"Ahem... Russia? Yeah that's OUR playbook, and we aren't quite sure about giving it up just yet.
Accuse a country of having WMD, then invade that country after they've clearly got rid of any they did potentially have while using words like naziism, fundamentalism, and terrorism to whip up domestic support?
Royalty check please."
Are you talking about Iraq? The country that had invaded Kuwait, genocided the Kurds, was posturing as if it had nuclear weapons to intimidate its neighbours and wouldn't cooperate with the IAEA?
Doesn't seem all too comparable to Ukraine to me... Not to mention that this ''comparison'' is one of the main Russian propaganda talking points.
Sidenote: I found it comical when non-US Int agencies came out years later (somewhat recently) saying that THEY had ''correctly'' assessed that there were no WMDs. Like, bud... Logically speaking, you finding no evidence doesn't prove anything other than your inability to find the evidence.
If any apt comparisons can be drawn here, it seems to be between '02 Iraq and Russia, both having invaded neighbours, engaged in genocide, and inappropriate posturing with WMDs.
(I say that in good humour, post not to be construed as some sort of angry tirade ;P )
) why can't some Tomahawks be sent, on an airdrop pallet (like was used to convert a C-130 into a missile/bomb truck) preprogrammed with various targets in critical areas and delivered to somewhere in the western Ukraine (within their useable range to Mariupol) where the UAF has a transport or helicopter that can carry them high enough for a successful "launch"?
