I think the Poles have a score to settle with the Russians also.When Poland is involved it does get my attention quickly.
poland would like their slice of uk rain also,
You have no more idea exactly what happened than anybody else on this board. You just think you do, because you found a news source that agrees your predetermined bias. It could have been an errant Ukrainian defensive missle, it could have been an errant Russian missle. The only thing that is clear is that Russia is to blame.
I know better than to completely trust the US government. But yeah, I'm sure that they immediately released the complete and unvarnished truth in this case. Absolutely no reason at all to avoid blaming Russia for one of their missles hitting NATO soil, regardless of where the missle actually came from. It's not like starting WWIII is any type of consideration at all.So you know better than US intel?
I know better than to completely trust the US government. But yeah, I'm sure that they immediately released the complete and unvarnished truth in this case. Absolutely no reason at all to avoid blaming Russia for one of their missles hitting NATO soil, regardless of where the missle actually came from. It's not like starting WWIII is any type of consideration at all.
Has US intel found the WMDs in Iraq yet?
Have you 2 met?So you know better than US intel?
I'm loony? You're the one swallowing what Biden's intel people are giving you.Show me where the missile could have potentially been launched from, while knowing the actual range of an S300. Any model of S300.
None will achieve the range necessary to land where it did, from Russian controlled territory.
You sound like those loony NAFO people.
I'm loony? You're the one swallowing what Biden's intel people are giving you.
Was it a blue and yellow missle with "definitely not from Russia and absolutely a Ukranian S300" written on it with a Sharpie?
No. There's only one possible conclusion to avoid igniting direct confrontation of NATO vs Russia. Facts are irrelevant.Try thinking rationally. Establish the facts, the capabilities, and the region.
Work through it and you'll see that there's only one possible situation.
Facts are irrelevant.
No. You don't.I see.
Huh?You know what makes zero sense with this illogical idea that the invasion was to keep NATO off their borders? A successful invasion would literally put NATO on their border. I mean, idiots that parrot anything they're told will believe it but anyone with 2 working brain cells will see the fallacy of his argument.
Do you really so fundamentally misunderstand the strategic implications of what's going on here? It's not like Russia is playing some game of "NATO is lava" where they lose the moment their border touches a NATO country. If Russia takes over Ukraine they haven't moved their heartland, their industry, and most importantly Moscow, any closer to NATO territory, rather, they've created a bigger buffer of territory, and taken control of strategically important terrain features that make their border far easier to defend in the case of a war with NATO.“I don’t want you close to me so I’ll move closer” argument. Got it.