Search results

- Dugina was killed by Ukrainian assassin as a revenge for her public support of Putin - Dugina was killed by Ukrainian assassin to get more weapons from NATO - Dugina was killed by Ukrainian assassin to disrupt Russia-Turkey relations at the behest of the British - Dugina was killed by FSB...

Conspiracy theorists are already spinning stories how Dugin has persuaded Putin to stage an assassination of his own (Dugin's) daughter.

IRA is an actual entity with some actual people who can at least put on masks and record a video message. There is no evidence NRA actually exists beyond the words of one random guy.

Losing a fleet's flagship while conducting primarily land operation whereas the other party no longer has any naval assets is... Remarkable. In the end, it's just another (but highly visible) sign how badly Putin and his generals have miscalculated. This invasion turns out to be a classic case...

No, it's largely because there isn't much you can do in Ukraine that can be competitive on the world market. The workforce is neither all that cheap or all that great, infrastructure is nothing to write home about, and agriculture&resource extraction... well, those have gotten Ukraine just below...

Afghanistan is resource rich beyond imagination, yet somehow neither USSR nor USA have prospered by controlling it. It's almost like there are other considerations to economic growth and ability to extract profits beyond mere presence of resources. Ukraine is (was) a very poor country. It's GDP...

Breaking teeth part is basically guaranteed since there is simply no way Russia is going to win anything in this conflict. Even if Russian military takes over all of Ukraine, it's going to be a giant expenditure of resources for the privilege of expending even more resources in the future...

Which ones? I'm pretty sure that invading such large (largest in Europe bar Russia, significantly larger than Iraq) and populous country (40+ mil. people and 200.000+ army) with such a small force (150.000 soldiers?) is pretty much unprecedented in modern history.

It wasn't some "people making noises", it was the policy of Ukrainian President Yushenko, preceded by more than a decade of NATO-Ukraine cooperation. What would formal, written neutrality matter if it has been disregarded the first time? And why wouldn't it be disregarded at the first earliest...

It was already tried, didn't work.

Eh, whatever fits your story. It's like that "tank" (not actually a tank, but armored AA vehicle) driving over civilian vehicle on camera. People seeing the same footage passionately decried Russian/Ukrainian war criminals bulldozing innocent civilians.

"That" included things like half a million French soldiers in Algiers alone. War on terror never came even close to "that".

Two or three seconds (which is what the distance difference amounts to given the speeds) are not going to make or break the calculus. Especially since the rockets are going to become even faster in the future and the distance is going to become even less of a factor than it currently is. Trying...

NATO currently encompasses Romania, Slovakia, Poland. Given the range of modern weapons systems, there is no functional difference between them being stationed in Bukharest or Kiev. A Tomahawk launched from Warsaw can hit basically anything in European Russia. The reverse is also true: modern...

The same can be said about the invasion and arguably the entirety of Russian involvement in Ukraine in the last 30+ years. Yet here we are.