- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted on 3/5/25 at 3:40 pm to Lee B
Posted on 3/5/25 at 3:40 pm to Lee B
A ballistic missile strike hit a hotel in Krivoy Rog this evening. The hotel had previously been struck in October (see picture 4).
Ukrainian sources report two injuries so far, while Russian sources claim the hotel was housing Ukrainian servicemen and foreign mercenaries."
Ukrainian sources report two injuries so far, while Russian sources claim the hotel was housing Ukrainian servicemen and foreign mercenaries."
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.
1
Posted on 3/5/25 at 3:57 pm to John Barron
Posted on 3/5/25 at 4:14 pm to John Barron
I know when it comes to trust and my money I think China #1 and then Russia #2.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 4:51 pm to cypher
Yaroslav Trofimov
@yarotrof
Did anyone think this through? Some two-thirds of European defense procurement is spent on American weapons. If the U.S. indeed switched off the targeting of HIMARS in Ukraine — a country fighting a war that not just Kyiv, but most of Europe, consider existential — buying any American technology will soon be considered a security risk.
To be clear, I have no independent confirmation that the HIMARS itself has been disabled in Ukraine, but the data used in targeting has stopped flowing.
@yarotrof
Did anyone think this through? Some two-thirds of European defense procurement is spent on American weapons. If the U.S. indeed switched off the targeting of HIMARS in Ukraine — a country fighting a war that not just Kyiv, but most of Europe, consider existential — buying any American technology will soon be considered a security risk.
To be clear, I have no independent confirmation that the HIMARS itself has been disabled in Ukraine, but the data used in targeting has stopped flowing.
This post was edited on 3/5/25 at 4:59 pm
Posted on 3/5/25 at 5:14 pm to cypher
quote:
weapons. If the U.S. indeed switched off the targeting of HIMARS in Ukraine — a country fighting a war that not just Kyiv, but most of Europe, consider existential — buying any American technology will soon be considered a security risk.
Ukraine didn’t buy these weapons. Big difference.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 5:58 pm to Lee B
quote:
There's a Russian guy... I'll have to find his name. He pops up from time to time...
He was on CNN the other day, and when someone said "Well, Putin did not invade when Trump was in office..."
he said "You think Putin planned an invasion in a week? He planned to do this WHEN Trump was re-elected in 2020, but Trump lost, which took Putin totally by surprise. He planned to do it with Trump in office because Trump would not do anything about it except praise Putin making a smart move, as he did out of office at the time. Trump would try to pull out of NATO and pull US troops out of Europe, which he's long talked about... and Putin would roll through Ukraine. But Trump lost. And Putin just decided to try it anyway."
Found him, it was Kasparov... did someone else post this here recently?
The Atlantic (via MSN): The Putinization of America, by Garry Kasparov
Russia first invaded Ukraine in 2014, during President Barack Obama’s second term. It annexed Crimea and entered eastern Ukraine, offering up feeble pretexts about protecting Russian speakers (whom it bombed indiscriminately), Nazis in Ukraine (also, naturally, the Jews running Ukraine), NATO expansion, and so-called Ukrainian separatists. Russia launched an all-out invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, in the second year of Joe Biden’s presidency, attempting to take Kyiv in what the Kremlin famously planned to be a three-day special military operation. The timing led Trump and his defenders to say that he had been tough on Russia: The invasion would never have occurred on Trump’s watch.
Now that the second Trump administration is racing to tick off every point on Putin’s long wish list, the reason for this has become clear. In Trump’s second term, Putin was expecting him to abandon Ukraine, lift sanctions on Russia, create divisions within NATO, and leave Ukraine relatively defenseless before Europe could get organized to defend it. That is, exactly what is happening today.
But Trump lost to Biden in 2020, and, entering his 23rd year in power, Putin needed a new conflict to distract from the dismal conditions in Russia. Dictators always wind up needing enemies to justify why nothing has improved under their eternal rule, and once the domestic opposition is eliminated, foreign adventures are inevitable. Putin didn’t expect much resistance from Ukraine or from the West, which he had successfully corrupted, bluffed, and bullied for decades. But then an unlikely hero appeared in Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, a former comedian and actor who, it turned out, could perform a phenomenal impression of Winston Churchill under enemy fire.
Ukraine’s brave resistance to the supposedly overwhelming might of the Russian military lasted long enough to force the United States and Europe to join its defense, albeit reluctantly and slowly. Three long years have passed. Iranian drones crash nightly into Ukrainian civilian centers; Russian artillery and missiles reduce entire cities to rubble; China supports Russia’s attempt at conquest while hungrily eyeing Taiwan. Three years of documented reports of Russian torture, rape, and the mass kidnapping of children. North Korean soldiers have arrived to fight and die in Russia’s invasion, while NATO nations stand by, letting Ukrainians die in the war NATO was created to fight. Yet somehow Ukraine holds the line while Russia’s military losses grow and its economy wobbles.
Once more unto the breach arrives Donald Trump, back in office with more help from the Kremlin—and the inept Democrats—ready to throw his old pal Putin a lifeline. At his side is someone new: the richest private citizen in the world, Elon Musk. (Putin controls far more money than Musk or Trump—do not underestimate how that affects their perceptions of him as the big boss.) With Musk arrives an overused and misunderstood word in the American vernacular: oligarch.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 6:04 pm to cypher
.SPRAVDI — Stratcom Centre
@StratcomCentre
Key Points from Macron's Announcement Tonight
French President Emmanuel Macron: Russia plans to mobilize an additional 3 million soldiers and produce 4,000 tanks.
"Peace in Ukraine cannot be achieved through its capitulation," Macron stressed in his address to the nation.
Additionally:
A peace plan for Ukraine has already been prepared.
Europe is entering a new era in which the threat from Russia extends to all of us.
Peace cannot be concluded on Russia's terms.
We must prepare for the possibility that the U.S. will not be on our side.
Peace cannot be signed in Washington or Moscow.
@StratcomCentre
Key Points from Macron's Announcement Tonight
French President Emmanuel Macron: Russia plans to mobilize an additional 3 million soldiers and produce 4,000 tanks.
"Peace in Ukraine cannot be achieved through its capitulation," Macron stressed in his address to the nation.
Additionally:
A peace plan for Ukraine has already been prepared.
Europe is entering a new era in which the threat from Russia extends to all of us.
Peace cannot be concluded on Russia's terms.
We must prepare for the possibility that the U.S. will not be on our side.
Peace cannot be signed in Washington or Moscow.
This post was edited on 3/5/25 at 6:05 pm
Posted on 3/5/25 at 6:06 pm to cypher
Sounds like the Frenchman has it handled. No need for us to keep fricking with it so we can stop all assistance and let Emmanuel take charge of Ukraine.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 6:15 pm to cypher
... and I was waiting for this... France seeks to extend its nuclear umbrella to cover all of Europe (as I assume Trump will withdraw US nukes stationed there back to... here, or maybe to Russia? Who knows at this point?).
MILITARY.COM: Macron to Discuss Nuclear Deterrence with European Allies. A Look at France's Unique Strategy
PARIS — French President Emmanuel Macron says that he's ready to start discussions on nuclear deterrence with European allies.
Macron has hinted that France could help to protect other nations after U.S. President Donald Trump raised questions both about the trans-Atlantic alliance and the defense of Ukraine.
While Macron's offering has been on the table for several years, it has gained urgency after Trump's remarks raised concerns among European NATO allies, which have for decades counted on the powerful U.S. deterrent.
...
During the Cold War, the U.S. nuclear umbrella was aimed at ensuring that allies, especially NATO members, would be protected by American nuclear forces in case of a threat. That’s one of the reasons why many nations across the world haven't pursued their own nuclear arsenals.
France is the only nuclear power in the European Union. The United Kingdom, which is no longer an EU member but is working on restoring closer ties with the 27-nation bloc and belongs to NATO, also has nuclear weapons.
In the wake of Trump's push for Europe to carry the defense burden, German election winner Friedrich Merz recently called for a discussion on “nuclear sharing” with France.
...
MILITARY.COM: Macron to Discuss Nuclear Deterrence with European Allies. A Look at France's Unique Strategy
PARIS — French President Emmanuel Macron says that he's ready to start discussions on nuclear deterrence with European allies.
Macron has hinted that France could help to protect other nations after U.S. President Donald Trump raised questions both about the trans-Atlantic alliance and the defense of Ukraine.
While Macron's offering has been on the table for several years, it has gained urgency after Trump's remarks raised concerns among European NATO allies, which have for decades counted on the powerful U.S. deterrent.
...
During the Cold War, the U.S. nuclear umbrella was aimed at ensuring that allies, especially NATO members, would be protected by American nuclear forces in case of a threat. That’s one of the reasons why many nations across the world haven't pursued their own nuclear arsenals.
France is the only nuclear power in the European Union. The United Kingdom, which is no longer an EU member but is working on restoring closer ties with the 27-nation bloc and belongs to NATO, also has nuclear weapons.
In the wake of Trump's push for Europe to carry the defense burden, German election winner Friedrich Merz recently called for a discussion on “nuclear sharing” with France.
...
Posted on 3/5/25 at 6:21 pm to El Segundo Guy
Posted on 3/5/25 at 6:35 pm to Lee B
The day after Trump was re-elected, I saw a post on X from a German guy saying (paraphrased, from memory):
"NATO was never about conventional armies... it was about the US Nuclear umbrella. Russia would not attack a NATO country because it feared a nuclear response. But Trump has signaled over and over that he would not honor that commitment. Well, all it takes is one nuclear hit, and Russia is overwhelmingly concentrated in Moscow. The UK and France have large enough arsenals on their own to provide the umbrella, at least for now. Admit Ukraine into the EU, add a military component to the EU, then tell Russia they've attacked an EU member and there's a nuclear response that will be launched if they do not withdraw."
CSIS: Can France and the United Kingdom Replace the U.S. Nuclear Umbrella?
On February 20, 2025, shortly before Germany’s snap elections, Friedrich Merz, chairman of the conservative Christian Democratic Union and Germany’s next chancellor, made a prominent declaration about the future of European nuclear deterrence: “We need to have discussions with both the British and the French—the two European nuclear powers—about whether nuclear sharing, or at least nuclear security from the UK and France, could also apply to us.” Germany has been a key participant in NATO’s nuclear sharing arrangement since the Cold War, hosting U.S. nuclear weapons and maintaining dual-capable aircraft that could deliver them if necessary. This role has long been a symbol of transatlantic solidarity, yet it has become the subject of renewed political debate amid growing uncertainty over U.S. commitments to NATO’s security guarantees.
"NATO was never about conventional armies... it was about the US Nuclear umbrella. Russia would not attack a NATO country because it feared a nuclear response. But Trump has signaled over and over that he would not honor that commitment. Well, all it takes is one nuclear hit, and Russia is overwhelmingly concentrated in Moscow. The UK and France have large enough arsenals on their own to provide the umbrella, at least for now. Admit Ukraine into the EU, add a military component to the EU, then tell Russia they've attacked an EU member and there's a nuclear response that will be launched if they do not withdraw."
CSIS: Can France and the United Kingdom Replace the U.S. Nuclear Umbrella?
On February 20, 2025, shortly before Germany’s snap elections, Friedrich Merz, chairman of the conservative Christian Democratic Union and Germany’s next chancellor, made a prominent declaration about the future of European nuclear deterrence: “We need to have discussions with both the British and the French—the two European nuclear powers—about whether nuclear sharing, or at least nuclear security from the UK and France, could also apply to us.” Germany has been a key participant in NATO’s nuclear sharing arrangement since the Cold War, hosting U.S. nuclear weapons and maintaining dual-capable aircraft that could deliver them if necessary. This role has long been a symbol of transatlantic solidarity, yet it has become the subject of renewed political debate amid growing uncertainty over U.S. commitments to NATO’s security guarantees.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 6:39 pm to Lee B
quote:
I assume Trump will withdraw US nukes stationed there back to... here, or maybe to Russia? Who knows at this point?).
You are all bent out of shape
you should really move to Europe to help with the defense. Posted on 3/5/25 at 6:45 pm to Aguga
quote:
Ukraine didn’t buy these weapons. Big difference.
It's not a good look if true. I doubt it like 99% of the shite out there these days.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 7:13 pm to Aguga
quote:
You are all bent out of shape you should really move to Europe to help with the defense.
And you should move to Russia and get sent to the front.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 7:13 pm to dagrippa
ISW Update March 5 2025
quote:
Key Takeaways:
The Trump administration suspended intelligence sharing with Ukraine, one of many demands the Kremlin has made of the US, Ukraine, and Ukraine's other supporters.
The suspension of US intelligence sharing with Ukraine will damage Ukraine's ability to defend itself against ongoing Russian attacks against military and civilian targets.
The suspension of all US intelligence sharing with Ukraine would also allow Russian forces to intensify their drone and missile strikes against the Ukrainian rear, affecting millions of Ukrainian civilians and the growth of Ukraine's defense industrial base (DIB).
The Trump administration has been applying considerable pressure on Ukraine, whose leaders continue to offer concessions and publicly declare their interest in achieving a lasting end to the war. These Trump administration policies are undermining the leverage that the United States needs to get Russian President Vladimir Putin to accept any peace agreement that is in the interests of the United States, Ukraine, and Europe.
Kremlin officials announced their intention of taking advantage of the suspension of US military aid and intelligence sharing to make additional battlefield gains.
Russian officials continue inaccurately to place the blame on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky — and not Russian President Vladimir Putin — for the lack of meaningful peace negotiations.
Kremlin officials continue to use business incentives to make further demands of the United States and to push the United States to de facto recognize Russia's annexation of Ukrainian territory.
Ukrainian forces recently advanced near Toretsk and Pokrovsk.
Over 50,000 Russian servicemembers are reportedly listed as having abandoned their units and are absent without leave (AWOL) between February 2022 and mid-December 2024
Posted on 3/5/25 at 9:11 pm to Lee B
Lee,
Why the anger, those billy bad arses shooting at the effigy of Trump.....how they like him now.....
Ya shoulda said please and thank you.
Why the anger, those billy bad arses shooting at the effigy of Trump.....how they like him now.....
Ya shoulda said please and thank you.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 9:13 pm to LSUPilot07
quote:
We could very well just buy drones and EW systems from Ukraine.
You believe that stupid shat that they somehow learned to build drones and are manufacturing them by the 1000s......when they dont even have power half the time, and couldnt put together a paper airplane without the US.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 9:20 pm to Lee B
Lee boy,
You all in here talking about a nuclear war.......you best focus on those ukranian boys learning to wipe their own arse and at least try and hold some ground without the US help, that might be a good start.
You all in here talking about a nuclear war.......you best focus on those ukranian boys learning to wipe their own arse and at least try and hold some ground without the US help, that might be a good start.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 9:24 pm to StormyMcMan
The Atlantic (via MSN): Russia Is Not Winning
by Graeme Wood
Last year, Russia made slow progress in Ukraine: Tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands, of Russian soldiers were killed or wounded, and whole mechanized divisions were lost, in exchange for Ukrainian territory slightly larger than the state of Rhode Island. At that rate, Russia will control all of Ukraine in about 118 years. Keep that figure in mind when you hear President Donald Trump or Vice President J. D. Vance declare, as Trump did last week at their Oval Office meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, that Ukraine is “not winning” the war and that it is in “a very bad position.” Russia’s position is also “bad”—and perhaps more agonizing, because Russians taste the extra bitterness that comes with the knowledge that they could, in February 2022, have just stayed home and not started the war. Both sides have lost, which means that declaring only one side the loser is a peculiar choice.
...
by Graeme Wood
Last year, Russia made slow progress in Ukraine: Tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands, of Russian soldiers were killed or wounded, and whole mechanized divisions were lost, in exchange for Ukrainian territory slightly larger than the state of Rhode Island. At that rate, Russia will control all of Ukraine in about 118 years. Keep that figure in mind when you hear President Donald Trump or Vice President J. D. Vance declare, as Trump did last week at their Oval Office meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, that Ukraine is “not winning” the war and that it is in “a very bad position.” Russia’s position is also “bad”—and perhaps more agonizing, because Russians taste the extra bitterness that comes with the knowledge that they could, in February 2022, have just stayed home and not started the war. Both sides have lost, which means that declaring only one side the loser is a peculiar choice.
...
Posted on 3/5/25 at 9:29 pm to trinidadtiger
Looks like Russa just pounding the snot out of Odessa. Wonder if they will take that as well before the "peace" negotiations?
Page 4653 of 5046
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News