No off-Ramp Putin will sacrifice tens of Millions of Russians

Kill it with fire!!!! Imagine Putin pulling such a stunt ...he's terrible, but he hasn't come close to torching a city of more than a million souls.

As per Stav's post, Dresden death toll was 25k tops. No surprise that our resident Trumpanzees are all squealing it was so much higher, they are suckers for propaganda.

Not sure if any of you are watching the series on Netflix titled "Greatest Events of WW2 in colour", but it's one of the best series I've ever watched. I'm learning a lot! 

You have a lot to learn.

OK, my bad.... I Googled for a photo of Dresden

Don't worry about one...I've come across that issue before with google image searches.

Survivors and people who helped with the clean-up afterwards seems to think the casualties were much higher...even similar to Hiroshima...but history is written by the victors...

Think about it logically, how would survivors or people who worked on on the ground know what the true number of fatalities where. Given the city was largely destroyed it was probably quite reasonable to believe what the Nazi government was telling them at the time. 

The number of 25,000 thousand is most certainly not history being written by the victors, it's the numbers modern day Germany has concluded is accurate when it fully investigated the bombings.

I've seen some fact twisting first hand...but you go on believing what is comfortable

This isn't a matter of fact twisting, or belief, I'm simply stating what the facts are supported by the most up to date evidence.

war is a terrible thing

Agreed

.it's good to know the good guys can do no wrong, but when they do, the consequences are minimal...and the good guys always win...just look at the world we live in!

No one here stated that, please don't misrepresent others.

@Crusadersfan

It's getting hard to know the truth from the BS.

I always thought the Dresden death toll was 80k to 100k.

In fairness deaths into the hundreds of thousands caused by the firebombing of Dresden was and maybe still is a commonly held view, one which I once held myself.

Mostly civilians do I agree with civilians being killed, not at all but under the circumstances I can see why they did it. Over 40k died during during the blitz.

~DbDraad

here's no sugar counting this, even though it happened 77 years ago...IMO this was also a war crime, but it was covered up for many years.

I'd agree with you I think it was a war crime. But there was never a cover up. It was a well known event the morality of which has been debated for decades. It's just the British in this case where on the winners side. Had Germany won the war maybe they would have set up their own war crimes tribunal and rendered judgement on the vanquished and we would have never known about the Holocaust.

@Crusadersfan

I can understand  where they were coming from.

As a family man there is nothing I would not do to extract revenge.

....wouldn't put it past him doing some modern day equivalent of that. Putin has started a war that's already resulted in the deaths of more people than who died in Dresden.

He's very dangerous...and should be stopped...this war should never have been allowed to happen.

"Think about it logically, how would survivors or people who worked on on the ground know what the true number of fatalities where."

They wouldn't know, but they saw very little survivors...where did all the people go?....you can't honestly tell me that you can rain down fire bombs for a whole day on a city of 1.2M people and expect me to believe only 25K perished...the whole city was destroyed....if you use logic, many more than 80K probably died. 

"As per Stav's post, Dresden death toll was 25k tops. No surprise that our resident Trumpanzees are all squealing it was so much higher, they are suckers for propaganda."

WHOOSH!!! you miserable ...cretin...what propaganda? I base my views on logic and a semi autobiography I've read, from someone who was actually in Dresden when it happened...

The Nato fascists have never wanted peace in the Donbass region Mike. Thanks for your input, there are always two sides to a war.

"...there are always two sides to a war."

Indeed...someone is stoking the fire... war is about money ...someone is making a lot of iit...

He's very dangerous...and should be stopped...this war should never have been allowed to happen.

How should of it been stopped?

They wouldn't know, but they saw very little survivors...where did all the people go?....you can't honestly tell me that you can rain down fire bombs for a whole day on a city of 1.2M people and expect me to believe only 25K perished...the whole city was destroyed....if you use logic, many more than 80K probably died.

While individual survivors might know many people who died particular in the specific part of the city they lived, individuals couldn't  have known the situation for the whole city.

I wouldn't have the expertise to know what the expected fatality rate of such a bombing would be, that's what investigations in the bombings concluded, which looked at records of people who where buried and official records for the time period. They also ruled out the possibility of significant numbers of people being burned to ash.

https://www.dresden.de/en/city/07/03/historical_commission.php

Also if you look at the fire bombing of Tokyo, deaths range from 80,000 to 130,000 and the population of Tokyo which pre-war was at least 7 million. I'm not 100% sure what the population was when the fire bombing took place other than it was at least over 4 million. So the death rate is roughly comparable to Dresden.

WHOOSH!!! you miserable ...cretin...what propaganda? I base my views on logic and a semi autobiography I've read, from someone who was actually in Dresden when it happened...

In fairness, its a commonly held view that the death rate was much higher. I appreciate you read an autobiography of someone who was there but autobiographies can be inaccurate (either intentionally or unintentionally) and in this case its just a single source. Again how would an individual really know how many died.

"...there are always two sides to a war."

Indeed...someone is stoking the fire... war is about money ...someone is making a lot of iit...

Absolutely there is always two sides to a war. Doesn't mean there is moral equivalency between the two sides. Nothing Ukraine did in anyway comes remotely close to justifying Russia's actions.

 There is a lot of these mealy-mouthed phrases thrown out by people who dislike the West and like to blame the West for everything but they know the evidence doesn't support that in this case but can't bring themselves to admit that.

"Doesn't mean there is moral equivalency between the two sides. "

I agree 100%...Russia went way over the top.

"There is a lot of these mealy-mouthed phrases thrown out by people who dislike the West and like to blame the West for everything but they know the evidence doesn't support that in this case but can't bring themselves to admit that."

I  see myself as a Westerner and I'm not happy at all about how this was handled...weak leadership and deliberate provocation...this is a stupid and unnecessary war...yes Russia is the aggressor, but pretending it was unprovoked is denial...the conflict started way back in 2014...there's a reason it boiled over now...either deliberate or it was weak leadership, I don't know, but wars don't just happen.

"Yeah Putin decided he simply didn't want Ukraine to exist as an independent state any more."

Why now suddenly?.

"What weak leadership?"

BoJo

Biden

Macron

Olaf

Trudeau 

if Churchill and Kennedy...or Reagan/ Trump  were around, he would not have tried his luck...they all saw it coming and they didn't prevent it....and are doing nothing to stop now...they seem happy with their proxy war...plenty of sabre rattling from the West.

Macron tried to prevent the war and even after the Russian Invasion was happening he tried to settle the issue - but was sabotaged by Biden.    The problem is in the USA where an election is  11 days away and the media is trying to influence the voters by anti-Russia attacks and blame Russia for the horrible state of the country caused by Democratic Party policies and the dementia suffering president.         

If one has a look at Russian wars for over the last thousand years many of them are in their direct neighbour's territory. Make a deal with them, give them a strip of land and save a 10 0 million lives. 

If one has a look at Russian wars for over the last thousand years many of them are in their direct neighbour's territory. Make a deal with them, give them a strip of land and save a 10 0 million lives. 

How about Russia put some nuclear warhead in Cuba's hands.
You didn't think about that ,too much hatred for Putin to see the consequences.

How about Russia put some nuclear warhead in Cuba's hands.
You didn't think about that ,too much hatred for Putin to see the consequences.

And no one was talking about giving nuclear warheads to Ukraine.

True, in the meantime your hero Kim Jong Un has developed nuclear missiles that can strike USA. What a mess.

Da fuck?

Stav

You have misrepresented the situation as to NATO membership of former Communist countries are concerned totally.   In 1990 an agreement was reached that NO NEW COUNTRIES that was previously part of the USSR should be allowed to become NATO members.   Lithuania. Latvis and Estonia already became part of NATO.   Did Russia threaten to invade the three countries?   Russia objected but did nothing about it.   

Why the Russians accepted the situation was that the three countries mentioned had stable Democratic orientated  Governments with constitutional guarantees applicable also to the relevant small Russian Speaking component of their populations.   

So why the DIFFERENCE as to Ukraine?   Ukraine has been involved in destroying democracy in the case of the seizure of power from the elected president through a coup - organized and funded by the USA.   A Civil War broke out immediately  

The constitution of the Ukraine was aborted and there was a need to  negotiate a new Constitution.   Without taking into account the fact that the 1991 Constitution of the Ukraine provided that Krimea - with its 95% Russian and Tartar population component - would have their own Parliament with powers pertaining to governance of the Kriimea.    The Parliament decided to hold a referendum as to joining Russia and the referendum was held,    The outcioe was clearly for going the Russian way,     The fact is the West claimed that the actions of the Krimea Parliament was illegal in terms of the non-existent at the time Ukraine Constitution and that the election was rigged      Subsequent opinion polls conducted by reputable polsters from Germany and from the USA undertaken subsequently proved that the election outcome waas a trrue reflection of the feelings of the people of the Krimea.   Basically the answer is - why should the people of Krimea support a state where the governance changed through an unconstitutional coup anyway.   There was never any civil war fighting between the forces of the new central government and the population in Ukraine.

As stated a Civil War resulted from the 2014 coup.    The new Ukaine puppet Government got massive financial support from the USA and the Russian speaking rebels got financial and military support from Russia.   The battle for control was basically in two oblasts in the Eastern Ukraine.   In an effort to end the civil war a treaty was negotiated in Minsk in 2015.    The treaty implied the need for returning to constitutional democracy in the Ukraine and had specific provisions as to a new federal republic within Ukraine including of the 2 Oblasts mentioned.   A referendum was to be held in the whole Ukraine excluding the Krimea, which by the date the agreement was signed was not part of Ukraine anymore.   

In the absence of a Constitution No Demcocratic elections were held since 2014 since elections were not held in the two Oblasts mentioned and in the rest of the Oblasts where Russians made up a large component of the population.    In the absence of a Constitution Ukraine is NOT a democracy anymore.          The fact is the media propaganda is total rubbish.

If you have any way to disputre the above please provide proof to the contrary as to what actually happened since the unconstitutional coup in 2014.                         

Stav 

Just one easy question to answer - what caused the start of the Civil War in Ukraine in 2014?  

Stacv

What happened BEFORE the fighting started?   What about the coup leading to seizure of power by the coup promoters?   

How can that be regarded as false Russian propaganda - it is aa historical fact that the coup happened.     Then there are several questions about who organized and funded the coup?       

 In 2014 the pro-Russian government under pressure from Russia dropped an EU association agreement that had been under negotiation for seven years. This resulted in what was called the Revolution of Dignity or Maidan Revolution which led to the ousting of Yanukovych and his government by the people of Ukraine.

Stav

What a bloody farce - I must put it strongly and clearly - what is the difference in this case.- you claim it was a revolution - the fact is it was an illegal and unconstitutional grab of power by the Ukrainian element of the Ukrainian population.    It was funded and organized by the US Government  - fact.     

If there was any election held to change power t would have been CONSTITUTIONAL - but there never was  a referendum held to authorize the change of Government and the Russian element of the population in Eastern Ukraine opposed it. and that led to the civil war starting in 2014.  Th e Russian element of the population felt threatened by the REVOLUTION as you called it.   Subsequent developments indicated that they had reason to feel afraid of the threats posed by elements in the new Government - since the Ukraine Constitution was sc rapped as a result of the REVOLUTION and there was no guarantee of the protection of human rights in Ukraine left.

The EU leaders themselves realized there was a problem caused by unconstitutionality and in the Minsk agreement was contained a formula for a new constitution  for Ukraine and suggested that peace be secured through a new federal constitution with absolute conditions to ensure human rights and freedoms.   The proposals were negotiated by representatives from Germany and France on the part of the EU, Russia and the Ukraine Government and a treaty was signed to ensure a return to constitutional Governance.   

There is ample documented evidence that the US Government under Obama was involved in undermining the implementation of the Minsk agreement - there is ample evidence that billions of dollars were allocated for assistance to the new Government and that senior members of the Democratic Party benefitted from corrupt activities in Ukraine.    

To ignore the above is not Russian propaganda at all - it is a fact of life.    What happened was that the coup/revolution was illegal and what followed that was a civil war caused by the coup or as you call it revolution.     Since the Minsk agreement was not implemented the abuses of human rights started and increased after the 2019 election in areas controlled by the Kiev Government and not countrywide - so that could not be regarded as a real constitutionally-based election.   After that human rights in Ukraine suffered and deteriorated badly in many cases and the present situation in Ukraine is totally dictatorial in nature.

The above is the reason why from the start I supported finding a constitutional and legal way to get out of the mess created in Ukraine in 2014 and subsequently.    I do not condone he Russian Invasion of Ukraine - but I also do not condone the civil war and blame both sides for it.   Aside from that I do not trust the Democratic Party leadership in the USA - they have too many corrupt scum in their leadership structure who gets kickbacks iro of US Government grants to Ukraine and other countries.   It is sickening and totally immoral.    Aside from Biden - other proven kickbacks from corruption were paid to Pelosi and Schiff and information on that is well-documented.    In the USA any suggestion of peace negotiation is equated to treason - so you are not alone in what you write on site. 

You swallowed up the endless media propaganda on the issue - not realizing that they have the agenda of their owners to contend with and in the USA more particularly they thrived on lies when it comes to real issues.            

The US Embassy paid for and organized the coup in Ukraine - that was done through USAID to some institutions in Ukraine and a list of funding operations are in view in US Aid Grants to Ukraine authorized by the US Ambassador in Ukraine.  The money dished out by the US Government found its way to the organizers of the revolution    The whole scenario was a revolution by the Ukraine element in the population - not all the Ukraine people.

You have made a variety of claims that proved to be BS - the one being the US-funded biolabs in Ukraine.   You claimed the USA were involved in cleaning up the USSR biolabs in Ukraine and after 30 years how many of the labs were cleaned up and closed?   No proof of not oene being closed.    The present US Government denied the existence of the biolabs and then the US Assistant Secretary of State under oath in Senate admitted that there were operational biolabs and the US Government is worried about the dangerous pathogens produced may fall into the hands of the Russians.   If the research was as innocent as the US Government initially made out bo be -why are they worried about the results falling into the hands of the Russians?    You were totally wrong in that case and many-many other cases as well.

Just a simple question - since when is a revolution as you call it or a coup as it is called in most documents pertaining to the 2014 change in government by unconstitutional means not a problem for you?   It should be if you are in fact supporting democracy as a key means of ideal Governance in the world.      

Rather than focusing on the imagined shortcomings of the Western leaders, I’d suggest considering how much better off the world would be if Khameini, Putin, Kim and Xi were replaced by modern leaders focused on their own issues rather than the imagined shortcomings of others.

In other words by 21st century regimes rather than 19th century expansionists.

"if Khameini, Putin, Kim and Xi were replaced by modern leaders focused on their own issues rather than the imagined shortcomings of others"

That would be great but it's not easy replacing them...Look what happened in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.

Well in Kim's case it would definitely be an upgrade in any other direction.
What can be worse than an atheist state run by a cult of personality as his father
and grandfather.

Mike, adding the word fact, does not make what you say fact.

Looks like Europe will cope.

Looks like Europe will cope - hopefully they will - but at a huge price.   Will Europe still cope when the winter bites harder and the protests get worse as a result of diesel running out?     According to media reports from the USA they have enough diesel to last 21 days - why should Europe be better off?    There were two ships with diesel heading for Europe already stopped by  the US Government to prevent a situation where the whole supply system of goods collapse.

Lets look at the situation - the Minsk and subsequent agreements had the support of Putin for Ukraine to remain an independent state with the Borders being as they were before the coup and the EU negotiators even agree not to include the Krimeea in Ukraine,   So why do you carry on with the BS that Putin has an imperialist agenda?    There s zero proof that such an agenda even existed  other than in propaganda of the newspapers you believe in.     Just ask yourself one single question - why did Putin signed the Minsk agreement in 2015 if he is indeed an imperialist.      In the last election the Party supporting Putin got 48,2% of the vote - but got a majority in the Duma because of the splitting of the opposition votes.   Putin in the presidential election was supported by 60% of the voters.    So how is that represented as a dictatorship?

Before anybody swallow propaganda - one has to check whether the propaganda is factual.   Then one can understand what is really the situation.     I o not like to see what is happening in  the USA and their so-called support of the Ukraine Government.   In question in the Senate under oath  that only 30% of the armaments provided reach the armed services of Ukraine.   That was followed by a statement of Ukraine army officers that they experience serious shortages in arms and ammunition.   So where are the other 70% of the arms going?   Look no further than the Arms Black Market and who gets the profits out of the trade?                          

What does Putin want from Ukraine Mike?

Is it their grain? Access to the sea? Their power output?

Here he wanted to install nuclear power but it would have been at a phenomenal cost. 

I do not want anything  from Ukraine other than -

*     Ukraine not becoming a member of NATO; and

*      there be constitutional and legal protection of the component of the Russianb-speaking people living in Ukrraine.

The above was in the Minsk agreement Putin has signed.   The agreement was never implemented and in 2021 already there were moves that discriminate against Russian speaking peopl.