Russlands invasjon av Ukraina [Ny tråd, les førstepost]

[Brother Ursus]

 

"Parfyonov was wounded at the front, and living in field conditions aggravated his chronic illnesses. According to him, he was refused full treatment at the hospital. Parfyonov recorded a video message and was detained for it."

 

 

Det er en saftig dose karma når tastaturkrigere og folk som forsøker å tjene på krig blir tatt på ordet.

[bojangles]

General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine:

Quote

During the day of April 3, there were 54x tactical engagements.

The enemy launched a total of 5x missile and 50x air strikes, 37x MLRS attacks on positions of Ukrainian troops and various settlements.

During the day of April 3, the Ukrainian Air Force launched air strikes on 1x anti-aircraft missile system, 14x concentrations of troops, weapons and military equipment of the occupiers.

The Ukrainian Missile Forces hit 2x concentrations of troops, weapons and military equipment, 1x artillery system, 1x radar station, 1x electronic warfare station, 1x UAVs control post of the russian invaders.

 

 

Dette er kostbart for russerne. Store mengder panser og artilleri forsvant. 1 luftvern, 1 jammestasjon, 26 droner, 35 kjøretøy og 710 frontsoldater. 

Endret 4. april 2024 av bojangles

[bojangles]

Quote

Myndighetene i Kharkiv: Fem drept i russisk droneangrep

 

Fem personer er bekreftet døde i et russisk droneangrep mot den nordøstlige ukrainske byen Kharkiv, opplyser byens ordfører.

Fem rapporteres meldes å være skadd. Ytterligere én person skal ha mistet livet i et angrep mot en annen del av byen.

Totalt ble byen, som er den nest største i Ukraina, rammet av fire angrep natt til torsdag, opplyser guvernør Oleh Synjehubo. De øverste etasjene i et leilighetsbygg skal ha fått skader.

russiske krigsforbrytelser og terrorbombing av sivile fortsetter. 

[Serpentbane]

Det russiske forsvarsdepartementet påstår at rundt 16.000 mennesker har signert kontrakter med det russiske forsvaret på halvannen uke.

Bakgrunnen for villigheten til å bli en del av landets væpnede styrker skal være terrorangrepet i Moskva i mars, skriver Moscow Times.

– Under intervjuer utført ved vervekontorer i russiske byer den siste uken, antyder de fleste at de ønsker å hevne de drepte i tragedien som skjedde 22. mars, skriver departementet i en uttalelse.

Totalt hevder russiske myndigheter at 100.000 mennesker har vervet seg så langt i 2024.

Russian Military Says Recruited 100K Contract Soldiers Since Start of 2024 - The Moscow Times

[DrAlban3000]

Propaganda er effektive greier.

[Abnorm]

Thor. skrev (22 timer siden):

Ja, men ikke forvent at de betaler frivillig.

Er det noe verden kan tvinge dem til, eller er dette frivillig?

Mener å huske at Tyskland omtrent frem til dags dato betalte en slags erstatning for WW2? Vet ikke om dette var noe dem ble tvunget til, eller om generasjonene etter har valgt å gjøre det?

[J.Stavros]

Jeffers skrev (34 minutter siden):

Han bruker også Kiev konsekvent, men det gjør også Norske putintilhengere. 

Kiev brukte også norske medier helt frem til februar 2022.

Ser også at Finn reise også fortsatt bruker Kiev selv om du søker på Kyiv.

https://www.finn.no/reise/leiebil/ukraina/kiev/

[Brother Ursus]

1 hour ago, Serpentbane said:

Det russiske forsvarsdepartementet påstår at rundt 16.000 mennesker har signert kontrakter med det russiske forsvaret på halvannen uke.

Bakgrunnen for villigheten til å bli en del av landets væpnede styrker skal være terrorangrepet i Moskva i mars, skriver Moscow Times.

– Under intervjuer utført ved vervekontorer i russiske byer den siste uken, antyder de fleste at de ønsker å hevne de drepte i tragedien som skjedde 22. mars, skriver departementet i en uttalelse.

Totalt hevder russiske myndigheter at 100.000 mennesker har vervet seg så langt i 2024.

Russian Military Says Recruited 100K Contract Soldiers Since Start of 2024 - The Moscow Times

 

Det dukker opp stadig fler folk fra Latin-Amerika og Afrika og nå også særlig Asia og det indiske subkontinentet og omegn, på slagmarken i Ukraina.

Russland er i ferd med å "outsource" krigen til andre land. At disse landene ikke reagerer sterkere er for meg snodig. Ikke bare fordi man skulle tro en nasjon hadde omtanke for egne borgere, men også fordi de vil dra med seg traumer og problemer hjem igjen, og bli psykotiske, voldelige eller det som verre er, i det sivile liv.

 

12 minutes ago, Abnorm said:

Er det noe verden kan tvinge dem til, eller er dette frivillig?

Mener å huske at Tyskland omtrent frem til dags dato betalte en slags erstatning for WW2? Vet ikke om dette var noe dem ble tvunget til, eller om generasjonene etter har valgt å gjøre det?

 

Etter WWII bestemte de allierte seg for nettopp ikke å avkreve Tyskland for erstatning (noen erstatninger måtte de betale til f.eks jødiske familier og andre som de hadde regelrett stjålet økonomiske verdier fra), da krigserstatninger ble sett på som en trigger for WWII etter Versailles-traktaten i WWI, hvor Tyskland måtte betale erstatning fordi de tapte, selv om de selv mente de ikke startet den. Det var én av greiene som gjorde Hitler populær på 1930-tallet som var økonomisk vanskelig for hele verden.

[Gouldfan]

Glad vi har Stoltenberg i Nato.... Han er dyktig diplomat og politiker og evner å få alle med på avtaler. Dette er som en vaksine i tilfelle rabiate Trump periode. Det gir trygghet og forutsigbarhet, og kan potensielt også bedre økonomien, rente inflasjon osv i verden.

https://www.nettavisen.no/ukraina-krigen/nato/jens-stoltenberg/nato-landene-stotter-stoltenbergs-plan-for-ukraina-stotten/s/5-95-1739482

Kilder i Nato om situasjonen til nå.

https://www.nettavisen.no/nyheter/nato-kilder-roper-russlands-enorme-fordel/s/5-95-1738682

Endret 4. april 2024 av Gouldfan

[Brother Ursus]

 

 

Russerne "double tapped", altså slo til dobbelt, mot sivilt mål, antagelig for å ramme og demoralisere redningsarbeidere.

Jeg tror ikke på gud, men jeg håper nesten helvete eksisterer.

[Brother Ursus]

https://kyivindependent.com/ukrainian-born-republican-congresswoman-spartz-says-she-wont-vote-for-ukraine-aid-bill/

Ukrainian-born Republican Congresswoman Spartz says she won't vote for Ukraine aid bill

Spartz was born in a small city in Chernihiv Oblast, and moved to the U.S. in 2000. She became the first Ukrainian-born member of Congress in 2021 and has been known for her staunch support of former President Donald Trump.

Chuck Goodrich, considered to be her top rival, has already begun to attack Spartz on her previous support for Ukraine in his campaign ads.

Hva f... røyker de i denne valgkretsen i Indiana? Hun er altså ikke kategorisk imot å hjelpe Ukraina, men vil ta seg betalt for det, av hensyn til skattepengebruk. Har dama noen peiling på hvor mye penger USA bruker på forsvar, og de smulene som dryppet på Ukraina frem til for åtte måneder siden, som var sist gang kongressen vedtok å fornye støtte? Vet hun hvor dyrt atomkrig er?

[torbjornen]

Brother Ursus skrev (4 minutter siden):

 

 

Russerne "double tapped", altså slo til dobbelt, mot sivilt mål, antagelig for å ramme og demoralisere redningsarbeidere.

Jeg tror ikke på gud, men jeg håper nesten helvete eksisterer.

Og det er ikkje fyrste gongen terrorstaten Russland gjer dette.

[Snikpellik]

Brother Ursus skrev (5 minutter siden):

Hva f... røyker de i denne valgkretsen i Indiana? 

Kanskje disse?

[Brother Ursus]

Just now, Snikpellik said:

Kanskje disse?

Mon tro om det er noe Trump ikke forsøker å selge... han har allerede solgt både sjelen og landet sitt.

[Brother Ursus]

https://www.newsweek.com/republican-infected-russian-propaganda-michael-mccaul-ukraine-aid-package-1886742

Top Republican Says Party Base 'Infected' by Russian Propaganda

Russian propaganda pushed by the Kremlin has "infected" part of the Republican base, a senior GOP congressman has said, as indications grow that a vital U.S. military package for Ukraine will come up for a vote with U.S. lawmakers this month.

"I think Russian propaganda has made its way into the United States, unfortunately, and it's infected a good chunk of my party's base," House Foreign Affairs Committee chair and Texas Republican, Michael McCaul, told Puck News.

A new tranche of military, economic and humanitarian aid for Ukraine, worth around $60 billion, has been ensnared in Congress for months by infighting, causing deep concerns in Kyiv as Russian forces inch westward and gain territory while Ukrainian forces contend with shortages along the frontlines.

The U.S. aid is the backbone of support flowing into Ukraine to sustain its war effort against Russia, now well past the two-year mark. Aid from other sources, like several European nations, is dwarfed by the contributions from the U.S., and Russia has mobilized its defense industry to keep its own fight going.

The Biden administration managed to drum up $300 million in additional aid for Ukraine in mid-March, but has looked on with frustration at the Republican-controlled House of Representatives stalling the fresh aid package.

Newsweek has contacted the GOP for comment on this story.

We really need Congress to pass the supplemental budget," Pentagon Press Secretary Pat Ryder told reporters late last month. "That is the route to ensuring that Ukraine has the support that it needs and the volume of support that it needs to continue the fight

Without the aid, Ukraine has been clear, the picture for the rest of the year's fighting is dire. "If there is no U.S. support, it means that we have no air defense, no Patriot missiles, no jammers for electronic warfare, no 155-milimetre artillery rounds," Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky told The Washington Post in an interview published in late March.

"It means we will go back, retreat, step by step, in small steps," he said. Should the frontlines not hold out because of shortages, he added, "the Russians could go to the big cities."

"The delay in passing the supplemental has undoubtedly emboldened Russian President Vladimir Putin and his regime," the U.S. think tank, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said in December. Anxieties in Kyiv have only worsened in the months since, particularly as it prepares for a Russian summer offensive starting as early as May.

"I have to explain to them what's at stake, why Ukraine is in our national security interest," McCaul said. Should Ukraine fall, the Kremlin will turn to neighboring nations like Moldova and Georgia, and then look to the Baltic region on NATO's eastern flank, he said. "So I just think it's preventative."

Pressure from former president and current presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump has halted the aid's progress on the House floor. Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson—contending with his own precarious position—is now expected to bring a vote on Ukraine funding when Congress returns from recess next week.

"His commitment is to put it on the floor after Easter," McCaul told CBS News on March 24.

 

 

Det er altså åtte måneder siden kongressen sist vedtok en støttepakke til Ukraina. Det er FORRIGE SOMMER. Ukrainerne er dermed nødt til å forsvare i dybde. Det vil si la russerne avansere, slik at det er lettere å forsvare seg uten store tap.

Europa har altså 'outsourcet' forsvaret sitt til en i økende grad politisk ustabil og kanskje tom. direkte korrupt hegemon (jeg har ingen annen forklaring på Trump, Johnson & co's fremferd).

[Dragavon]

Sitat

Finland stenger grensen til Russland på ubestemt tid
Det melder nyhetsbyrået Reuters og viser til en uttalelse fra myndighetene.

https://www.vg.no/nyheter/utenriks/i/kEqezL/finland-stenger-grensa-til-russland-paa-ubestemt-tid-melder-reuters

[aklla]

Dragavon skrev (16 minutter siden):

https://www.vg.no/nyheter/utenriks/i/kEqezL/finland-stenger-grensa-til-russland-paa-ubestemt-tid-melder-reuters

Norge og de fleste oppegående land burde gjort det samme

[Brother Ursus]

https://www.eurointegration.com.ua/eng/articles/2024/04/3/7182922/

"Most of NATO is ready to accept Ukraine. But the US is both the engine and the brake"

NATO is celebrating a milestone anniversary this week. On 4 April 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation – an association aimed at countering the aggressive expansion of the Soviet Union's influence in Europe through collective defence with US participation – was established in Washington.

75 years later, the Alliance has essentially returned to its original mission and is being forced to confront an aggressive Russia.

Over the past decade, however, the Alliance set itself the naive and – as history has shown – unattainable objective of reconciliation with Moscow. Because of its belief that this was possible, NATO leaders made many mistakes that the Alliance is slowly correcting now. Volodymyr Ohryzko told European Pravda how it all happened, and how Ukraine started to promote the idea of joining the Alliance 30 years ago.

Ohryzko was the Minister of Foreign Affairs when Ukraine applied to NATO for a Membership Action Plan [in 2008] and Putin personally came to the Alliance summit to sabotage it.

Ukraine started moving towards NATO 32 years ago!

It so happened that I was one of the first Ukrainian diplomats to set foot in NATO’s headquarters in Brussels.

It was 1992.

Kyiv had decided that Ukraine should participate in the NATO programme Partnership for Peace. But there was no Ukrainian embassy in Brussels back then, only "embryo embassies" in Berlin and Paris. So the task of ensuring our participation in the programme fell to Ukraine’s ambassador to France and me – the political attaché from the embassy in Germany.

And you know, from the moment I attended my first meetings at NATO headquarters, there was no doubt in my mind that we ought to become part of this space of normalcy, where there is a desire for a civilised world, not a world of confrontation.

There was, however, a narrow circle of diplomats who used to talk about this when Ukraine was a colony of the Soviet empire.

Even back then, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs formed a group of "pro-Westerners", including Borys Tarasiuk (later ambassador to Belgium, the EU and NATO; Minister of Foreign Affairs in 1998-2000 and 2005-2007, and ambassador to the Council of Europe), the late Anton Buteiko (ambassador to the USA and Romania and first deputy minister, who died in 2019) and Viktor Batiuk (permanent representative to the UN and ambassador to Canada, who was killed in a car accident in 1996), and a few others.

So even then there was a group that saw Ukraine as a member of the European Union and a member of NATO.

On unfulfilled expectations

We realised that this would not be an easy path, but we were still dreamers.

I’ll be honest, after Ukraine declared independence, we used to discuss how many years the transformation would take. Back then, we thought: "Well, five years... No, five is probably too fast, but in ten years, by the beginning of the new millennium, Ukraine will have joined both the European Union and NATO."

So these were slightly rose-tinted dreams.

Now I understand why this didn’t work out.

Later, when I worked in Germany and met with top German diplomats, I realised that it was not going to happen that quickly.

When I asked a senior official from the German Foreign Ministry directly whether they saw Ukraine in NATO and the European Union, I got a straight answer: no, we don’t see that – there is no such political decision regarding you. But there is for the Baltic states.

So we were not seen as part of European structures, at least in the medium term.

The only thing that did work out then was the signing of the Charter on a Distinctive Partnership with NATO. And although this document was largely declarative, it was still a very serious step in terms of forming an understanding among our political elite that we should be moving towards the Alliance, that this direction would be decisive for us.

 

How Putin stopped Ukraine's movement towards NATO in 2008

In 2008, Ukraine asked NATO to provide it with a Membership Action Plan (MAP). Having this status is like being in a "preparatory class" – a course for university entrance.

But even that was too much for Moscow. And when Russia realised that we were seriously aspiring towards this, the entire Russian machine cranked up to prevent it.

But that wasn’t the only reason why we didn’t receive the MAP.

The second reason is much more global, deeper, and stronger: the West continued to see Russia as its partner, turning a blind eye to all the horrors that were already happening in Russia, including the genocide of the Chechen people.

Its European partners forgave Russia everything.

We had the United States on our side.

When President George W. Bush was here in Kyiv ahead of the Bucharest summit [in 2008], he clearly told President Viktor Yushchenko that he would insist on giving Ukraine the MAP.

So we went to Bucharest with total confidence that everything was going to be fine.

But the French and the Germans – Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel – decided that Putin was more important to them. Cheap gas made more sense for Merkel. And Sarkozy did not want to play a separate political role then (unlike, for example, President Macron today).

Thus the Franco-German alliance emerged which blocked the granting of the MAP to Ukraine. And although representatives of many countries sided with us (and later told us in detail about the course of the discussion between Putin and the NATO leaders), the principle of consensus ruled, and the decision was vetoed.

If Germany and France had at least held a neutral position, that decision would have been passed.

How Putin convinced European leaders

The Kremlin had three main arguments.

The first did not play a key role in the making of that decision, but it was strategically important for the future. Putin told the Europeans that Ukraine did not exist – that it was a territory that had been artificially set apart.

In other words, he said the very things that we later heard openly after the invasion of Crimea, the beginning of the full-scale war, and so on. But even back then, he convinced the West that Ukraine was an artificial entity and Ukrainians were part of the Russian people, just seen from the side, because they spoke Russian and thought about the Soviet Union, and because there were communists and the Party of Regions running around with flags, shouting "No to NATO!" and so on.

Unfortunately, the West accepted these arguments to some extent.

But the main role was played by the economic bribery of Western states in the form of cheap Russian gas.

Putin’s second argument was based on an idea that was very popular at the time – the idea of creating "common spaces" in Europe and Eurasia. Projects like Vancouver-Vladivostok or Lisbon-Vladivostok had significant support. The West mistakenly believed they could turn Russia into a civilised partner and did not want to open their eyes to the realities, although Russia did not hide anything. Remember Putin's Munich speech in 2007 (where he denied NATO enlargement, undermined the sovereign decisions of Eastern European states, and warned the West about revising the world order – ed.).

Now it seems that you would have had to be deaf not to hear what was being said – but they didn’t hear it!

 

How NATO's refusal to give the MAP led to war in Georgia

Putin realised after Bucharest that he could do far more than he himself had expected. He realised that there would be virtually no reactions to his actions.

Russia's aggression against Georgia confirmed this 100%.

Yet NATO did not realise its mistake. I was involved in those events. On the second day after the invasion [of Georgia], we were preparing for a visit to Tbilisi by the leaders of Ukraine, Poland and the three Baltic states.

We were in contact with Western embassies, and I was convinced that even despite the war, NATO and EU member states still had that mindset that "Putin is a partner". 

They essentially blamed [Georgian President] Mikheil Saakashvili for attacking Georgia, meaning that he attacked himself. He had supposedly attacked the Russian "peacekeepers" (who were illegally present in Georgia), thus provoking Russia's response to protect the "Russian-speaking" and Russian citizens residing in the occupied Georgian territories.

And the most frightening thing was that after three months of symbolic sanctions for this invasion, the world returned to normal interaction with Russia. The West decided to turn a blind eye and "not notice" this.

But no matter how deeply you sleep, when something explodes loudly above your head, you wake up. And this is what finally awakened the West on 24 February 2022. Everyone saw that it was a full-scale war capable of turning into World War III.

Yet the West’s actions in Ukraine were ambiguous. We only have to think back to the panicked, shameful evacuation of Western diplomats from Kyiv, when they showed the enemy that they were leaving Ukraine for him on a platter, thinking that Kyiv would fall in three days.

And it was only after seeing how heroically the Ukrainian Armed Forces resisted the Russian enemy that they gradually began to realise their own mistake and the fact that their handling of Russia had been totally inadequate for the past 30 years.

The fundamental change in Germany's position, and its acknowledgment of the mistakes it had made in dealing with Russia, was a clear litmus test.

 

Ukraine will join NATO

Now I have no doubt that Ukraine will become the 33rd member of NATO.

I sincerely hope that at the Washington Summit, the Alliance will take at least half a step towards this and create some intermediate stage where we will discuss when and how Ukraine will join NATO.

This would be an important decision for the entire world, and for Putin most of all. Because it would mean that despite his nuclear "threats", NATO is not afraid of him and is ready to deter Russian aggression.

Essentially, what is needed is a decision that the processes of Ukraine's integration into the EU and NATO will run in parallel.

The vast majority of Alliance members are ready for this. But we are aware of the role of the United States, which is the engine of this system and can also act as its brake.

Unfortunately, for now, nuclear "threats" and statements by Medvedev, Lavrov, etc. do make an impression on both the US and Europe. But there is every reason to believe that this will change, whether under the current US administration or the next one.

 

How Ohryzko demanded Russian-Ukrainian translation in negotiations with Russia

This was before Bucharest.

I never sought conflict with Russia. But I am convinced that relations with all partners, including Russians, should be based on respect, as stated in all diplomatic documents.

Being considered second- or third-class, people thinking you don’t have the right to vote and should stand somewhere behind – I don’t accept that.

Such things do not happen in diplomacy.

Everyone understands that different countries have different political weight, but in international organisations, the US and a tiny island nation in the Pacific alike each have one vote.

Diplomatic ethics and rules of interaction require all countries to respect each other. I demanded that of Russia as well.

As for the details of that story, I'll stop there. I’m planning to write my memoirs, and I’ll put all the details in there.

 

 

 

Litt langdryg, men svært interessant artikkel av den erfarne ukrainske diplomaten Volodymyr Ohryzko, som også var utenriksminister uten krigen i Georgia. Beklager om dere må scrolle litt, men tror det er lettere og mer redelig å poste kronikken i sin helhet og utheve interessante punkter. Si gjerne ifra om dere heller vil at jeg skal skjule lange tekster.

Ohryzkos fortelling spenner også i min oppfatning ytterligere bena under det russiske narrativet om at "Russland ble lovet, om enn bare verbalt, at NATO ikke skulle utvides østover." Det har altså vært et ukrainsk mål om å knytte seg til NATO helt siden Sovjet kollapset. Kanskje til og med før.

[Brother Ursus]

https://www.straitstimes.com/world/europe/russia-nato-relations-at-level-of-direct-confrontation-kremlin-says

MOSCOW - Russia and NATO are now in "direct confrontation", the Kremlin said as the U.S.-led alliance marked its 75th anniversary on Thursday.

NATO's successive waves of eastern enlargement are a fixation of President Vladimir Putin, who went to war in Ukraine two years ago with the stated aim of preventing the alliance from coming closer to Russia's borders. Instead, the war has galvanised NATO, which has expanded again with the entry of Finland and Sweden.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters: "In fact, relations have now slipped to the level of direct confrontation."

NATO was "already involved in the conflict surrounding Ukraine (and) continues to move towards our borders and expand its military infrastructure towards our borders", he said.

Putin has repeatedly said that Russia was cheated by the West in the aftermath of the Cold War as Moscow's Warsaw Pact alliance was disbanded but NATO moved eastwards by taking in former pact members and the three Baltic states that had been part of the Soviet Union.

The West rejects that version, saying NATO is a defensive alliance and joining it was a democratic choice by countries that had shaken off decades of Communist rule.

NATO says it is helping Ukraine fight for its survival in the face of Russian aggression, and has provided Kyiv with advanced weapons, training and intelligence.

Russia says that makes NATO de facto a party to the conflict. Putin said in February that a direct conflict between Russia and NATO would mean the planet was one step away from World War Three

 

Peskov rir igjen. Han og Lavrov er jo verre enn Putin. Snakker de for Putin som et slags toansiktet monster hvor Putin får lov å leke "good cop", eller snakker de på vegne av Patrushev eller en annen faksjon?

[aklla]

Fjernet innlegg der dere går etter en privatperson.
Det er både en avsporing og veldig unødvendig å "henge ut" privatpersoner slik. 
Hold slikt til offentlige personer evt. anonymiser.