Watch moment sea drones dodge Russian helicopters’ guns as Ukraine launches attack near Putin’s beloved Kerch Bridge

Sun UK ^ | 5/30/2024 | Ellie Doughty

[marcusmaximus]

INCREDIBLE footage shows Ukraine's sea drones nip out of the way of Russian fire during an overnight blitz in occupied Crimea.

Meanwhile Kyiv's forces launched missiles towards Vlad's beloved Kerch Bridge - reportedly sparking some 20 explosions and damaging two ships.

Dramatic video shows the drones flying over water in Uzkaya Bay, western Crimea.

Kyiv's forces dodge the Russian barrage of explosions raining down around them.

The Magura V5 marine drones managed to hit two Russian high speed KS-701 Tunets [Tuna] vessels - despite the onslaught.

The Tuna boats are used by Russian forces for patrolling as well as transport and landing.

On the other side of Crimea in Kerch, Ukraine successfully targeted a car and railway ferry - both used in Vlad's illegal war to supply Crimea from Russia.

Ukrainian intelligence said: “In order to neutralise the attack sea drones....Russian occupiers in Crimea scrambled military aircraft 32 times."

Their failed attempt included multiple warplanes, helicopters and 30 mm cannons.

[adorno]

I’m doing it unto you because getting a taste of your own nasty medicine is likely the only way you’ll see the error of your ways. And even that is being a tad optimistic on my part.

Yet, when I feel exactly the same way, and do unto you the same way, it's against the rules of FR? Hypocrisy is never-ending with people who rationalize your right to engage in the same manner that you accuse others of doing.

[Allegra]

We are conservatives.

That’s Jim’s quote you’re arguing with. Maybe take it up with him?

So, even some republicans are on the side of Putin, which to me, is a complete embarrassment and against the principles that make us conservatives.

I shouldn’t have to keep pointing this out, but being opposed to the current corrupt regime in DC sending billions and billions of our tax dollars to a known money-laundering operation with no audit trail or accountability to the American citizens does not put us on the side of Putin.

It is quite acceptable and reasonable to see Putin, Zelensky and Biden all as corrupt scumbags.

BTW, I noticed that my posting history has been removed as of 2 days ago, so, is that the way that the conservative FR treats people that might have opposing opinions by fellow FReepers? Freedom of speech apparently has its limits within conservatives sites too.

You might want to take that up with Jim or the Moderators. I do not have the ability to remove posters’ history. I have no administrative powers/abilities here. I was merely pointing out that the owner of this site has asked you all to stop calling fellow FReepers names like “Putinista.”

[Forward the Light Brigade]

Just blow the bridge and Ukraine wins the war! When its down, Putin will be deposed and Russia surrenders to Hero-Ukrainian army of patriot-saints. Victory for the west and a crushing defeat for Soviet Russia.

[Allegra]

Yet, when I feel exactly the same way, and do unto you the same way, it's against the rules of FR?

Again, those are Jim’s quite reasonable rules.

And to be fair, those who support sending billions upon billions of our tax dollars with no audits or accountability to a known money laundering operation are taking the Biden position on this issue.

[Lurker]

“It is quite acceptable and reasonable to see Putin, Zelensky and Biden all as corrupt scumbags.”

Not to a whole lot of folks around here lately.

L

[Allegra]

Not to a whole lot of folks around here lately.

Well, that’s their problem.

It is a logical stance.

[adorno]

And to be fair, those who support sending billions upon billions of our tax dollars with no audits or accountability to a known money laundering operation are taking the Biden position on this issue.

Yet, when it came to sending our tax dollars with no real audits to places like Iraq and Afghanistan, that was not money laundering or without accountability? FACT is that, we spend hundred of billions each year in support of our allies all over the world, and not all the money can be accounted for. It all depends upon what the meaning of "is" is. Money laundering has occurred since time immemorial with our country and others; its actually called 'foreign policy', because, it's also about tit-for-tat or quid-pro-quo. It's a normal state affairs. nationally and internationally. Nobody can control where all the money goes, and in many cases, we are better off not knowing. Not that necessarily agree with it, but, that's how things work, unfortunately. How do you think China became a world power? We did things with China that we now regret, but, there was a lot of quid-pro-quo, and accountability was not a concern then.

But, we can cut back and mind our own business and hope for the best.

[wastedyears]

Big government. How could you support our military being all over the world while also claiming to be in favor of small government?

[Allegra]

I was all about turning off the flow of dollars to Iraq and Afghanistan and even played a small part in helping the Iraqis learn to spend their budget and wean themselves off of American and coalition dollars.

And the money that was sent there was heavily audited.

I personally provided lots of documentation for internal and outside auditors. Was there some corruption going on? Oh, hell yeah. And a lot of it was uncovered and people were held accountable, some even serving prison time.

With the Ukraine dollars, it appears that nobody is auditing that. And some high-ranking slimebag official always seems to visit Ukraine shortly after another funding drop. It’s been Biden, Pelosi, Graham…it was Blinken this last time.

Strange, that.

[adorno]

How could you support our military being all over the world while also claiming to be in favor of small government?

Big government is necessary for defense spending, and for international relations. The biggest part of our big government, is not for the purposes I mentioned. Most of our spending is for domestic purposes, and we have grown that kind of spending without direct control from 'the people'. The people did allow for defense spending, and that was lid out under the constitution. Domestic spending has gotten out of control, and we now spend more on paying for the debt than for any other segment of spending. That's an indication that, big government is out of control, and defense spending is not the cause.

[JonPreston]

Big government is necessary for defense spending, and for international relations

Your version of Big Government comes with Big Spending, that inevitably drives up deficits. If you can, please tell us when the last time defense spending didn't require borrowing?

[adorno]

Very doubtful that all the funding for Iraq or Afghanistan was all accounted for. What is disclosed and accounted for, is not the totality of what was ‘approved’. Heck, funding that is approved is not the same as what was spent. We have that kind of spending inconsistencies within domestic spending, where a lot more is spent than what the government officially approves. “WE” spend a lot of money on school grants and on paying off college student loans, so, we could be doing the same with foreign spending and not know about it. When it comes to 5-8 trillion dollars of spending each year, we won’t know exactly where it’s going, and that;s the same for military and domestic spending. Big government says we don’t have a need o know.

[adorno]

Defense spending is not big government wasteful spending. Defense spending is necessary, no matter how much is spent. Defense spending is proportional to the number of threats we might encounter around the world, or within our land. Domestic spending was never necessary, until the big government proponents wanted to buy off the electorate. If we found ourselves in a big war, the only spending necessary would be for defense, and domestic spending would take major hits.

[CrimsonTidegirl]

The sun is a damnable, sorry, lowlife tabloid.

In 1989, Ninety six Liverpool football (soccer) fans perished in a horrific crush during an FA cup match with Nottingham Forest. The match took place In Sheffield at Hillsborough stadium. It is known as the Hillsborough Disaster.

A couple of years ago, the death toll rose to Ninety seven after a man was taken off life support. He had been on life support ever since the 1989 tragedy.

After the disaster, the sun wasted no time in slandering the dead fans, calling them “alcoholics”, “druggies”, “criminals” and much worse. Never mind that several of the deceased were children. The sun had a field day slandering the deceased, their families and Liverpool fans. As a result, the sun is is still boycotted by the citizens of Liverpool and our just retired manager Jurgen Klopp would refuse to speak to “reporters” from the sun.

To this day, the tabloid has never apologized nor retracted their slander of the deceased fans. We proud Liverpool supporters will never forget, nor forgive.

The sun is a tabloid even beneath the Weekly World News and should be banned from FR. No serious conservative would ever post anything from that trash.

[JonPreston]

You didn't answer my question.

Once again; please tell us when the last time defense spending didn't require borrowing?

[CrimsonTidegirl]

Under Biden, the US is more communist than Russia. In reality, Russia isn’t even communist.

Putin is more like a Tsar.

[adorno]

Communism is not just about economic matters. Under communism you lose the ability to be able to decide on your representation in government. So, when did we lose the ability to vote, even if we know that people can cheat?

Socialism becomes communism when people can’t decide on theor form of government. That we have socialists in control at the moment, doesn’t mean that we have become communist. Contrast that with how government is run in Russia. Do we have a dictator yet? Do we have a government that doesn’t allow more than one candidate, or where a candidate is the assured winner? Under communist rule, Trump would be dead by now, and democrats would be the only party.

[adorno]

Once again; please tell us when the last time defense spending didn't require borrowing?

A question can be answered by another question.

How much of the spending is being financed by borrowing?

The U.S. is spending money we don't have, and MOST of it is because of the domestic spending, and if we didn't have so much domestic spending, we'd have enough funding for the military with most tax revenue remaining to send back to the tax payers. It's not the military that's causing so much spending; it's domestic spending that's causing borrowing, which should not be happening. Military spending is required, while domestic spending should not be as high as it is. Without the high domestic spending, the U.S. would not be borrowing at all.

[JonPreston]

Military spending is required

If it's required, why is it we can't win a war?

[JonPreston]

Under communism you lose the ability to be able to decide on your representation in government

With incumbents winning re-election app. 97% of the time, please explain how our system is better.