7 ms·

> All the evidence about "imminent attack" is fed to media by US government without sufficient proofs. Whatever are your sources, try to find more information.

> All the evidence about "imminent attack" is fed to media by US government without sufficient proofs. Whatever are your sources, try to find more information. I don't feel like one can participate in this discussion in good faith because any "evidence" of "imminent attack" can be brushed off... 100k troops and a ton of military gear on the border? Just chilling out and sightseeing, my friend, nothing to see here! However, I do contest the claim that all "evidence" is fed by the US government. There are other sources if you care to dig in. How about Ministry of Defence of Ukraine? They've been predicting action for January-February since months ago, and there's certainly evidence from Ukraine that Russia is up to something. > On 21 November, the head of the HUR MOU, Kyrylo Budanov, reported that Russia had concentrated more than 92,000 troops and deployed several Iskander short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) systems near the Russo-Ukrainian border. Budanov accused Russia of conspiring protests against vaccination against COVID-19 in Kyiv and other protest rallies in Ukraine to destabilize the country in preparations for a large-scale military invasion. According to Budanov, active Russian military actions should be expected between late-January and early-February 2022. > On 3 December, the Ukrainian Minister of Defense, Oleksii Reznikov, spoke of the possibility of a "large-scale escalation" by Russia during the end of January 2022, during a session at the Verkhovna Rada (Ukraine's national parliament). > Russia began a slow evacuation of its embassy staff at Kyiv beginning from January 2022. The motives of the evacuation remain unknown and were subjected to multiple speculations. By mid-January, an intelligence assessment produced by the Ukrainian Ministry of Defence estimated that Russia were in its final stages of completing a military buildup at the Russo-Ukrainian border, amassing 127,000 troops at the region. I'm not going to post the links because anyone who is not dishonest and not intellectually lazy can find them in two minutes of searching.

ivan_gammel 5y ago
First, it is already beginning of February, so those predictions were false - nothing happened so far. Second, it would be more appropriate to quote more recent statement by the president of Ukraine, who denied that the attack is imminent and said that these statements only create unnecessary panic. Whatever links you refused to post, they cannot possibly deny that this official position did exist just a week ago.
- foxfluff 5y ago
  > First, it is already beginning of February, so those predictions were false - nothing happened so far. Umm, this is exactly what I meant when I said it's impossible to discuss this in good faith. Any evidence can be immediately brushed off. "Ha, Ministry of Defence of Ukraine failed to predict the exact date when something would happen, therefore everything they said is false!" Completely disregarding everything that has been happening near Ukrainian border. Sorry, I'm not going to continue this discussion with you.
  - ivan_gammel 5y ago
    Well, my comment had two parts. Statement of Ministry of Defence that is disavowed by the President a month later does not look like based on hard evidence, it is merely a speculation. Ukraine has a role in this propaganda theater just like everybody else, and apparently they back off from a convenient alarmist position when the money start flowing away, not because of any change in the situation on the borders.
    - foxfluff 5y ago
      Given that it is the within the president's interest to avoid war, come to a diplomatic resolution, and prevent panic, I wouldn't take their denouncement as having any bearing on the evidence.

ivan_gammel 5y ago

First, it is already beginning of February, so those predictions were false - nothing happened so far. Second, it would be more appropriate to quote more recent statement by the president of Ukraine, who denied that the attack is imminent and said that these statements only create unnecessary panic. Whatever links you refused to post, they cannot possibly deny that this official position did exist just a week ago.

foxfluff 5y ago
> First, it is already beginning of February, so those predictions were false - nothing happened so far. Umm, this is exactly what I meant when I said it's impossible to discuss this in good faith. Any evidence can be immediately brushed off. "Ha, Ministry of Defence of Ukraine failed to predict the exact date when something would happen, therefore everything they said is false!" Completely disregarding everything that has been happening near Ukrainian border. Sorry, I'm not going to continue this discussion with you.
- ivan_gammel 5y ago
  Well, my comment had two parts. Statement of Ministry of Defence that is disavowed by the President a month later does not look like based on hard evidence, it is merely a speculation. Ukraine has a role in this propaganda theater just like everybody else, and apparently they back off from a convenient alarmist position when the money start flowing away, not because of any change in the situation on the borders.
  - foxfluff 5y ago
    Given that it is the within the president's interest to avoid war, come to a diplomatic resolution, and prevent panic, I wouldn't take their denouncement as having any bearing on the evidence.