Russian losses:
- 1050 KIA
- 2 Tanks
- 7 AFVs
- 56 Artillery systems
- 306 UAVs
- 3 Cruise missiles
- 149 Vehicles & fuel tanks
SLAVA UKRAINI
Don't forget to donate, Ukraine's cause is ours! Support Ukraine!
NOTE: Those of you who do NOT want to allow automatic translation of your comments, please go to your profile page and set it.
Hover over your name at the top right, select edit profile, and you will then find the setting under the language settings heading.
N Slobozhansky-Kursk 17💥
S Slobozhansky 10💥
Kupyansk 8↗️
Lyman 27💥💥↗️
Siverskyi 3
Kramatorsk 0
Toretsk 11💥↗️
Pokrovsk 66💥💥💥↗️
Novopavlivka 17💥↗️
Huliaypillia 0
Orikhivsk 3
Dnipro/Prydniprovsky 3
On the night of July 5, units of the Unmanned Systems Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, in cooperation with other components of the Defense Forces, struck a significant target of the Russian aggressor’s military-industrial complex – JSC “VNIIR-Progress” (Cheboksary, Chuvash Republic, RF).
a
Thank you 205 👍🏻.
👍
Russia’s clear message and Europe must now take responsibility!
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov openly states that Russia’s goals in Ukraine cannot be achieved through diplomatic means and that the so-called “military special operation” will therefore continue. This is not new in substance, but a useful clarification, as you mentioned above! It confirms that Russia has no intention of negotiating peace on terms that respect Ukraine’s sovereignty.
For Europe, this should be a wake-up call:
We have long known that diplomacy only works when both parties want to avoid or end war. When an aggressive state openly declares that it will continue its war of aggression, the response cannot be concessions or naive hopes that “dialogue” will solve everything.
History teaches us this time and time again. From the Peace of Westphalia to the Congress of Vienna and the deterrence of the Cold War, European peace has never been built on wishful thinking but on balance, strength, and consequences for those who break the peace.
When Peskov says that diplomacy is not possible, it is because the Kremlin wants to dictate Ukraine’s future through violence. And as long as the cost is bearable for Russia, there is no reason for them to back down.
Therefore, our task is simple to formulate, but difficult to implement:
– Increase the cost of continued aggression.
– Make it militarily, economically, and politically unsustainable to continue the war.
– Show that Ukraine will never be left without support.
But we must also clearly state the conditions under which sanctions can be lifted. It cannot be a matter of political whim or a trade issue.
Sanctions should only be lifted if and when those responsible are held accountable in accordance with international law and through a court in The Hague, in my opinion!!!
This is not just a moral principle but a foundation for a stable and rule-based international order. If we were to lift sanctions without legal scrutiny, we would send the message that war crimes can pay off.
Taking a tough stance is not about rejecting diplomacy but, on the contrary, it is about creating conditions for real diplomacy. Diplomacy only works when there is a situation where both sides see peace as better than continued war.
To achieve this, Europe must:
Strengthen its defense capabilities and industrial base.
Ensure long-term military and economic support for Ukraine.
Reduce Russia’s strategic revenues, especially from energy.
Protect our societies from Russian propaganda and subversion.
Unite our countries behind a clear line that holds over time.
Be uncompromising on the issue of justice: no lifting of sanctions without legal review and accountability.
This is not a radical policy. It is the order that made Europe more peaceful and stable after the great catastrophes of the 20th century. It is a return to a proven principle: that international law cannot be sold out for short-term gains or illusory peace.
Peskov’s words are not an invitation to negotiate. It is an invitation to either capitulate or to show that Europe can still defend its values and its freedom.
Very good!
If something should be added, it is that Europe must realize and not least accept that this costs in monetary terms. And yet it is insanely cheap. Ukrainians, on the other hand, pay in blood.
Well thought 👍
However, one might need to realize that it is cheaper to pay a lot now, instead of a little over several years? There, politicians have a homework assignment to explain to the voters.
Exakt! 💪
Well written! 👍👍👍
Very good!
If something should be added, it is that Europe must realize and not least accept that this costs in monetary terms. And it is still insanely cheap. However, it is the Ukrainians who pay in blood.
Insanely well written Jari and a bit late to the party from me here 😀
How are you doing in the scorching heat back home in Svedala?
Not much to update here – under 30 during the day and sunny after lunch, evenings under 20 and a light breeze.
I Finland! Cool and pleasant, so one can think clearly 🤭
No excess mortality in the evenings at least, although it sounds a bit on the edge… obscure public service reference…
If you hook onto Jari, we sit and ridicule Chamberlain, but it’s the same movements we see today with the same results.
As long as one party has decided to escalate, it matters less if you yourself are yielding and using a low affective approach.
What needs to be done is to motivate the other party to de-escalate.
Or escalate internally? But what ryzZNazze will we get instead?