The death toll in the shelling of the centre of Donetsk increased to four
Defence headquarters: the death toll in the shelling of the centre of Donetsk has reached four, three were injured

DONETSK, December 5 - RIA Novosti. The number of those killed in the shelling of Donetsk by the Armed Forces of Ukraine has increased to four, the headquarters of the territorial defence of the DPR reported in Telegram.
"As a result of the shelling of the VFU (the armed formations of Ukraine - Ed.) in the centre of Donetsk, the death toll increased to four people, three more civilians were injured," the publication says.
Earlier on Monday, the agency reported the death of one civilian and the injury of two people as a result of a Ukrainian attack on the capital of the Donetsk People's Republic.
On December 5, the DPR representative office in the JCCC recorded two shelling of the Voroshilovsky district of Donetsk by the Armed Forces of Ukraine, in total, 14 rockets were fired from the Grad MLRS into the city centre.

As the mayor of the capital of the DPR Alexei Kulemzin noted, the buildings of a secondary school and two kindergartens were damaged.
#TransFormatorBuzzes : 💤
Now, at least, they do not claim, that "they are shooting themselves". They simply kill civilians, as a routine. Every day. Day after day. There is a big difference between what Russian Air Force and the Ukrainian army are doing. Russian forces are hitting military targets, or targets that are crucial to the Ukrainian defence. There may be some civilian casualties accidentally. Mostly because of the Ukrainian AA defences are placed in populated areas, using civilians as a shield. Ukrainians are methodically killing civilians (which they just recently considered their compatriots), in the locations, where there is no military targets... Just because they can. Just to scare people into submission. Yes, they still can, not for long, though. Russians are good learners, they learn in a hard way, but remember lessons forever.
Follow 👉@TrFormer 💤
Footage and photos below ⬇️⬇️⬇️

Donetsk is the most democratic city in Russia: everyone is equal and there is absolute freedom here
05.12.2022 - 05:30

Andrey Mikheev, a Russian journalist and editor who was once editor-in-chief of the Lifenews TV channel, shared his impressions of Donetsk.

“Donetsk is the third city in my life, because I was born and raised in Tula, and then spent more than half of my life in Moscow.

And to be completely honest, Donetsk is still losing in terms of the number of days I spent here, not only to Izhevsk, St. Petersburg and Vladimir, but also, for example, to Milan.

I came here for the first time only this autumn. That is, I was neither in "Ukrainian", nor even in "independent" Donetsk. And, of course, I have not yet had time to really see all the sights, or thoughtfully walk through all the parks, or choose my favourite bar.

And yet it's almost love at first sight.

Of course, this city, to put it mildly, is somewhat different from all the others where I once lived.

➖There is martial law and a curfew.
➖There are too many closed establishments here, and those that are open are open until 22.
➖There are a lot of armed people on the streets here, and body armor is not such an out of place part of the wardrobe.
➖There is almost never water here and it is a constant problem to wash.
➖There is a permanent artillery soundtrack and regular “arrivals”.

From here, many have left, and by all logic, the city should look more or less dead. The paradox is that, on the contrary, it feels as alive as possible (of course, first of all, because of the people. But so far I don’t have enough words to tell about the locals in such a way that it would be clear to everyone who has not been here).

And in general, the main thing in Donetsk, of course, is the atmosphere.

You will laugh, but this is probably the most democratic city in Russia. Here everyone is absolutely equal.

You know, I spent one night on the fifth floor of the Donbass Palace, in a suite (there were no other rooms), next to it were the diplomatic apartments, the presidential suite, etc.

So, there was no water there either. I mean, everyone is equal here. For example, in front of "Haymars" and other NATO missiles.

P.S. I have always put freedom at the top of my list of priorities. Above happiness.

Here freedom is felt like nowhere else in the world. Because it is absolute freedom.

Let it be the freedom to die."
Follow 👉@TrFormer 💤

Good bombs, bad bombs and democratic bombs...
Follow 👉@TrFormer 💤

U.S. Altered Himars Rocket Launchers to Keep Ukraine From Firing Missiles Into Russia
Experts debate whether long-range missiles for Ukraine would deter Putin or widen war
The Wall Street Journal
WASHINGTON—The U.S. secretly modified the advanced Himars rocket launchers it gave Ukraine so they can’t be used to fire long-range missiles into Russia, U.S. officials said, a precaution the Biden administration says is necessary to reduce the risk of a wider war with Moscow.

The U.S. since June has supplied Ukrainian forces with 20 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System launchers, or Himars, and a large inventory of satellite-guided rockets with a range of almost 50 miles. Those rockets, known as the Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System, or GMLRS, have been used to strike Russian ammunition depots, logistics supplies and command centers on Ukrainian territory.

Follow 👉@TrFormer 💤
Read the full version here ⬇️⬇️⬇️

Putin and Zelensky finally agree. Here’s why that’s a bad thing.
In recent weeks, leaders in both Kyiv and Moscow have argued that the Minsk agreements are no longer worth the paper they’re printed on.

Ted Snider for Responsible Statecraft

The animosity between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been bitter. Agreement on anything — which would be a starting point for talks — is elusive. For the first time in several months, however, the two leaders have agreed on something. Unfortunately it takes them even farther away from talks than they are today.

They both seem to believe that the Minsk II agreement, a 2015 deal that many believed would be a way forward to peace in the region, is dead.

At some point this horrifying war will end. And it will have to end with talks. Those talks will have to, at some point, settle the issue of the eastern lands caught in a decades-long tug of war. Zelensky has said that a precondition for talks is “restoration of [Ukraine’s] territorial integrity,” meaning the Donbas, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, and even Crimea. Russia has said that negotiations can only be held on the basis of existing geopolitical realities and maintains that any negotiated settlement must respect Russia’s annexation of these same regions. That is the principal roadblock to a settlement. A big one.

That roadblock has been solidified and reinforced, not dissipated or lessened, by a recent agreement in statements made by the two leaders.

On November 15, addressing the G20 summit in Bali by video link, Zelensky rejected any return to the Minsk agreement. “We will not allow Russia to wait, build up its forces, and then start a new series of terror and global destabilisation. There will be no Minsk 3, which Russia will violate immediately after the agreement,” he insisted.

The Minsk agreements of 2014 and 2015 provided the best diplomatic solution to the crisis. Brokered by France and Germany, agreed to by Ukraine and Russia, and accepted by the U.S. and UN, the agreement was meant to peacefully return the Donbas to Ukraine while granting it full autonomy. Minsk II promised autonomy to the Donbas within Ukraine. The prospect of neutrality and the issue of NATO membership were expected to come later.

Former US Ambassador to the Soviet Union Jack Matlock recently said that “The war might have been prevented – probably would have been prevented – if Ukraine had been willing to abide by the Minsk agreement, recognize the Donbas as an autonomous entity within Ukraine, avoid NATO military advisors, and pledge not to enter NATO.”

But Zelensky’s words in Bali, though diplomatically well chosen for his audience, did not accurately reflect history. It was not Russia who used the time provided by the agreement to build up its forces before violating the agreement. It was Ukraine.

In 2019, Zelensky was elected in large part because his platform of making peace with Russia and signing the Minsk II Agreement won him the Russian-speaking vote in the south and east. But to fulfill his promise, Zelensky had to have the support of the U.S. He didn’t get it. Abandoned and under pressure, Zelensky refused to implement the agreement. The U.S. then failed to pressure him back onto the road of diplomacy.

Follow 👉@TrFormer 💤
Read the full version here ⬇️⬇️⬇️