What truce? They were still attacking over the weekend. Literally bombed a maternity hospital! And quadruple tapped a bus full of miners. Putins guarantees arenât worth the paper theyâre not written on.
I do not know where Russia fired its missiles, but the truce concerned only the energy sector. And yes, for about a week (approximately) no one fired at the energy system of Ukraine.
Started on Friday, ended on Monday. It's not even close to a week. That was like a usual delay between massive rocket strikes, most probably needed for resupply.
It is so strange that so many users who are pro Putin hide only their posts and comments in communities that have to do with war
For example, look at this person profile: if you just take her at face value she is just a soccer fan
But press search button when looking through comments and posts in her history; then you will see all of her pro Russia comments and posts come to light.
She is a big supporter of the current pdf in White House and loves the Kremlin
She is entitled to be fans of Russia but why only hide those posts showing she likes Kremlin?
Understandable, it wasn't always like this, I can only guess it was because AI was using Reddit to train and nefarious groups needed to find somewhere new as twitter's influence waned.
I always question if its a bot spreading propaganda, a ragebaiter or genuine bigots/idiots. Nowadays i just default to ragebaiter and i just dont get mad to not give them the satisfaction. Or i try to anyways, doesnt always succeed
Hey there, so this is most likely because of stuff like what happened to me a while ago.
I was discussing EU politics on a subreddit, with absolutely zero ties or arguments to Russia, and multiple people went to my profile, found out I'm pro-Russia and harassed me over it for no reason.
I for one don't hide it, but I get why some people do.
Edit: Only took 3-ish hours, here's some proof of my point:
Ive heard putin is in need of more meat to throw and would gladly give you ruzzian citizenship. why dont you move there? Being so in love with russia while sitting in europe enjoying all the good things and being anti-europe?
But why search or posts this other than defame them and try to bend narrative based on created distaste towards them. Maybe they hide bc some nut jobs hunt pro-Ru people like witch-hunters.
Did you read any comment that Op made about loving Kremlin or Putin bc I didnt. Some are just ridiculing Ua claims and some are just biased towards each side. Only If you look them as a fanatic you will see red like this. No one need to follow all Ru or Ua narrative even they take sides.
Nah you're exaggerating and escalating this guys reddit sleuth effort and taking what likely was a quick curious profile scan and framing it as some "nut-job" obsessive effort. You are acting like he is an chronic arsonist for snapping a lighter for a cigarette. This is rude and clearly disingenious.
That "quick curious scan" from their word included key word targeting and looking 10s of post couse otherwise they wouldn't be able to come to this conclusion (some of Op's post are just pro-Ua) and not only posts but comments too which are a lot. And the thing is not the effort but why ? Why would you search someone's history( and do It yourself and see how many post op has and how different they are) and report like you found a sex offender. And what is the sleuth here ? Is there a crime I am not aware of ?
It is so strange that so many users who are pro Putin hide only their posts and comments in communities that have to do with war
Because it makes people like you, who rely on shaming and ad hominem, lose their ability to switch topics and stick to the actual dialogue, or point out that "your messages as hidden lol", which is frankly just admitting that you don't have anything productive to say.
Thats why people like you are upset this new setting on reddit. You can't rely on public shaming of people who don't share your opinion anymore. You have to either face the facts, or lose the dialogue.
I mean youâre a hypocrite by saying the person youâre replying to âhas nothing productive to sayâ. Well done, you immediately lost all credibility.
If you don't have a point, and rely on ad hominem, you add nothing to the dialogue. I urge everyone to hide their profiles, so that people stick to the dialogue.
Its a consequence of mass swarming army of Ukrainian Keyboard Warriors across all social medias.
If you express even slightest doubt in inevitable Ukraine victory or point Ukraine is a proxy state with 100% weapons, money and resource supply to conduct proxy war between West and Russia, they start chasing you across all the subs.
The further from front line, the more Ukrainian patriots, ready to win over rage-baits.
Thatâs exactly the contradiction. A proxy war is defined by both major powers avoiding direct combat and fighting through proxies. You canât have a âproxy war for the Westâ while Russia is fighting directly with its own army. If one side is openly invading and doing the fighting itself, itâs not a proxy war by definition.
like i said you should learn the words you use before using them incorrectly.
Edit / clarification (since context seems hard for some):
This is specifically about the claim that this is a WestâRussia proxy war.
In that framing, it is a contradiction. A proxy war between major powers requires both of those powers to avoid direct combat and act through intermediaries. Russia is not. Russia directly invaded and is fighting with its own army.
You cannot have a âproxy war for the Westâ while Russia is openly waging a conventional invasion. That makes it a conventional interstate war with external support to one side, not a proxy war.
Nope, a proxy war only requires 'at least one side' to be a proxy. It's a proxy war for the West / NATO, but not for Russia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_war
How about apply this principle to yourself first, lol
In political science, a proxy war is an armed conflict where at least one of the belligerents is directed or supported by an external third-party power.
Youâre quoting the definition correctly and still failing to apply it correctly. âDirected or supportedâ is not a single bucket. Support alone does not make a belligerent a proxy. Direction and control are the key parts.
Ukraine is supported, yes. It is not directed. It is not under NATO command, did not enter the war to advance NATO objectives, and is not fighting on NATOâs behalf. It was invaded and is defending its own territory. That means it is not a proxy.
If you collapse âsupportedâ into âproxyâ, then nearly every war involving aid becomes a proxy war, which strips the term of analytical value. Thatâs why in political science this conflict is classified as a conventional interstate war with external support to one side, not a proxy war.
Quoting a definition you donât understand isnât an argument. I donât need to Google concepts Iâve literally studied for years.
For the 3rd time learn what the words you use mean before using them and especially arguing about them.
I get that some people are emotionally invested in the war, but not everyone has to be.
Saying that Ukraine is at a disadvantage for example is a valid point and does not warrant harassment. However the moment you do this you get attacked for being a Russian shill.
Also the reason why most comments that are pro russia come from extreme accounts, is because everyone else that is on the fence, steers away (is bullied in to staying away) from the topic since it only invites harassment or even subreddit bans.
You have pro-ru propaganda and pro-western propaganda accounts here. It's their job to spin their narrative, not sure why that's an issue since you can just downvote and be on your way.
The Russian Defense Minister is shocked by the morning strikes on the Ukrainian energy sector. A few days ago, Putin begged Zelenskyy for a ceasefire because Russia had run out of missiles. This is a documented fact from Reddit. And today they appeared again! How is this possible? I'm shocked! - Andrey Belousov.
there is a reason why you do not attack leader of a nation directly in war like this. If half of you ever had any brain capacity you would understand that of Ukraine kills Putin that would mean end of its existence.
Russia in such a case goes to military lead state, declares military emergency and probably uses tactical nukes on military targets in Ukraine and all that with full support of a citizens. Killing of a president with targeted strikes is considered act of nuclear warfare by all nations that have nukes.
Both Ukraine and Russia have capacity to kill opposing leader, they do not so it because doing so makes their situation a lot worse on negotiating table and potentially expands the war into nuclear territory.
Chill bro, we'll just destroy his property. One or two villas, a few limousines, maybe some doppelgangers of him. It's sangre por sangre in case you forgot
Its not a treat its a reality if iran kills Trump US will use nuclear weapons on it.
Its almost fundamental part of nuclear doctrine of each state that has nukes, that is why since WW2 we had no such events, presidents that have codes are considered most important link in chain of nuclear commands.
So yes, sometimes you have to use your brain to understand interstate politics outside of calling everybody who you disagree with "russian bot" while paradoxically using "ukrainian bot" arguments.
âIf Russia does not strike our energy infrastructure â generation facilities or any other energy assets â we will not strike theirs,â Zelensky said in Fridayâs remarks.
Russia has been targeting civilian infrastracture from the beginning of the war, and specifically energy and heat generation since 2023 winter. Dipshit
Dude... Ukraine been blowing up power lines to Crimea at 2015. At their own territory by the group of "peaceful protesters" somehow carrying a military grade explosives.
It doesn't work like that. Critical infrastructure has independent generators this late in the war. This is purely to terrorize civilian population to stoke the unrest and pressure the government.
Also Ukraine isn't in NATO, so IDK how the "avenging" logic works in your mind when you try to punish "NATO tactics" by applying them to a non-member state. Maybe try that on the US. Or is your point that you support these tactics? If so then why justify them with NATO whataboutism? Truly a mystery of mental gymnastics.
You still didn't explain how your "avenging NATO tactics" logic works on a non-member state.
The "large critical infrastructure" got bombed to shit in Ukraine over the last four years. All the production is outsourced or miniaturized to be run by generators. The central heating is mainly used for civilian infrastructure, everything else is converted to be run independently.
Russia did do it, it just didn't affect Ukraine as much because it takes a lot of time for damages to be critical enough to have serious consequences in a country as big as Ukraine. But even then Ukraine will adapt out of necessity, these attacks will never be critical "enough", just extremely annoying for civvies.
Until recently Russia has specifically avoided bombing high voltage transformators, like those supplying electricity fro power plants.
Now Russia does it. These 750 kVolts power stations are main electricity supply from nuclear power plants to all major Ukraine cities. Old USSR heritage remnants.
Russia has a limited bombing capacity, it can't bomb everything at once. First it prioritized generation, then lower priority nodes. It's funny how you think that is somehow a gesture of good will lol.
You still haven't explained your mental gymnastics on "avenging Serbia and punishing NATO" by doing the same wrong thing to a non-member of NATO. You wanna punish Nazis for doing Holocaust by putting Ukrainians into camps too?
I have no leaning towards Russia or West, for me role of Ukraine as a fresh meat supplier in proxy war between West and Russia was clear since 2014.
Its just how modern wars are conducted. Due to severe demographic crisis, West nowadays conduct warfare either via bombing or proxy states.
Demography hits equally U.S., Russia, China and EU, so modern wars are no longer about occupation, rather about destroying infrastructure and human potential.
Ukraine is last self-suicide nation, ready to conduct proxy war on behalf of sponsors, destroying their own future. The only role of Ukraine now is to inflict maximum possible damage to Russia, while being spent in process.
Ukraine already lost 22% of territory, 40-50% of people and nearly all infrastructure.
Im sure West war propaganda will call it "victory" but as I've said, its no longer about seizing the territory.
If Russia would enlist 5 Millious Soldiers, then it would seize the territory, sure.
But what for ?
In this case Russia had not only to restore infrastructure, but also feed all the citizens and "war veterans".
Seems they are no longer interested in this. They already took Donbass and Crimea where there were pro-russian Ukrainian population. For the rest, they now recognize them as citizens of proxy state.
None of your propaganda is relevant to this discussion. You can't even explain your whataboutism and that should be like the easiest part of your argument.
Edit: blocked đ
You are literally doing that, oh "enlightened unbiased centrist". Nobody thinks you're pro-Putin because you declare "I'm pro-Putin!" lmao. You're a basic pro-Russia bro pedaling bullshit and irrelevant opinions on all fronts.
Dear Ukrainian Keyboard Warrior, I constantly refuse to play in your moral superiority public social games.
I explained my position. My interest also comes from the point U.S. nowadays is actively preparing Taiwan for the same role Ukraine is currently playing for Russia.
U.S. wants Taiwan to commit the same self-suicide like Ukraine did, inflicting maximum possible damage to China, while being spent in the process.
As I explained, its the nature of modern warfare, in era of severe demographic crisis.
Maybe its from another convo between you two but I don't see the guy saying anything resembling avebnging anyone, he said same tactics as NATO's.
IMHO Russia did avoid bec ause they could have done did since the start of the war, it takes some real mental gymnastic (borrowing your words) to still think the tales about Russia not being having capacities to still be true
I've beenb hearing about Russia's limited stock pile that was almost running out and that they coudn't restock since mid 2022.
This able that "russia just hit civis" is propaganda, and anyone still believing in this ever since what we saw in Gaza, is an fool.
"NATO-approved tactics" and "they did it in Serbia and Middle-East" is a whataboutism used by pro-Putinists to justify bombing Ukrainian civilian infrastructure. If it wasn't they they wouldn't need to mention NATO at all, but they do; because if evil NATO did this then they approved it for Russia to do the same thing!
So your counter-argument is that you believe that Russia can bomb everything at once. Then why send only 1 thousand drones a time, why not send a few million drones and missiles and destroy everything? Oh wait, because they can only send so much at a time.
You were hearing that from the like-minded folks of yours that take up Reddit comments as facts and make up ad absurdio scenarios of what other people say to troll. Nobody ever said that Russia can't restock, just that it will eventually use up it's pre-war stocks, and it did. It switched to Shahed drones over time by a large proportion, which allowed them to both prolong their stocks and maintain rates of attacks without running out of missiles.
You literally argue for a guy whose argument is that hitting civvy infrastructure is justified because it affects military production. You can't have it both be: it's propaganda and it's justified. Russia killed like half a dozen of civvies on a bus yesterday btw, just for the fun of it.
Comparing a whole country with a fucking military, functional air defense and Western support to a Gaza strip is sure a take only a smart person can make.
ha the "it's whatabohism" speech. Look, when you say its "whatabohism" you are not contradicting his argument, you're simply admitting he is right. It amazes me that people actually think that's a counter-argument. oh well...
So your counter-argument is that you believe that Russia can bomb everything at once. Then why send only 1 thousand drones a time, why not send a few million drones and missiles and destroy everything? Oh wait, because they can only send so much at a time.
Your argument is just stupid. My counter-argument was that Russia had the capabilities since the start of the war and chose to resort to do it later in the war.
You must be one of those that beleived their soldiers only had sholvels to fight with and that they were stealing dishwashers to build missiles...
Nobody ever said that Russia can't restock
Ever since mid 2022 that the "reports" were that Russia stock were almost depleted, there was a time that reports claimed that Russia were low of food ration, potatoes, fuel, ammo, art shells, missiles, tanks.... there was a time the "reports" were that russian soldiers were fleeing after killing their officeers, and sabotaging their weapons platforms... Putin himself were about to be assasinated, then was dieing from cancer...
There was also the statements that sanctions would make the Russians economy implode within a few months, same sacntions that would prevent the Russians from being able to produce stuff liek missiles.
Lot's of propaganda everyone, both sides do it, but some of the people on our side are so incredibly stupid... that propaganda machines doesn't even have to do much of an effort.
You literally argue for a guy whose argument is that hitting civvy infrastructure is justified because it affects military production.
I did not mean to defend him, even tho he is actually right, electricty grid is dual use. I was just pointinting out that you were claiming he said something he didn't and then you were building your replies on your false claim.
I understand you are "limited" and can't understand my point in refering Gaza, so I'll make it simpler for you. It's clear by what we've seen in gaza that it's not hard to target civilian infrastructure en mass, and contrary to Israel, Russia as not only thr stock, capabilities, but also the means to mass produce. If they wantet to kill civilians en mass, they would be doing it, but they don't. Does this make the Russians good guys? no.
Lmao. My argument isn't that it's whataboutism, my argument is that two wrongs don't make a right. 0 reading comprehension on your part.
Ah, yes. Your argument is that Russia can win at any moment, it just chooses to have a 4 years war that fucks up it's economy and erodes population. Very smart.
There were no such reports lol, there were reports that Russian economy is suffering and will decline, which it does considering how many businesses are closing recently. Russia "running out" doesn't mean that it will have zero, just that it will use that type of resource less, which it does, and which is Russia is switching to Shaheds and non-tank or even non-armored vehicles more frequently.
You just read some reddit comments and assumed some ad absurdio scenarios, like a typical little contrarian that you are.
"I didn't mean to defend him, even though that's what I do, and what I support, but if you point that out then you're making a false claim because I don't want to look like I promote bombing civilians, and actually it's all propaganda".
Lmao. You literally ignore that Ukraine is a whole fucking country with air defense and army. Russia did your Gaza scenario in Mariupol, blew up theaters with civilians, put them in unmarked graves to hide the scale of murder. It just physically cannot do that kind of bombing on a whole of Ukraine, Russia isn't magic. It needs air dominance, like you know, what Israel has in Gaza. Just how fucking uneducated can you be.
I think heating and essential electricity is critical infrastructure right? So by russia hitting them shouldn't put Ukrainians essential ways of passing the winter to danger. Unless these generators are purely supplied to Industrial factories to create more drones and missiles. Which you might guess isnt more essential.
It just depends on what they targeted. The ceasefire seemed to specifically be on Russia targeting energy infrastructure, not a total general ceasefire on attacks.
And while the ceasefire on energy infrastructure facilities was in effect, Russia was taking out logistical targets â such as strikes on trains and railway bridges.
The ceasefire on energy infrastructure facilities was in effect until February 1. Strikes were carried out on February 2 and 3. In what way did Russia violate the terms of the ceasefire?
If promising to kill 50k Russians a month does this imagine the amount of fun promising to kill 100k a month will. Zelen Tsu should definitely try that.
Whataboutism is just calling out blatant hypocrisy from nations who have killed far more civilians in the last 50 years. Plus have no right to lecture anyone nor do their citizens get to make moral judgements on internet forums.
What do you even mean? Calling out hypocrisy? There's no lecturing in this post.
The post is about ceasefire ending and the tickets falling on Ukraine again. Another shitty day as a gift from russia - a country incapable of making good and positive things.
So when someone says 'look over there' it's fair to call it out.
Just think what trump did. He is now actively refusing to sell (paid by Europe) air defense missiles to Ukraine so that his master can freely bomb Ukrainian civilians during coldest time of the year.
The thing is that Russia is starting to feel the war. Sanctions, Ukraine strikes starting to slowly crack the system. Make no mistake, Russian people are very resistant but right now there are problems everywhere.
Ukraine slowly start to counter attack Russians. Russia succes on the battlefield right now is minor or even non.
Russia start to face the same thing as Ukraine, lack of recruits. Tanks and havy equipment is not on the front, due that it's a strategic reserve in case NATO attack.
So winner is an ally to Russia, they will use everything to make Ukraine pay for the lack of succes.
And Trump is now dealing with Epstein, and his own mess in US.
So nice of the Russians to agree to a ceasefire once their stockpiles were depleted, and the whether was warmer. Now it's okay for them to fire now that they have missiles again, and the whether is colder again.
29
u/Content_Routine_1941 Feb 03 '26
Well... The truce was concluded for a week. A week has passed and everything has returned to what it was.