Posted on 10/31/2022 1:48:44 PM PDT by dennisw
Ukraine has touted large numbers of Russian losses throughout the eight-month conflict, though Russia has not publicly confirmed the claims.
"This morning, the [Ukrainian] Air Force successfully shot down 44 Russian cruise missiles," the ministry tweeted. "All this before their first cup of coffee."
Russia allegedly launched 50 missiles toward "critical infrastructure facilities" in Ukraine at about 7 a.m. local time, the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine wrote in a Facebook post.
The attack included Kh-101 and Kh-555 missiles, which were launched from aircraft north of the Caspian Sea from the Rostov region. Only six of the missiles managed to avoid Ukrainian defense efforts, the post said.
"44 cruise missiles were destroyed by the forces and means of the Air Forces in the areas of responsibility: Air Command 'Center' - 18, Air Command 'South' - 12, Air Command 'East' - 9, Air Command 'West' - 5!" the post reads.
Ukraine also claimed to have destroyed 14 Russian tanks, 32 armored combat vehicles, four pieces of artillery, one jet, one helicopter, one drone and eight vehicles and fuel tanks on Monday, the defense ministry wrote. Ukraine's numbers could not be independently verified by Newsweek.
Multiple explosions rocked Ukraine, including in the capital Kyiv. Strikes on critical infrastructure were reported in Kyiv, Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia and Cerkasy.
Debris from one downed Russian missile fell into the northern Moldovan village of Naslavcea, damaging several houses in the village that borders Ukraine
Ukraine Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba condemned the Russian missile attacks on civilian infrastructure Monday.
"Another batch of Russian missiles hits Ukraine's critical infrastructure," Kuleba tweeted. "Instead of fighting on the battlefield, Russia fights civilians. Don't justify these attacks by calling them a 'response.' Russia does this because it still has the missiles and the will to kill Ukrainians."
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Brace for incoming anger from the angry and frosty neoconned chugger of the Ukie neokoolaid...
Russia invaded a sovereign country no rationalizations can change that.
Any citizen would fight to their own deaths to defend their nation from a foreign invader.
Russia is the guilty party.
No amount of ridicule or neoconning will change that.
I’m old enough to remember when comments like that would get you banned from this site.
And, we were totally justified in invading Afghanistan.
The point is that there are good reasons to invade another nation and Russia has them, better ones than we had in either Iraq war.
Nevertheless, if someone expressed disagreement with the invasion of Iraq were banned.
There was also the purge of Rudy supporters.
In reality, Saddam Hussein regularly fired at US aircraft. He also engaged in genocide. He also sponsored the first attack on the WTC in 1993.
Afghanistan harbored and helped sponsor Al Qaeda that launched domestic airlines as missiles toward New York City and the World Trade Centers. Those attacks were designed to kill upwards of 50,000 civilians.
Two other planes were targeted at our pentagon and the nation’s capital.
It is truly absurd that we have to endure these tireless defenses of Vladimir Putin while at the same time taking note of endless filibusters about how evil the United States is. These arguments are not different than those of radical leftists including Bernie Sanders and AOC.
The election of Joe Biden does not justify turning conservatism on its head and demaninding that Ukraine accept annihilation at the hands of a Russian autocrat.
And nearly 1000 Russian soldiers killed the day before yesterday. Around 600 yesterday.
Thanks / the way it really was and is today
That doesn't justify going into Iraq. And, far less of reason than Russians have to be in Ukraine.
You've done an excellent job demonstrating the hypocrisy of our foreign policy.
That’s right.
Bombing the World Trade Center in 1993
Committing genocide
Shooting at US aircraft
Let’s add massive sponsorship of anti U.S. terrorism
Is not sufficient to justify a military invasion.
Additionally your talking points are those of the radical Left. It’s armies of Noam chomskys telling us how over bearing America is and how genteel and innocent the remaining sovereigns.
And none are as innocent or noble as Chief Saint Vladimir Putin. He is the good man fighting Nazis in Ukraine.
It won’t be long and perhaps it’s come that America was wrong to fight Nazis but Putin is a hero along with the long suffering Russian/Soviet super state.
But good for you dropping Afghanistan. You do have some level of moral refinement.
>>>Preventing Russia from attacking its neighbors, some of whom are NATO members will keep us out of a war in Europe.<<<
Why is Russia going to attack anyone in NATO? For years Putin has warned Ukraine they can’t join NATO. I don’t recall him threatening any existing NATO countries. Can you cite such?
"Today I didn't even have to use my AK. I gotta say it was a good day!"
In case you never thought about it, the entire purpose of NATO is to prevent Russian attacks and invasions of Europe.
What did you think the purpose of NATO was?
>>> In case you never thought about it, the entire purpose of NATO is to prevent Russian attacks and invasions of Europe.
What did you think the purpose of NATO was?<<<
Just as I suspected. You’re a low IQ person. NATO’s purpose is not prevent attacks and invasions in Europe from Russia. NATO’s purpose WAS to protect the members from an attack, presumably by the now defunct Soviet Union. Ukraine is not in NATO. And Russia is not the Soviet Union.
1956 Hungary had a revolution and the Soviet Union invaded to restore the communist government. And again in 1968 the Soviets invaded with other Warsaw Pact members to crack down on Czechoslovakia. Did NATO defend either country? Of course not.
I should stop expecting more of people on this site because the logic about Ukraine is more feelings based than anything else.
Do you honestly believe that every person involved in NATO has thought since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 that the organization had no purpose, and all the military involved in NATO were just sitting around doing nothing?
That's a ridiculous idea. Why don't you read what NATO itself describes as its mission and get back to us once you have a clue about their purpose and missions.
You might see things like
"NATO continues to address the security implications of Russia's growing arsenal of nuclear-capable missiles, which poses a significant risk to Alliance security and violated the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. The Alliance is responding by strengthening its advanced conventional capabilities, investing in new platforms – including fifth-generation fighter aircraft – and adapting its exercises, intelligence, and air and missile defence posture. It is doing so while ensuring its nuclear deterrent remains safe, secure and effective. At the same time, NATO remains strongly committed to effective arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation, and continues to call for all actors, including Russia and China, to engage constructively."
You should also work on your English, in your writing you make many of the errors typical of people from Eastern Europe who learned English as a second language. That may also help you understand English material you read.
When did Congress vote to change our mission in Europe? I don’t remember that happening. Russia does not desire world domination like the USSR did. I don’t think you can sell a real war to the people over the integrity of Ukraine’s borders. If Russia decides to bully it’s neighbors who are not in NATO, so be it. I’m tired of the USA being the world’s policeman. And I think my view is the majority now. And yeah I know my grammar is atrocious. Nobody’s perfect.
Oh one more thing. Supposing we decide to occupy part of Ukraine, like the city of Odessa to prevent it’s capture. The likelihood of failure is high. Russia has completed it’s 300,000 troop mobilization, but I’ve been keeping tabs on what Scott Ritter and Colonel Macgregor have to say about this war. And from their analysis, Russia is still mobilizing forces. The 300,000 figure is just the start. I’ve heard them say there are 5,000 troops of the 101st airborne division in Romania and another 5,000 troops of that division in Poland.
Supposing Russia launches a massive invasion before the month of November is up, like Colonel MacGregor predicts? Would Biden rush the nearest available troops to Ukraine? Then we would have a modern day Dien Bien Phu with our troops surrounded on all sides. That’s a situation I’d rather not see come to pass. Especially for a cause such as this.
At this point Russia is moving away from Kherson back towards Crimea. That is the opposite direction from where Odessa is.
No need to invent fantasy situations and then fret about them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.