the most noticeable one, but it is a small number compared to the Ukrainian military as a whole. The Russian press makes a big thing of events like the annual street march by the Banderists. They portray it as a big Nazi following, but the numbers tell the true story. I think from memory, the last one had about 400 marchers, which is not representative of the population as a whole. It can't be that widespread if that's all they can muster in a city of Kiev's population.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Informative 1
Posted

IF it's all going to Plan, it's a diabolic PLAN. and who's going to love you after you destroy everything and kill and terrorise people to achieve your aims?.. Being callous and tough might reach the self image desired by a KGB sourced person but WHO would want to be ruled over by Putin IF you had a choice to live in the West? The ordinary Russian has for a long time copped the rough end of the stick. The ECONOMY is about the same size as that of Australia. Nev

  • Agree 2
  • Informative 1
Posted

It's tricky trying to read Russian press the last few days as they are under constant DDoS attacks. Putin has been making some statements on the progress in Ukraine and they seem to be increasingly delusional. He's normally measured and calculating in his speeches and comments, but now he's starting to sound like Hitler before he went down. I think there's a real possibility he's losing it mentally. I just hope his generals can keep that big red button away from him.

  • Like 1
  • Informative 1
Posted (edited)

They say Russian airlines operate close to 500 Airbus, Boeing and Embraer airliners. The EU has given leasing companies until March 28th. to wind up current contracts. Foreign aircraft make up about 75% of Russia's air fleet.

Edited by willedoo
  • Like 1
  • Informative 1
Posted

Logical stuff onetrack... but  what about the stuff like stinger missiles that are ( belatedly I think ) finding their way onto the battlefields?

With any luck, the air superiority that the Russians have will not last. But it sure is a worry about what a cornered Putin might try.

  • Agree 2
Posted

In the future, if Ukraine survives this, they will need a big investment in their air force. What they have is totally inadequate for a country of their size.

 

 

uaf.png

  • Agree 1
Posted (edited)

There's some reports saying the Ukrainians have had some success against the Russian troops with attacks using the Bayraktar TB2 drones. But with only 6 on hand initially (although it's reported the Army and Navy actually possess 20), and 48 more supposedly coming, they'd want to arrive in the next 48 hrs, or they won't arrive at all - or the Russians will grab them instead, if they do turn up.

 

https://eurasiantimes.com/ukraine-receives-more-game-changing-bayraktar-tb2-uavs/

 

Edited by onetrack
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Informative 1
Posted

One question is how badly the An-225 is damaged. Satellite images show the tail intact but front end damage is unknown at this stage. The Ukrainians are saying they'll rebuild it, but the figure quoted to do it was astronomical. Also hopefully good news for the Antonov Airlines sole An-22. In the image, you can see it parked on the ramp at bottom centre of the photo. I think apart from the Antonov Airlines An-22, there's only three others left belonging to the Russian Air Force. Whether they are now retired, I don't know.

 

http---cdn.cnn.com-cnnnext-dam-assets-220227175415-ukraine-damaged-aircraft-hangar-022722.jpg

Hostomel-Airport-AN-225-Tail-Damage-Russian-Invasion.png

antonov_airport_hostomel_kyiv_oblast_ukraine.jpg

  • Informative 1
Posted
22 hours ago, willedoo said:

Ukraine hasn't been able to qualify as they haven't made much inroad into corruption and civil rights and political abuses to name a couple.

How long has Volodymyr Zelenskyy been President? Didn't he get 73% of the vote on a platform of taking on corruption?

  • Informative 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, old man emu said:

How long has Volodymyr Zelenskyy been President? Didn't he get 73% of the vote on a platform of taking on corruption?

I don't think Zelensky has enough of a power base behind him to do much about it. Like a lot of those countries, it's deeply entrenched and he's always been on the outside of the real power..

  • Like 1
Posted

One lone well intentioned cowboy doesn't stand a chance against a cohort of long term corrupt billionaires who have been 'working the system' for decades.

 

Doesn't matter whether it's in the communist mob or the capitalist mob.

  • Agree 3
Posted

Putin is cracking down further on the media. They've blocked Facebook and passed laws with jail terms for reporting what the Kremlin deems fake or defamatory news. Defaming the Russian army can bring three years jail, calling for anti-Russian sanctions could receive fines of up to $5,000. Spreading information that harms national security can bring fifteen years jail. News outlets that publish in Russian, like the BBC, CNN and Bloomberg, have ceased operation in Russia.

 

There is already a law in place enacted some time back that makes it a criminal offence to insult or defame the president. As an example of how Putin is going, in his recent statements he has accused Ukraine of holding foreigners hostage. He also said Ukrainian neo-nazis were opening fire on Chinese students trying to flee Kharkiv. He's either getting increasingly delusional or it's a calculated tactic to lie his way out of it.

Posted

Those who live there probably have little chance to move out and also have censored news reports. There was a time when most countries had overseas news services, sending their propaganda or news to listeners in other countries. We dropped radio Australia many years ago, so Asia gets nothing from us and I don’t think that we broadcast to Europe.

I remember hearing Lord Haw Haw during the war.

As usual the people who suffer from sanctions are the poor. The rich may be slightly inconvenienced, but they will still be far better off than the general population.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Posted

Do you really think that Australians get the Truth, the whole Truth, and a little BS? We live in a "need to know" world, but who decides what we need to know? Is the crap we get from Canberra any different from what Canberra and Washington call propaganda when it is published by nations which are not our "friends"?

  • Agree 4
Posted

Agreed. OME.

 

I recall that as a young man I could tune in to Radio America, BBC world news, and even Radio Australia on a short wave radio. I could listen to each countries official spin on events.

 

Now that social media has become the prime source of information, we seem to have lost the ability to compare the national biases. And when a power doesn't like what's on the net, they can shut it down, leaving a information vacuum.

 

The biggest mistake that Australia has made politically (internationally), has been the shut down of Radio Australia short wave service.

 

When I was in Timor in 2000, the biggest local problem was lack of information. The Indonesians however, kept up their flavor of 'news' but the locals were sceptical but lacked any other source of news (Australia could have provided some), so crazy rumours ruled the day.

 

In countries that have heavy censureship, there are still lots of people with access to a old fashioned radio.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
14 hours ago, facthunter said:

WHO would want to live in the new Russia? NO free press is a bad sign of where things are going. Nev

Not too dissimilar to a country that has a high concentration of press ownership where the proprietors are sympathetic to a particular party..

 

This is an interesting piece - it goes for c. 55 mins, but there are swathes you can skip...

 

 

 

Posted

I hear what you say, OME, but there are degrees of badness and I reckon we have a less worse system than they have elsewhere.

Examples where I reckon to have been lied to by my government  include...  The Coniston Massacre ( 1928 official massacre of aborigines near Alice Springs); the Darwin bombing ( I really thought there was only one event till lately ) ; The treatment of Australian troops at Gallipoli ( they suffered malnutrition badly and unnecessarily ); The Stolen Generation ( I never heard of this till recently, it sure didn't happen in Alice Springs in the 1950's) ; The non-proliferation treaty signed by Australia ( I thought we were guaranteed protection )and last but not least , the lies told in support of " the war on terror".

On careful checking out, these lies generally turn out to be due to stupidity or laziness, on my part too. I don't think they deliberately set out to lie, with the possible exception of " the weapons of mass destruction".

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...