Largest Plane Ever Built May Have Been Destroyed, Ukraine Foreign Minister Says (sfgate.com) 152
SFGate reports:
The largest plane ever built has been destroyed at an airport outside Kyiv, Ukraine Minister of Foreign Affairs Dmytro Kuleba said Sunday....
The Antonov An-225 Mriya was built in Ukraine in 1985 when the nation was still controlled by the Soviet Union. It has six turbofan engines and is the heaviest aircraft ever built. It was created as a strategic airlift cargo craft, carrying Soviet space orbiters, but was later purchased by Antonov Airlines. It's since been used to airlift oversized cargo and large loads of emergency aid during natural disasters....
Although Kuleba's tweet confirmed the plane's demise, Antonov says it is still gathering information on the massive plane's fate.
The Antonov An-225 Mriya was built in Ukraine in 1985 when the nation was still controlled by the Soviet Union. It has six turbofan engines and is the heaviest aircraft ever built. It was created as a strategic airlift cargo craft, carrying Soviet space orbiters, but was later purchased by Antonov Airlines. It's since been used to airlift oversized cargo and large loads of emergency aid during natural disasters....
Although Kuleba's tweet confirmed the plane's demise, Antonov says it is still gathering information on the massive plane's fate.
Shall we play a game? (Score:2)
Global Thermonuclear War.
Who is willing to call Putin's bluff on nuke readiness?
Re: Shall we play a game? (Score:2)
North Korea? (Score:2)
Global Thermonuclear War.
Who is willing to call Putin's bluff on nuke readiness?
I'd just like to point out that while Russian nuclear forces are on highest alert, N. Korea just fired off a ballistic missile [yna.co.kr].
Action condemned by the US (obviously), but it gave me a chuckle that N. Korea would try to provoke Russia and the US into a nuclear war like that.
Re: (Score:2)
This is where things get really messy. If Russia and NATO really get going, China may see this as an opportunity to seize Taiwan, and North Korea may see this as an opportunity to take South Korea. There are plenty of hot spots in the world where the US being occupied elsewhere could signal opportunity to aggressors.
Re: (Score:2)
North Korea can shell Seoul into rubble, but they're not capable of invading and holding anything.
Re: (Score:2)
North Koreas army is about 1million soldiers ...
Re: (Score:2)
Having a large army is no guarantee, the south is better equipped and better trained. The US defeated the Iraqi army despite being outnumbered and fighting on their territory. Having a large army on the ground does you no good when the enemy can remain out of range of your weapons and blow you up from a distance.
That's why the north want nukes - they know they will lose a conventional war, but if they have the capability to nuke a couple of cities in the south it would render any war too costly for the sout
Re: (Score:2)
You are right in principle, but with enough numbers - and those they probably have - you can weed out that disadvantage.
After all the other side might run out of ammunition etc.
but if they have the capability to nuke a couple of cities in the south it would render any war too costly for the south to pursue.
That is a two fold problem. As US likely has nukes in South Korea, too.
That fucking problem is basically USA's fault. Letting the Soviets have NK, because they agreed "Yeah, Korea is a part of Japan, let'
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is: many people go and fight the one on the other side of the fence, when there is one in their back threatening to shoot them into the back if they do not fight, or kill their families.
The north Korean deserter who flew a Russian plane to Japan, had all his comrades shot in his air wing.
Re: North Korea? (Score:3)
Nato won't get going at all. The only way to get Nato going, is to attack a Nato country. With the exception of 9-11 this has never happened and because no Nato country is involved in this war, Nato simply won't do anything. Nato never was an actual threat to Russia, that's just what Put wants you to believe.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My understanding of history suggests most of us don't have long to live.
I obviously hope I'm wrong. I'm fine with dying myself. I'm ready. But I hoped that 5-6 billion of my fellow human beings wouldn't end up having to die anytime soon as well.
Re: North Korea? (Score:2)
As much as any nation may think this, the little pride I have as an American is our achievements in WW2. We are one of the few nations it seems in history that got goaded into a two front war and kicked ass on both fronts. Yes Ukraine will be more of a land war but not China with Taiwan which means it's very similar in strategy to WW2.
Of course we can't nuke anyone into submission but we could sit our navy off the coast and pummel a shit ton of targets in China.
The real question is only would we commit to d
Re: (Score:2)
We are one of the few nations it seems in history that got goaded into a two front war and kicked ass on both fronts.
Credit where it's due. While the US certainly made major contributions in Europe during WW2, it was hardly the only party involved. Let's not forget that it was technically the USSR that won WW2 in Europe. Also, the USSR crushed the Japanese on land in WW2. It's been argued that the US used atomic bombs against Japan because they were desperate to get Japan to surrender to them rather than the Soviets who were preparing to invade Japan directly. So that would make the USSR/Russians a nation that was goaded
Re: North Korea? (Score:2)
Fair enough. The USSR of this period was a mighty force but likely the comparison to modern Russia is slim. Russia did take far more losses than us but it did also have to contend with two land wars.
Honestly, it seems generally accepted that Germany's mistake was opening the offensive with Germany when it did. As for the history of WW2 in Asia, I know rather little about it other than it having a bit of a different regional name and started much earlier in a significant form than Europe. I do not know much
Re: (Score:2)
All being said, it's hard to deny the strength of the USSR of the time but the nation of Russia is quite distinctly different.
Quite true. One way it seems to be different is that modern Russia is more brazenly kleptocratic. I'm quite sure that there was plenty of corruption at the time too (Putin, for example, supposedly used to divert entire trainloads of government provided food and supplies to sell for his own profit when he was a political officer in the KGB), but it seems quite possible that it's worse today. On of the things that has surprised people in their invasion of Ukraine is the poor state of repair of a lot of their
Re: North Korea? (Score:2)
Your speculation sounds on point.
Re: (Score:2)
The US, UK and Russia have an agreement to respect Ukraine's sovereignty, not to provide material support or defense in the event that Ukraine is attacked by someone else. Russia has clearly broken that agreement, but the US and UK have not.
Re: North Korea? (Score:2)
Fair enough. I had to reread the "security assurances" but this quote seems to explain it, "It gives signatories justification if they take action, but it does not force anyone to act in Ukraine."
Seems kind of weak but the details I quickly read said US politics limited effectively ratifying a more effective defense treat.
Re: (Score:2)
This is where things get really messy. If Russia and NATO really get going, China may see this as an opportunity to seize Taiwan, and North Korea may see this as an opportunity to take South Korea. There are plenty of hot spots in the world where the US being occupied elsewhere could signal opportunity to aggressors.
While nobody is looking Britain might take America back!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Who is willing to call Putin's bluff on nuke readiness?
He's probably performing for his home audience.
Re:Shall we play a game? (Score:5, Informative)
Global Thermonuclear War.
Who is willing to call Putin's bluff on nuke readiness?
Everyone, because it's meaningless. Even his addled brain won't be stupid enough to do anything with nuclear weapons.
It's the last, desperate cry of a loser to make themselves seem relevant. It's the same reason he wants to have a meeting tomorrow (Monday). His invasion of Ukraine has failed. Totally. It's an absolute debacle with thousands of troops dead, military hardware by the metric ton either captured, abandoned or annihilated, and no objective even remotely close to being met. They don't even have air superiority. As result, convoys are [9cache.com] being taken out [9cache.com]through the use of drones [9cache.com].
And this is on top of his logistical failure. It is well known he is unable to supply his troops with enough fuel or ammunition. 72 hours. That is what someone in the know quoted when it comes to supplying a military force. After 72 hours of sustained combat you need a complete refuel, rearm and resupply if you want to continue. As the video evidence shows [9cache.com], that's not happening [9gag.com]. Supply convoys are being totally destroyed. As a result, troops are literally leaving their vehicles where they are and walking away.
All of this is addition to his attempts to enter Ukrainian cities. Again, the video evidence [9cache.com] shows his convoys [9cache.com] are being obliterated [9cache.com].
Putin needed a quick victory. He thought it would be two or three days and over. We're now coming up on day five and the tide is turning against him. His soldiers are demoralized, the equipment they're using is far below analyst predictions in quality and capability, and now that his country is essentially isolated from the world, things are unraveling. Fast. The only card he can play is, "I'vE gOt NuKeS!!!", and he's not going to use it.
Re: (Score:3)
Not to detract from your overall tone, which I'm rooting for being correct, but you seem marginally disconnected from reality, and there have been boatloads of stories, fake videos, and misattributed videos propagandizing Ukraine's bravery and success (which isn't to say that they aren't brave- they are, and not successful- I think they're putting up a hell of a fight in the face of terrifying odds)
Re: (Score:2)
If I were you, I'd be a bit more skeptical of ambiguous videos you find on the internet.
Not to detract from your overall tone, which I'm rooting for being correct, but you seem marginally disconnected from reality, and there have been boatloads of stories, fake videos, and misattributed videos propagandizing Ukraine's bravery and success (which isn't to say that they aren't brave- they are, and not successful- I think they're putting up a hell of a fight in the face of terrifying odds)
These particular videos are confirmed. Specifically, any of the destroyed convoys have a V or Z on the side of the vehicles are Russian. Those are some of the symbols used by the Russian forces to identify who is who. The group asking for fuel is clearly Russian. The videos of convoys being struck by drones are also confirmed. The one video of the guy saying 'blyat" at the end of the sentence is from Kharkiv yesterday. The other is from Bucha, another known location of Ukrainian defense.
Yes, there are m
Re: (Score:2)
These particular videos are confirmed.
I'm sure they are very much real. I once got drunk and jumped off my deck straight into a swimming pool and the video ended on Facebook. That's however where it should end. No one should assume I'm a parkour expert or a long-jump athlete. The video shows 3 convoys being hit. Unless there were only 3 convoys, and unless Russia has destroyed nothing of the Ukraine all you've shown is what is known as war propaganda.
I'm not saying Russia isn't in a bad shape, but please don't spread propaganda, especially when
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It's the last, desperate cry of a loser to make themselves seem relevant.
My first thought on watching that video was: "Wow, looks like he's just received a terminal diagnosis."
There's a difference between 'going out with a bang' and 'taking the whole world with you' which has perhaps been lost in translation...
Re: (Score:3)
Who is willing to call Putin's bluff on nuke readiness?
The Russian army, I would expect. My reading of history is that soldiers, including generals, don't like war. You may have noticed that soldiers tend to die a lot in wars. Politicians start wars, not soldiers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Precision Skyrim archer shooting an arrow from orbit to hit the heart of the dragon.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Holy shit- someone solved MAD!
It's a good thing that the last 70 years of nuclear policy hasn't been focus on 2nd strike capability in all eventualities.
Re: (Score:2)
Holy shit- someone solved MAD!
Yep, it's called THAAD [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
It may one day be, but even then, not really, because as soon as THAAD can successfully hit terminal phase reentry vehicle with active countermeasures, they'll just make better ones.
Re: (Score:2)
Nonetheless the system is in service and doesn't use active countermeasures so that it doesn't detonate the warhead. The system is in active deployment, I'm pretty sure it was one motivation to get out of the intermediate nuclear weapons treaty.
Help me out, why is it not a solution to MAD?
Re: (Score:2)
Warheads use active countermeasures.
THAAD has only had 1 successful hit on a reentry vehicle, and that reentry vehicle had no active countermeasures.
Further, it's entirely untested against reentry vehicles with ICBM velocities, only IRBM velocities.
As I said, it's not a deterrent. It's a "send one more warhead" deterrent, and a potentially future deterrent, but currently right now, the only thing it's useful for is shooting down scuds.
It's not a solution to MAD because it is not
How?! (Score:2)
Is anyone else shocked that this plane wasn't moved out of the country well before the attack, or even shortly after it started? Why would they just let it be destroyed like that?
Re: (Score:2)
Is anyone else shocked that this plane wasn't moved out of the country well before the attack,
No.
or even shortly after it started? Why would they just let it be destroyed like that?
It has no particular value, other than historical.
Re: (Score:2)
The plane was being used for transporting cargo up until a landing incident last year which damaged it (I assume that was the repairs they were doing that prevented it from being flown out before Putin's thugs targeted it).
According to this [rferl.org] It was making about 12 to 20 flights per year but demand picked up during the pandemic.
It can also carry large loads that no other plane can.
It has more than historical value.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because if its maintenance base is destroyed, theres no point in having the aircraft elsewhere anyway.
Whats more important is whats the state of the Motor Sich jet turbine manufacturing centre in Zaporizhzhia, as this produces the engines that power the AN-124 and AN-225 - if that factory is gone, then so are essentially the remaining AN-124s in due course.
Re: (Score:2)
According to this article [ukroboronprom.com.ua], it was undergoing repairs at the time and could not be flown out in time.
The claim is that it will cost $3B USD to "restore" (given that reports are that it was on fire in the maintenance hanger, "restore" may be an optimistic outlook) and that the occupiers will pay for that. I'm sure if they send an invoice to Putin, he will see to it that it's paid in a timely fashion.
(Maybe the world will isolate Russia until they pay reparations that will include rebuilding this plane they ne
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Since they are sending the bill to Putin, they might as well aim high.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It most likely was not air worthy, or no one thought about it: there is a war going on, more pressing matters to attend.
So what? (Score:2)
Its destruction is symbolic of typical Russian evil which makes that a plus. The value to aviation buffs is irrelevant and flying out large assets wastes money and jet fuel needed for the war.
War matters more than toys.
In other news, people are dying (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Drones [youtu.be] may come to the battle.
Destroying History (Score:2)
I wanted to title this "Fuck" because it's so frustrating that such a significant piece of aviation history is now a smouldering mass.
Sure, Russia's military probably saw it as a Ukrainian asset that had to be destroyed to deny the use of it however they have destroyed a part of their history as well. Buran [wikipedia.org] was the spacecraft it was designed to service and two of them are still in storage in Kazakhstan. Even as a symbolic gesture they were a historical connection all three countries shared even if the c
Re: (Score:2)
I'll also point out that Antares [wikipedia.org], a Ukrainian rocket, with Russian engines and a US built second stage, successfully launched a day or so ago.
So, yeah, fuck war - we've got better things to do.
Man of the Year (Score:5, Insightful)
Vladimir Putin achieved what I thought was impossible: He united Europe, strengthened NATO, turned a TV comedian into an inspirational hero and symbol of courage and leadership, and set Russia back decades. He exposed the Republican Fifth Column in the US and all the Fox News Tokyo Roses and Lord Haw Haws.
He showed the world that patriots fight to defend their own capitol and traitors fight to attack their own capitol. And maybe, just maybe, having leaders who are syphilitic narcissists is not that great of an idea. He gave the world a wake-up call on what happens when nationalistic faux-populism and macho posturing meet emotional insecurity and attempt to take the mantle of political leadership.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
LOL try again idiot. But hey why not arrest him too? Might be fun to lock him up with some antifa idiots and see who walks away alive.
Re: (Score:2)
But they DID hurry and figure out how to distribute them. Was't that big a chore, uptake was easy.
I suppose you've made an argument for a gun locker in every local police station, and lists of volunteers who take the weekend course every year. Or just for your National Guard, well-run militias. Ukraine (and everybody else) just don't have your National Guard thing.
Or even all those squat stone armories that are in city centres across North America. Put in after the workers rebellion of 1877, to
A loss, but not for the Ukrainian effort (Score:2)
From what I can see online. The plane was stationed in Antonov airport, which was taken by Russia early on but because there was no air superiority established Russia were unable to hold it and Ukraine forces took it back. Seems Ukraine decided the airstrip was more of a military liability than a military asset and destroyed it. The plane Itself was too big and too much of a target to actually be useful to ukraine. If the airspace gets clear again there will be plenty of cargo planes able to fly in relief t
Re:Regardless which side you prefer to win this wa (Score:5, Insightful)
this is a great loss.
The Antonov 225 was not just an asset to Russia, it was an asset to the world.
There was only one of its kind.
And how will Volodymyr Zelenskyy be able to carry his balls?
Re:Regardless which side you prefer to win this wa (Score:5, Informative)
He had a chance to leave Ukraine and join his money. Instead he stayed behind to defend his country.
Re:Regardless which side you prefer to win this wa (Score:5, Insightful)
I know nothing about his Belize holdings, or if that's just more fucking slanderous misinformation and character assassination, but even if it is true, that became entirely irrelevant the minute he decided to stay in the fucking capital and lead from the shit.
That's bravery and patriotism, pure and simple.
Re: (Score:2)
Given Russia is doing bombing runs (without announcement so its not like he knows to hide from the 9:15), the fact that he's willing to stay (even when the US offered to get him out and he could have left on his own accord) speaks volumes for his character. And keep in mind Russia's previous tactics
Re: (Score:2)
He had a chance to leave Ukraine and join his money. Instead he stayed behind to defend his country.
Well it's all fine to him to do that, he doesn't have to deal with bone spurs.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't get the bone spurs reference.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh yeah. I have "bone spurs" too, but like most people I call them "sesamoids."
Re: (Score:2)
Considering that the military would have checked, and signed off on them, I have never understood this attack on Trump. I attempted to join the military when I was younger, and was declined for my heart arrhythmia, does that make me some kind of coward? It is really no different, Trump had a condition, that his doctor identified and signed off on, and that the military doctor verified and signed off on, which prevented him from serving. It is a damn sight better than Clinton who went to Canada instead of
Re: (Score:2)
So, your claim is that the military just accepts the doctor's note and says "sorry, we can't draft you Donald"? No, they have their own doctors who verify the condition. It doesn't matter what the daughter of the doctor says after the fact, because the doctor's note isn't what gets you out of the draft, it is the actual condition, as verified by military doctors.
I looked it up, and apparently I was wrong about Clinton, but he deferred as well, so is that still any better? It is the exact same thing, but
Re: (Score:2)
It is interesting to watch Ukraine's ongoing war and the leader, in comparison to Afghnistan, where the troops basically surrendered pretty fast (except for those in Panjshir valley).
And Ukraine's leader is staying put publicly, compared to Afghnistan's leader who was out so fast that everyone was surprised.
Re: (Score:2)
The Antonov 225 was not just an asset to Ukraine
Fixed that for you, Antonov is an Ukrainian company.
Re: (Score:2)
The Antonov 225 was not just an asset to Russia
Wait, so you're condoning Russians stealing what legally belongs to Ukrainians?
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's just a machine, more can be built. (Score:2)
It's only a machine and while foamers may miss it (because it's BIG which excites the autspergic mind) it is of little functional value to the world and more importantly not going to fall into enemy hands.
If you need a machine, you build one or many. SpaceX launch vehicles being examples. The more old machines are destroyed the greater the pressure to build back better. The modern world is quite capable of making very large airlifters.
Re: (Score:2)
Likely, a modern aircraft would weigh less, and perform better, while carrying more cargo.
Heck, did they even have titanium in aircraft construction that long ago, let along carbon fiber and other composites. Imagine the aircraft we could build if we had need for something that could lift that much.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, three were built, but only one was left in a flying state. And it was well utilized - if you have heavy cargo you need airlifted from one place to another, the An-225 was what you called upon. It earned quite a steady income doing that.
Now the only heavy lift capability in the world is reserved for well, the military. The An-225 was the only way to get civilian heavy ca
Re: (Score:2)
Dreamlifter and Super Guppy are not heavy lift aircraft-- just oversized.
This will be a big challenge in the oil and gas industry, along with power generation.
Re: Regardless which side you prefer to win this (Score:3)
Russia has no rights to another country, no matter what it believes historically, if the people in the country vote for a government that government is legitimate.
The current democratic government is far from national socialist, no matter what anyone believes of its beginnings, all that matters is now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It does not matter whether Ukraine is in the NATO or not. Its security and independence is guaranteed by the 1994 accord in which the West persuaded Ukraine to give up its nuclear weapons in exchange for security guarantee. So already all Western nations are treaty bound to step and drive Russia off Ukraine.
No, that is simply false. The memorandum does not provide such an obligation. Furthermore the memorandum was signed by Belarus, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Russia, United States and United Kingdom. Are you really suggesting that other western nations are bound by a memorandum that they did not sign?
From Wikipedia:
The Budapest Memorandum was negotiated at political level, but it is not entirely clear whether the instrument is devoid entirely of legal provisions. It refers to assurances, but it does not impose a legal obligation of military assistance on its parties.[1][20] According to Stephen MacFarlane, a professor of international relations, "It gives signatories justification if they take action, but it does not force anyone to act in Ukraine."
Regardless of the details of the text... (Score:2)
The clear INTENT of the agreement, and obvious strong implication to the Ukrainians (strong enough to get them to surrender their nukes) , was that the territorial integrity of Ukraine would be protected by the west.
MORALLY, Bill Clinton and John Major should have to restore nuclear weapons to the people of Ukraine. Both men are out of power, of course, and their even dumber and wimpier successors feel no obligations whatsoever, and this illustrates the completely craptastic nature of such "international ag
Re: (Score:2)
Russia has no rights to another country, no matter what it believes historically, if the people in the country vote for a government that government is legitimate.
Is that an absolute, I wonder? If, say, Idaho voted to secede, you'd be on board with that?
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing is an absolute, but you're not providing as much of a clever gotcha as you think you are. If Buggles McGee decides that he wants to be a sovereign citizen, dig a moat around his house and declare himself the Prince of McGeetopia, that's not legitimate. If the people of Idaho want to vote for a government, then that government is legitimate. They can vote for their Governor and whoever they want for their state legislature, etc. However, since they're not a sovereign nation they can't vote to secede
Re: Regardless which side you prefer to win this (Score:2)
Very important analysis. But "Idaho" secession is even harder if you consider the economic problems. Kind of like Brexit. Somehow Idaho has to take on it share of the national debt and give up all national subsidies. Of course they also stop paying taxes, but many/most secession-minded states get more from the federal government than they pay in taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
Right, and because they can see that Idaho will become an impoverished, probably war-torn (even without having to fight the US federal government) region, a big part of the population are going to say no to that. It's not one of those issues where some are opposed and some are in favor, but it's not really a big deal which way the vote goes. Like say voting on whether to put a new face on a unit of currency. It's a major question of national identity. So the people against it are going to be extremely, vehe
Re: (Score:2)
That is comparing apples to oranges. This is more like if the United States as a whole disbanded and the individual states all became independent nations, and then Texas decided to invade Louisiana thirty years later (having previously annexed Oklahoma, and installed a puppet government in New Mexico, etc.)
Historically, Ukraine predates Russia in any case. Kyiv was a major metropolis well before Moscow was even founded.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Historically, the people of the City of Rome have a right to most of Western Europe and North Africa, but I don't see any tanks and missiles rolling in from that direction.
As far as Britain is concerned, Queen Boudicca should have beat the bloody Romans. And we could have done it, if we had enough schoolteachers making Molotov cocktails.
Re: (Score:2)
He'll be "removed" and laugh all the way to the bank with the tens of billions he's skimmed off the top.
The innocent people just minding their own business who are killed are casualties of his ego.
Re: (Score:2)
You're a moron if you think there are Nazis in Ukraine. The Hitler wannabe is sitting in Moscow.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Regardless which side you prefer to win this (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure there are some nazis and other far right groups, just like there are in any other country.
However they are a tiny minority, they received a negligible share of the vote during the last election and do not have any influence over the government. The current president of Ukraine is jewish, so it's very unlikely that he would support nazis in his country.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Regardless which side you prefer to win this (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Putin, is that YOU? (Score:2)
Putin recently ranted that Ukraine was run by drug dealers and NAZIs... something that must have come as quite a surprise to the president of Ukraine who is apparently Jewish. Just what an Earth has Ukraine or the Ukrainian people done to YOU, or to anybody else for that matter?
Putin is a scumbag, who had absolutely no casus belli, and all his troops who are "just following orders" need to go on trial for war crimes. Now the guy is making noises about his nuclear arsenal. The Russian people better reign thi
Re: (Score:2)
In that part of the world it could be the Roma that certain people want to kill. The Nazi's killed perhaps a couple of million of them and its not like they're welcomed by the Israelis.
Looking, it's hard to find anything too recent, there's https://www.refworld.org/docid... [refworld.org] which is about 10 years old and being Roma in Ukraine doesn't sound like fun but nothing like some of their neighbours have and do prosecute them.
Anyways, it doesn't have to be Jews that the far right attacks to be considered Nazi's, jus
Re: Make up your mind, /. (Score:2)
Re: Make up your mind, /. (Score:2)