Russia - threadbanned users in OP

Well, when you go into the Russian army to do your compulsory military service, you may be teetotaler, but by the time you finish, you will have become quite fond of the "WODKA"😊

According to the Russians, Ukraine is attempting another offensive in the northern part of occupied Kherson.

Well after all is said and done, what did they expect? Thats the Mafia way.....in it for Life.

Indeed defending yourself is not against NATO or OSCE principles, however membership requires conflicts to be settled by "peaceful means" in order to join. The Study on Enlargement clearly states that a candidate state "must settle those disputes by peaceful means in accordance with OSCE principles", it further holds that "the resolution of such disputes would be a factor in determining whether to invite a state to join the Alliance".

To join NATO the state must meet all the political, legal and military obligations and commitments of the Study, that is the requirement for joining and so is a rule. It is the collectively accepted published requirement for membership of NATO which was issued by NATO on foot of the 1994 Brussels Declaration. Similar is also stated in the NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP).

And when you think about it it makes perfect sense, why admit a country when there is a dispute which could end up dragging all of NATO into that dispute?

Not at all. If it wasn't for the yanks making the iron curtain go up in our way, we'd all have been going to the Moscow Gaeltacht back in our school holidays.

Having to read his way through Peig would have put manners on the Putster.

Certainly seems to the be case that Ukraine is taking very heavy causalities just based off the failed assaults on the likes of Pisky. As is also evident with that one piece from the New York Times.

Though it should not be that surprising given Ukraine is coming against some very well prepared defences with some very hardened + experienced troops. The DPR Somalia Battalion, some very battle hardened remnants of VDV and a number of other elite Russian units have been stationed to defend that area with their lives.

Either Ukraine would need a lot more bodies at the city or get much more in the way of western aid.

The Ukrainian assault on Kherson is a great parallel to Russian forces constant push to try and Capture Bakhmut.

Well all i can say.

Read the quotes from the horses mouth

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/24/world/europe/ukraine-south-kherson-russia.html

I understand why a lot people have their perception shaped entirely by the large successes Ukraine are getting across Kharkiv and now Lyman. But you would be a bit foolish to not acknowledge that certain fronts are well fortified.

The Russian don't necessarily have the option for an easy retreat from Kherson City either as it is a key objective for Putin- to the Point where the advice from Generals to retreat were rejected. With the elimination of the antonovsky bridge and the reliance on barges it means that any form of retreat would be incredibly difficult to say the very least.

We don't all have a NT times account to read the link. But obviously if there's massive casualties in the Kherson counter offensive, there would be many (non-paywalled) news sites that have it? It still appears to have a news blackout so it's very hard to get any details about it.

I can't read the article you posted, but at the start of the Kharkiv counteroffensive, it looked like deliberate disinformation came out about a failed Kherson counteroffensive as a ruse to then steamroll Kharkiv.

James Holland's "The War in the West" gives excellent background on how Roosevelt codded and coaxed the US into WW2, and with a Germany First policy to boot. He also gives background on some of the personalities involved in turning to US from very little military production to the west's arsenal. Roosevelt seems to have had a knack for picking people who knew how to make thigs happen, and quick.

Highly recommended.

Yes. You've mentioned her before. I didn't agree then and I don't now. I'd probably have an interesting discussion with her on the topic but we would be coming from very different angles on the matter.

As for Japan not surrendering after the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, one must remember that the space of time between the two bombings was a matter of merely 3 days. That was hardly enough time to process clearly what exactly had occurred when the first bomb fell.

In any case the fact of matter is that the Suzuki government was looking for a way out, under the instructions of the Emperor himself. They knew that the war was over. The dropping of the bombs and the declaration of war by Russia (a country Japan had hoped would put out peace feelers to the US) just solidified the issue.

I concur with the comment but it more about control

Remember the refugee crisis which effects housing and health in ireland was Russian driven where they were active

US did far less and was more restrained in there activities