War in Ukraine

[MG1968]

They're not the global bank and they most likely don't want you at scale. People are simply trying to get into the bank at this point. Duh, they don't have to work. Printing money has its advantages and has some limitations i.e. it doesn't go on forever.

People risk death going to Chicago though. New Orleans forget about it, its like Afghanistan or worse.

The Ukrainians have to build a wall. The United States allows the invaders in. Of course, if all you guys are right.... Russia should lose fairly quickly at this point, no?
This is basically washing machine and shovel talk again, and how the 86th round of sanctions are going to be the nail in the coffin. That doesn't get tiring?


https://www.reuters.com/world/europ...new-years-eve-festivities-reports-2024-01-01/

lol. You have a knack for arguing against points that weren’t made. It’s almost as if you’re @luthervol trolling as @Rasputin_Vol.

It’s quite impressive, actually.

 

[LSU-SIU]

lol. You have a knack for arguing against points that weren’t made. It’s almost as if you’re @luthervol trolling as @Rasputin_Vol.

It’s quite impressive, actually.

Well, when people drive by troll it can have that impact, I can't deny that. Its like you have no purpose here, quite impressive, actually.

I got to go ladies, you can talk amongst yourself as to how great you're doing. I hope your liquidations go well overnight.

 

[volbound1700]

Its not a hard question, what is the population they should have?

Just because technically you can cram additional virus cells into the dish doesn't mean humans have a better quality of life. You are missing the point as to the virus i.e. overpopulation. There is no new host, this planet is what you have. Throwing out how big they are doesn't mean anything, what should their population be? They seem to be doing just fine over there.



The system is going to collapse than you have the 60% reduction. Right now a vast majority of the population is either non-productive or worse a drag on everyone's life. The collapse is going to happen regardless of your population. What you are describing is exactly that, a percentage of humans that come from certain parts of the world overpopulate like a virus. Eventually, the collapse causes a huge collapse or liquidation of the viruses in the petri dish.

Once you remove the United States dollar as the reserve currency, what are the chances a vast majority of the United States becomes Mad Max? You live on a finite planet, population growth will at some point plummet down globally.

Russia seems to be doing fine, which is the problem, right? I don't think importing third world trash really helps, but you do you. Humans don't have the ability to grow exponentially long term, a 100 years or so. Once the system collapses, those places are not the places one is going to want to be, imo. There is no way Asia can support 4-5 billion without a functioning credit system, but that is a whole other discussion.

All this immigration and war is desperation on something that has basically run its course. We live on a finite planet.

Tell this to China, India, and most of Africa. They just keep having babies, even if they can't afford it.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Tell this to China, India, and most of Africa. They just keep having babies, even if they can't afford it.

Oh, you're preaching to the choir on this one.

Somehow someone thinks this is all good. My guess is anyone that says overpopulation or increasing populations are just good by nature... have no idea what they are talking about. Its not limited to those countries, heck we can say that about urban areas here.

All it really says is they get enough food and water to be able to use their cock. He used terms like "success", but unless one really defines what that means than it becomes a moot point.

The real point has nothing to do with Russia's population though... he really isn't concerned about Russia. Actually, quite the opposite, imo.

 

[volbound1700]

Oh, you're preaching to the choir on this one.

Somehow someone thinks this is all good. My guess is anyone that says overpopulation or increasing populations are just good by nature... have no idea what they are talking about. Its not limited to those countries, heck we can say that about urban areas here.

All it really says is they get enough food and water to be able to use their cock. He used terms like "success", but unless one really defines what that means than it becomes a moot point.

I agree in general points with you but in the case of Russia, their population level is falling even below 1930s levels. I. Reality, they still haven't recovered, demographically, from the loss of over 20 Million people in WW2

 

[MontyPython]

Tell this to China, India, and most of Africa. They just keep having babies, even if they can't afford it.

Actually China's population is predicted to fall by around 50% over the next 25 years IIRC.

 

[508mikey]

Nope.

 

[LouderVol]

No it doesn't. Which is why Africa continues to produce human viruses at a great rate and its basically something out of the Stone Age. Chicago isn't any different. All it means is they have a working cock, and really can't think beyond that - generally speaking i.e. virus.

As I said, what does the population of Russia have to be or is right?

What is going on is, the underpopulated Russia with no manufacturing and zero ability to think can easily out produce the West. They seem to be doing pretty well, just an observation. Its amazing what Russia does with washing machines.

so is your contention here that Russian doesn't work? In your world if Russia is doing so great why have they been in a population decline? They are too busy making things to figure out how their junk works? Are they awkward nerds who can't land some tail? Have they fallen down the deviant paths of the west and gotten away from the strong central family structure and stopped having kids? women too ugly to bang? Men too ugly to bang? Putin banging all the women so there is none left for the average Russian? Why is their pop declining?

i would say Africa is generally better off than they were 50 years ago, 100 years ago, so on and so forth. so I don't see why that population growth would be a bad thing.

And when you say out produce the west you mean: certain military products, with the help of China, Iran, and North Korea, Russia can outproduce what the west gives to Ukraine, I agree. but the west isn't in a war time economy, and hasn't been working up to this point for a decade plus. you are comparing apples and hand grenades.

 

[LouderVol]

It is part of the reason why the southern border has been left open by both parties.



If their was a country that could weather demographic collapse via robots/AI, it's the Japanese. Time will tell.

The real interesting thought experiment is about the inflection point of demographics. At some point in the future via AI/robots/computing power, having a large population will be disadvantageous. It will be interesting to (most likely to future generations) when/what that inflection point is and what the ideal population is afterwards.

skynet won't need terminators. They just need to keep humans from banging other humans. plenty of ways to bring that about.

and agreed on the border, it should be "unlocked" but not completely "open" as it is.

*actually the Summer Glau version of terminator would be a very effective double duty terminator for this situation.

 

[McDad]

Actually China's population is predicted to fall by around 50% over the next 25 years IIRC.

A lot of tripping hazards over there?

 

[LouderVol]

A lot of tripping hazards over there?

25 years is a long time. probably just law of averages based on ordinary tripping hazards.

 

[LSU-SIU]

so is your contention here that Russian doesn't work? In your world if Russia is doing so great why have they been in a population decline? They are too busy making things to figure out how their junk works? Are they awkward nerds who can't land some tail? Have they fallen down the deviant paths of the west and gotten away from the strong central family structure and stopped having kids? women too ugly to bang? Men too ugly to bang? Putin banging all the women so there is none left for the average Russian? Why is their pop declining?

i would say Africa is generally better off than they were 50 years ago, 100 years ago, so on and so forth. so I don't see why that population growth would be a bad thing.

And when you say out produce the west you mean: certain military products, with the help of China, Iran, and North Korea, Russia can outproduce what the west gives to Ukraine, I agree. but the west isn't in a war time economy, and hasn't been working up to this point for a decade plus. you are comparing apples and hand grenades.

I would say there must be a God because somehow they're still there even without the ability to manufacturer, design or implement advance equipment. And no real population growth. It must be a miracle.

i would say Africa is generally better off than they were 50 years ago, 100 years ago, so on and so forth. so I don't see why that population growth would be a bad thing.

Yeah. Huge amounts of people starving to death over that time frame because they can't feed themselves is better off.... not just as a one off but a continuous basis i.e. success in your book They're not better off, its just more people that die under miserable conditions because they don't believe in birth control. Under your strange theory, that should be going on in Russia.... over the last 40-50 years. Who knew India, China and Africa were the places to live. I tell you what, send me a post card from Africa or India, **** I've been to Indonesia... if that is success well I guess I would rather fail. Heck, this place isn't better than when I was born, its worse let alone places that are basically human toilets.

You also somehow now equate that if you observe something that its because its the cause you point out, this is where you need evidence.

X is better off because Donald Trump was born, so it must be because Donald Trump was born. You are making up some crazy ****, and if I were to pick a place to go out of India, Africa, China and Russia..... it probably isn't going to be 3 of those. You do you though.

Tell you what... let's come back in a few years to watch the collapse of Russia, I mean under your strange theory.... its already going on. LoL

Now, for a simple question.... when is it that all these more advance countries, with huge populations and increasing populations are going to produce more artillery shells combined than their adversary?

Really what he wanted to say is its one big toilet i.e. success.

 

[LSU-SIU]

I agree in general points with you but in the case of Russia, their population level is falling even below 1930s levels. I. Reality, they still haven't recovered, demographically, from the loss of over 20 Million people in WW2

So. What is the correct population? The population has been in this range for 40-50 years. So.

There are parts of the world that function just fine with no or virtually no people. They seem to be doing fine there, which is what the problem really is.

Everyone is so concerned about Russia's demographics. If you were really concerned, it would be those FABs that keep coming down on your supposed "friends" head.


If I were to pick a place to live before it was always Norway (I have friends and family connections here and there) until the last few years, they got into the whole immigration nonsense. Heck, their population is roughly half what Russia is per km2. Really was a good place, I would probably scratch that one off the list pretty soon.

People are just trying to make them feel better, probably because of reality of the rest of the thread. (only so many shovel jokes before we have to invent additional things that make little sense)

Next up, Russia beaches suck.

 

[Rocky_Top_Vol13]

 

[LouderVol]

I would say there must be a God because somehow they're still there even without the ability to manufacturer, design or implement advance equipment. And no real population growth. It must be a miracle.



Yeah. Huge amounts of people starving to death over that time frame because they can't feed themselves is better off.... not just as a one off but a continuous basis i.e. success in your book They're not better off, its just more people that die under miserable conditions because they don't believe in birth control. Under your strange theory, that should be going on in Russia.... over the last 40-50 years. Who knew India, China and Africa were the places to live. I tell you what, send me a post card from Africa or India, **** I've been to Indonesia... if that is success well I guess I would rather fail. Heck, this place isn't better than when I was born, its worse let alone places that are basically human toilets.

You also somehow now equate that if you observe something that its because its the cause you point out, this is where you need evidence.

X is better off because Donald Trump was born, so it must be because Donald Trump was born. You are making up some crazy ****, and if I were to pick a place to go out of India, Africa, China and Russia..... it probably isn't going to be 3 of those. You do you though.

Tell you what... let's come back in a few years to watch the collapse of Russia, I mean under your strange theory.... its already going on. LoL

Now, for a simple question.... when is it that all these more advance countries, with huge populations and increasing populations are going to produce more artillery shells combined than their adversary?

Really what he wanted to say is its one big toilet i.e. success.

so you are going back to the default of just ignoring the whole other half of the argument, and are just fixated on one part of the equation and pretending like that is all there is?

I have said multiple times its about population growth and population management. success as a country is far easier on the population management side IF you have a growing population. neither alone is enough to be successful, but you just ignore the things you can't argue.

common sense alone should be enough to tell you that having a pre-war declining population, and then going on the attack to fight a war where your population will decline even more, is counter productive. burning the candle at both ends. I guess in your mind as long as Putin is around Russia is a success even if he is the last man standing. no need for a population at all, right?

the west will outproduce Russia whenever they take them seriously. you and ras have been right that for the west its all politics now, its not a serious matter for any of them. so there is zero emphasis to get on the same footing as Russia. and I would argue there is no need to go to a war footing either. its just harmful to us.

 

[NorthDallas40]

common sense alone should be enough to tell you..:

Probably should set the bar a tad lower when dealing with that one.

 

[PEPPERJAX]

Probably should set the bar a tad lower when dealing with that one.

What did you all do with Donjo?

 

[LSU-SIU]

so you are going back to the default of just ignoring the whole other half of the argument, and are just fixated on one part of the equation and pretending like that is all there is?

I have said multiple times its about population growth and population management. success as a country is far easier on the population management side IF you have a growing population. neither alone is enough to be successful, but you just ignore the things you can't argue.

common sense alone should be enough to tell you that having a pre-war declining population, and then going on the attack to fight a war where your population will decline even more, is counter productive. burning the candle at both ends. I guess in your mind as long as Putin is around Russia is a success even if he is the last man standing. no need for a population at all, right?

the west will outproduce Russia whenever they take them seriously. you and ras have been right that for the west its all politics now, its not a serious matter for any of them. so there is zero emphasis to get on the same footing as Russia. and I would argue there is no need to go to a war footing either. its just harmful to us.

You're not defining anything until I bring it up. You have no idea what you are talking about. You went from in the existence of human history there is no success without population increase. You don't define what success is. Than you went on another strange thing saying they are not self-sustaining when in actuality they appear to be that.... which is part of your problem. They're winning.

Now you add all this management stuff to it, like humans are cattle. The last person on this Earth to be talking about population and how to manage is you.... you're just a virus producer. Any idiot can stick their dick into something.

the west will outproduce Russia whenever they take them seriously. you and ras have been right that for the west its all politics now, its not a serious matter for any of them. so there is zero emphasis to get on the same footing as Russia. and I would argue there is no need to go to a war footing either. its just harmful to us.

So, back to more nonsense. When they want to take them seriously. Oh so getting their "friends" blown up isn't serious? Exactly why are they sending all these weapons there if it isn't serious? Yeah, its not they couldn't beat the goat herders, they just didn't take them serious.

You're not making any sense and the reason you're not making sense is they're winning and you don't like it. Literally, they look like they are doing better there than here.... this place has become a mess over the last 40 years.

The reality of the situation is they are doing pretty well, that's reality.... the are also doing pretty well as they are probably one of the most self-sustaining countries in the world.

You are not concerned about them, you are upset they are winning. Why is this such a serious concern of yours?


Their population has been in a range since you have been alive yet.... somehow they had toilet paper and we didn't.



Its not that the U.S. couldn't beat the goat herders, they just didn't want to beat them.
Its not that the U.S. can't outproduce Russia with ammo and weapons, they just don't want to.
Its not that much of the U.S. has turned to **** over the last 40-50 years, its just the U.S. doesn't want to do anything about it.

That's the bet.

 

[NorthDallas40]

What did you all do with Donjo?

Nothing I’m aware of. I’d just guess snowflake couldn’t handle the thunderdome

 

[LouderVol]

You're not defining anything until I bring it up. You have no idea what you are talking about. You went from in the existence of human history there is no success without population increase. You don't define what success is. Than you went on another strange thing saying they are not self-sustaining when in actuality they appear to be that.... which is part of your problem. They're winning.

Now you add all this management stuff to it, like humans are cattle. The last person on this Earth to be talking about population and how to manage is you.... you're just a virus producer. Any idiot can stick their dick into something.



So, back to more nonsense. When they want to take them seriously. Oh so getting their "friends" blown up isn't serious? Exactly why are they sending all these weapons there if it isn't serious? Yeah, its not they couldn't beat the goat herders, they just didn't take them serious.

You're not making any sense and the reason you're not making sense is they're winning and you don't like it. Literally, they look like they are doing better there than here.... this place has become a mess over the last 40 years.

The reality of the situation is they are doing pretty well, that's reality.... the are also doing pretty well as they are probably one of the most self-sustaining countries in the world.

You are not concerned about them, you are upset they are winning. Why is this such a serious concern of yours?


Their population has been in a range since you have been alive yet.... somehow they had toilet paper and we didn't.



Its not that the U.S. couldn't beat the goat herders, they just didn't want to beat them.
Its not that the U.S. can't outproduce Russia with ammo and weapons, they just don't want to.
Its not that much of the U.S. has turned to **** over the last 40-50 years, its just the U.S. doesn't want to do anything about it.

That's the bet.

what did I define?

you were the one who said success was having what you needed, some of what you wanted and something else. I pointed out that you couldn't assume they had everything they needed because their population was in decline without any real reason, Covid and outside war, some other act of God type thing. a declining population is a sign of problems. always has been, you don't get to ignore it because you can't argue it. or at the very least you need to offer an actual argument.

at best you have asked questions that wouldn't further the debate in efforts to deflect from the holes in your arguments.

a declining population, a war where people are dying, and imports from China, Iran, and North Korea, is pretty clearly NOT self sustaining. just because they aren't going to collapse tomorrow doesn't mean they aren't going to collapse or face major changes in the future. its the geopolitical version of the war in Ukraine. Attrition, Ukraine probably won't fall today, tomorrow, or the next day; but at some point they probably will, or come to unfavorable terms. Russia is in the same boat, just in their case their attrition is all internally sourced, and you think its a source of winning without offering any reasoning. you just deflect, ignore half of what I say, and invent strange hyperboles.

 

[MontyPython]

A List Of All The Countries In Favour of Ukraine Using Weapons To Strike Targets Inside Russia​

May 29, 2024

France​

On May 28 at a joint press conference with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz during his visit to Germany, Macron stated: “We think that we should allow them to neutralize military sites where missiles are fired, from where… Ukraine is attacked,”
In this context, Jean-Louis Bourlanges, President of the National Assembly’s Foreign Affairs Committee and Modem deputy, issued a press release pressing France to “come out of its reserve and make a decision comparable to that of the British and Americans,” according to the international affairs specialist. “The right to self-defense excludes the right to protect the territory of the aggressor.”

Lithuania​

Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis believes that Ukrainians should be able to use the equipment provided to them to achieve their strategic goals.
“They should be able to strike Russian territory, supply lines and troops preparing to attack Ukraine,” he said in an interview with the French television channel LCI.
“Only one side obeys the rules. We must abandon these rules that we ourselves have created,” according to Lithuanian Landsbergis.

Latvia​

Latvian President Edgars Rinkevics has urged Western partners to lift restrictions on Ukraine’s use of supplied weapons, noting that Russia’s current offensive attempts are also a result of Western delays and indecision.
“What we see is the consequence of our inability to provide Ukraine with weapons and also putting restrictions [on using] those weapons to strike military targets inside Russia.”

Sweden​

The Minister of Defense of Sweden Pal Jonson stated, in a commentary to Hallandsposten newspaper, that Ukraine can use Swedish weapons to strike targets on Russian territory.
“Ukraine is exposed to an unprovoked and illegal war of aggression by Russia.”
“According to international law, Ukraine has the right to defend itself through military actions aimed at the enemy’s territory as long as the military actions comply with the laws of war. Sweden stands behind international law and Ukraine’s right to defend itself,” Jonson added.

Estonia​

According to Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur, Ukraine should be permitted to target positions within the territory of Russia, using weaponry supplied by Western allies.
“Ukraine has its own drones that hit targets behind the front line in the very deep rear of the enemy, at a distance of more than 1,000 kilometers, so, of course, I sincerely hope that all countries that have long-range means will give permission to Ukraine as well, because this is not normal, that Russia is attacking from the depths of its territory, and the Ukrainians are fighting with one hand behind their back,” Pevkur stated.

Poland​

The Deputy Defense Minister of Poland Cezary Tomczyk stated that Poland does not limit Ukraine from hitting targets on the territory of Russia.
“Polish weapons, which we transfer to Ukraine, have no restrictions on hitting enemy territory,” Tomczyk emphasized.
“Ukrainians can fight as they want and I believe that this is a very important aspect of this donation.”

Finland​

In Februaury 2024, Finland joined Ukraine in urging Germany to “seriously consider” sending Taurus missiles to Ukraine.
“If necessary, Ukraine should also strike military targets on the Russian side. It is a completely legitimate defensive battle that Ukraine is waging. The U.N. Charter allows military targets to be attacked across land borders,” according to Jukka Kopra, chair of the Finnish Parliamentary Defense Committee.

Czech Republic​

The Czech government has responded positively to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg’s proposal for Ukraine to utilize Western weaponry to conduct strikes within Russian territory.
“As a country under attack, Ukraine certainly has every right to use all means of defense,” Prime Minister Petr Fiala said in Prague on May 28.

Great Britain​

British Foreign Secretary David Cameron visited Kyiv on May 2 and affirmed Ukraine’s right to use the weaponry provided by the UK for strikes within Russia. “Ukraine has that right. Just as Russia is striking inside Ukraine, you can quite understand why Ukraine feels the need to make sure it’s defending itself.”

Netherlands​

On May 23, Dutch Foreign Affairs Minister Hanke Bruins Slot expressed her support, allowing Ukraine to use weapons on Russian territory, and promised that the Netherlands would state its position in communications with the European Union and NATO members.
Several EU countries and the US have held back from authorizing the use of the weaponry they supplied to directly target Russia, citing concerns about the potential escalation of the conflict. However, as pressure mounts on the Ukrainian frontlines and territory is being lost, there is an increasing discourse on reassessing this stance.

Canada​

On May 29, at a press conference in Ottawa, Canadian Foreign Minister Melanie Joly stated that Canada did not set any conditions for Ukraine regarding the use of the transferred weapons. Joly stressed that Canada's commitment to Ukraine's defense is resolute.
“Because Russia does not have any "red lines", and therefore we must be sure that when it comes to the defense of Ukraine, we are ready to help them and show that, despite what is happening, we are on their side. And in Canada, there are no conditions for the supply of weapons to Ukraine, and therefore we will continue to work with the Ukrainian armed forces," Joly emphasized.


EDIT: Add Germany to this list as of today (5/29).

 

[MontyPython]

Life in Russian Donetsk ain't so easy these days since ATACMS.

Note the bumper that randomly falls out of the sky as the filming car hauls ass away.

Priceless.

Better quality, longer video of explosion in occupied Donetsk today
byu/killakh0le inUkraineWarVideoReport

 

[Redleg68]

A List Of All The Countries In Favour of Ukraine Using Weapons To Strike Targets Inside Russia​

May 29, 2024

France​

On May 28 at a joint press conference with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz during his visit to Germany, Macron stated: “We think that we should allow them to neutralize military sites where missiles are fired, from where… Ukraine is attacked,”
In this context, Jean-Louis Bourlanges, President of the National Assembly’s Foreign Affairs Committee and Modem deputy, issued a press release pressing France to “come out of its reserve and make a decision comparable to that of the British and Americans,” according to the international affairs specialist. “The right to self-defense excludes the right to protect the territory of the aggressor.”

Lithuania​

Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis believes that Ukrainians should be able to use the equipment provided to them to achieve their strategic goals.
“They should be able to strike Russian territory, supply lines and troops preparing to attack Ukraine,” he said in an interview with the French television channel LCI.
“Only one side obeys the rules. We must abandon these rules that we ourselves have created,” according to Lithuanian Landsbergis.

Latvia​

Latvian President Edgars Rinkevics has urged Western partners to lift restrictions on Ukraine’s use of supplied weapons, noting that Russia’s current offensive attempts are also a result of Western delays and indecision.
“What we see is the consequence of our inability to provide Ukraine with weapons and also putting restrictions [on using] those weapons to strike military targets inside Russia.”

Sweden​

The Minister of Defense of Sweden Pal Jonson stated, in a commentary to Hallandsposten newspaper, that Ukraine can use Swedish weapons to strike targets on Russian territory.
“Ukraine is exposed to an unprovoked and illegal war of aggression by Russia.”
“According to international law, Ukraine has the right to defend itself through military actions aimed at the enemy’s territory as long as the military actions comply with the laws of war. Sweden stands behind international law and Ukraine’s right to defend itself,” Jonson added.

Estonia​

According to Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur, Ukraine should be permitted to target positions within the territory of Russia, using weaponry supplied by Western allies.
“Ukraine has its own drones that hit targets behind the front line in the very deep rear of the enemy, at a distance of more than 1,000 kilometers, so, of course, I sincerely hope that all countries that have long-range means will give permission to Ukraine as well, because this is not normal, that Russia is attacking from the depths of its territory, and the Ukrainians are fighting with one hand behind their back,” Pevkur stated.

Poland​

The Deputy Defense Minister of Poland Cezary Tomczyk stated that Poland does not limit Ukraine from hitting targets on the territory of Russia.
“Polish weapons, which we transfer to Ukraine, have no restrictions on hitting enemy territory,” Tomczyk emphasized.
“Ukrainians can fight as they want and I believe that this is a very important aspect of this donation.”

Finland​

In Februaury 2024, Finland joined Ukraine in urging Germany to “seriously consider” sending Taurus missiles to Ukraine.
“If necessary, Ukraine should also strike military targets on the Russian side. It is a completely legitimate defensive battle that Ukraine is waging. The U.N. Charter allows military targets to be attacked across land borders,” according to Jukka Kopra, chair of the Finnish Parliamentary Defense Committee.

Czech Republic​

The Czech government has responded positively to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg’s proposal for Ukraine to utilize Western weaponry to conduct strikes within Russian territory.
“As a country under attack, Ukraine certainly has every right to use all means of defense,” Prime Minister Petr Fiala said in Prague on May 28.

Great Britain​

British Foreign Secretary David Cameron visited Kyiv on May 2 and affirmed Ukraine’s right to use the weaponry provided by the UK for strikes within Russia. “Ukraine has that right. Just as Russia is striking inside Ukraine, you can quite understand why Ukraine feels the need to make sure it’s defending itself.”

Netherlands​

On May 23, Dutch Foreign Affairs Minister Hanke Bruins Slot expressed her support, allowing Ukraine to use weapons on Russian territory, and promised that the Netherlands would state its position in communications with the European Union and NATO members.
Several EU countries and the US have held back from authorizing the use of the weaponry they supplied to directly target Russia, citing concerns about the potential escalation of the conflict. However, as pressure mounts on the Ukrainian frontlines and territory is being lost, there is an increasing discourse on reassessing this stance.

Canada​

On May 29, at a press conference in Ottawa, Canadian Foreign Minister Melanie Joly stated that Canada did not set any conditions for Ukraine regarding the use of the transferred weapons. Joly stressed that Canada's commitment to Ukraine's defense is resolute.
“Because Russia does not have any "red lines", and therefore we must be sure that when it comes to the defense of Ukraine, we are ready to help them and show that, despite what is happening, we are on their side. And in Canada, there are no conditions for the supply of weapons to Ukraine, and therefore we will continue to work with the Ukrainian armed forces," Joly emphasized.


EDIT: Add Germany to this list as of today (5/29).

Time for the U.S. to get off their butt and say have at it. The Russians started this crap, why should they get a pass on their staging grounds. I have seen this crap play out before.

 

[volbound1700]

Time for the U.S. to get off their butt and say have at it. The Russians started this crap, why should they get a pass on their staging grounds. I have seen this crap play out before.

Meh, I am glad we haven't commented on it.

 

[norrislakevol]

Actually China's population is predicted to fall by around 50% over the next 25 years IIRC.

Yes. Their one child policy is coming back to bite them bigly.