# Will Russia invade Ukraine again? (Yes, yes they did)



## DiezelMonster

The title says it all, there has been a build up of the Russian army on three sides of Ukraine, But will Putin invade before the winter Olympics? I doubt it, that would be a blow to his relationship with Beijing.

With the amount of anti tank weaponry and the 8500 US soldiers on their way, something is bound to happen.

The fact that the Russian, Chinese and Iranian navy is currently doing war games in the Mediterranean and the fact the US Air craft carrier fleets have been deployed there says a lot!

Are there any Russian or Ukrainian forumites that want to speak on any of this? 

At a time when we have a global pandemic going on and an already strained supply chain does this make any sense? Will the UN just let Putin take what he clearly wants?????


----------



## ArtDecade

US and allies will sanction Moscow. Russia will invade. More sanctions.

Otherwise, hot war. End of planet.


----------



## bostjan

DiezelMonster said:


> The title says it all, there has been a build up of the Russian army on three sides of Ukraine, But will Putin invade before the winter Olympics? I doubt it, that would be a blow to his relationship with Beijing.
> 
> With the amount of anti tank weaponry and the 8500 US soldiers on their way, something is bound to happen.
> 
> The fact that the Russian, Chinese and Iranian navy is currently doing war games in the Mediterranean and the fact the US Air craft carrier fleets have been deployed there says a lot!
> 
> Are there any Russian or Ukrainian forumites that want to speak on any of this?
> 
> At a time when we have a global pandemic going on and an already strained supply chain does this make any sense? Will the UN just let Putin take what he clearly wants?????


Like I said in the other thread, this is a continuation of the war that was going on before covid. Ukraine and Russia are at war, even though there is technically (I think) a cease fire at the moment.

The nordic countries all already formed a pact with the baltic states to keep Putin from invading there, anticipating Putin trying to make either the USSR 2.0 or Russian Empire 4.0 or whatever. If that is a deterrent, it might be worth noting that Ukraine and Georgia, I think, are the only two former SSR's outside of the Baltic states with an HDI worth Russia considering annexing. Even then, I'm not sure if Georgia's resources are worth that much to Putin.

But this invasion of Ukraine is 75% certain to happen at this point, by my estimations, but, then again, I had predicted Hilary Clinton was 90% certain to win the 2016 US presidential election, so what do I know?


----------



## Adieu

Could be a Putin negotiating tactic, could also be actually stupid enough to start this crap

At this point I'm genuinely shocked that nobody has assassinated the toxic little dwarf yet


----------



## Drew

Putin is aggressive, but not an idiot. I think whether or not he invades will be a direct product of whether or not he thinks he can get away with it with minimal costs, so I guess the best way to predict if Putin goes ahead and does it would be to have a sense of how committed he thinks Biden is to stop him, and how far he'll go. 

If he does, he thinks Biden is weak. Whether or not he's right will decide what happens next.


----------



## DiezelMonster

Drew said:


> Putin is aggressive, but not an idiot. I think whether or not he invades will be a direct product of whether or not he thinks he can get away with it with minimal costs, so I guess the best way to predict if Putin goes ahead and does it would be to have a sense of how committed he thinks Biden is to stop him, and how far he'll go.
> 
> If he does, he thinks Biden is weak. Whether or not he's right will decide what happens next.




From what I've read, Biden has no plan to Stop him, but as @ArtDecade said above there would clearly be more sanctions. 

There have already been plots uncovered by the British that there was a coup plotted to install a pro Putin puppet, that was found out and halted. I do understand that they are Still at war, since the start was in 2014 but I really think with all that has been going on Putin really will do something and it will be big. I do think he sees Biden as being weak.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

Never bet against a President whose poll numbers are in the dumps something silly will happen I am sure


----------



## Drew

DiezelMonster said:


> From what I've read, Biden has no plan to Stop him, but as @ArtDecade said above there would clearly be more sanctions.
> 
> There have already been plots uncovered by the British that there was a coup plotted to install a pro Putin puppet, that was found out and halted. I do understand that they are Still at war, since the start was in 2014 but I really think with all that has been going on Putin really will do something and it will be big. I do think he sees Biden as being weak.


I haven't been following this story super closely, plenty of other stuff to focus on in my corner of the news world, but, off the top of my head, 

1) Biden has been building international support for a broad round of sanctions if Putin does anything - the US, NATO, the rest of the EU, parts of the Asia Pacific - tightening the economic screws on Russia if they invade is absolutely part of his planned response, and if it comes to that, it will not be even close to a unilateral move on the US's part. 

2) Biden also began deploying troops to the border over the weekend. While this is clearly at least partly a deterrent and a show of force, it's awefully hard to picture Biden pulling them out if Putin invades - it's like parenting, you never make a threat you're not fully prepared to follow through on, or you risk appearing weak.Obama learned this the hard with in Syria, and Biden has been _very_ conscious about learning from the mistakes the Obama administration made. 

Again, I haven't been following this story super closely... but between Biden moving troops into position for a counterattack and not wanting to repeat Obama's mistakes in Syria with the "line in the sand" over chemical weapons, and between what Adieu is saying about tensions being at a fever pitch inside Russia and everyone freaking the fuck out, while this is more of an academic discussion in the US, makes me think Putin is probably going to blink, or at a minimum refrain from any _overt_ activities where he loses any pretext of plausible deniability.


----------



## sleewell

would probably be easier to just have one of their guys "win" the next election.


----------



## nikt

ArtDecade said:


> US and allies will sanction Moscow. Russia will invade. More sanctions.



Who do you consider to be these allies?

IMO Putin will wait till next winter and he's not going to invade whole Ukraine at the moment. He only need Dniepr as natural boarder and get Ukraine out of Black Sea. EU will do nothing as always.


----------



## ArtDecade

nikt said:


> Who do you consider to be these allies?



NATO. If they choose not to enforce sanctions against US wishes, that will mean they will have to pay more for their weapons, planes, subs, etc. Defense contracts speak louder than common sense.


----------



## Louis Cypher

Needs to be personal sanctions against Putin and his cronies on there wealth and assets, most of which are held in the west in particular London to our shame. Putin doesn't give a shit about the Russian people but he does care about his personal fortune he has stolen from them


----------



## nikt

ArtDecade said:


> NATO. If they choose not to enforce sanctions against US wishes, that will mean they will have to pay more for their weapons, planes, subs, etc. Defense contracts speak louder than common sense.



This scale have two side.
US without those contracts will have even worse crash in economy. I highly doubt that any of EU countries will put sanctions that will really impact Russia. It would backlash with extream prices of oil, gas, coal and other commodies. We would also pay more for transit from China.

I don't like where all this is going...


----------



## bostjan

I don't know why, but this picture is amusing to me:





I have no idea what the context is, but I can kinda guess. The woman's back says, roughly, "Go eat a dick, Putin."


----------



## Drew

nikt said:


> This scale have two side.
> US without those contracts will have even worse crash in economy. I highly doubt that any of EU countries will put sanctions that will really impact Russia. It would backlash with extream prices of oil, gas, coal and other commodies. We would also pay more for transit from China.
> 
> I don't like where all this is going...


the problem with this line of thought is the US recovery is currently leading the global recovery, and is being driven mostly by domestic demand. I know, I know, "military-industrial complex," but defense spending is not THAT big a portion of GDP. Q4 2021 GDP was reported this morning at just shy of $24 trillion dollars. The US defense budget for 2021 was about $700B. You could wipe that whole thing out, and we'd have a GDP contraction of about 3%. We could lose a couple hundred billion a year in defense contracts and STILL put up positive growth, I think.


----------



## Adieu

There's also a quite possible "intermediate" scenario: open annexation of the pro-Moscow separatist "Republics", without crossing into Kyiv-controlled territory.

The threat of a shooting war might be the bluff intended to make everyone go "meh, fine, nothing really changed" when (if) no one actually fires a shot, and the buildup might be intended to discourage Ukrainian military from trying to evict overtly or covertly Russian forces attempting to roll into the separatist areas unopposed.

...of course, this can go very wrong so, so many ways. Might even end up with separatist-vs.-Kremlin warfare.


----------



## StevenC

Drew said:


> the problem with this line of thought is the US recovery is currently leading the global recovery, and is being driven mostly by domestic demand. I know, I know, "military-industrial complex," but defense spending is not THAT big a portion of GDP. Q4 2021 GDP was reported this morning at just shy of $24 trillion dollars. The US defense budget for 2021 was about $700B. You could wipe that whole thing out, and we'd have a GDP contraction of about 3%. We could lose a couple hundred billion a year in defense contracts and STILL put up positive growth, I think.


It's a pandemic after all. Medical industrial complex > military industrial complex


----------



## Steo

Also tying in with this. There Russian navy is running a live-fire exercise 200km of southern coast of Ireland. We have no way of monitoring this, either by sea or air. It also happens to be the area where a lot of the undersea telecommunications cables from US to Europe pass.


----------



## Crungy

I know Ireland stated they were unwelcome there given what's going in the Ukraine but I take it that hasn't stopped Russia.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

Also China/Russia doing joint exercises in Mediterranean/Baltic


----------



## Adieu

Dineley said:


> Also China/Russia doing joint exercises in Mediterranean/Baltic



Kind of surprised China isn't tired of dealing with that obnoxious gnome yet


----------



## Steo

Crungy said:


> I know Ireland stated they were unwelcome there given what's going in the Ukraine but I take it that hasn't stopped Russia.


Literally nothing we can do, bar saying to the ambassador to pass word back, that the government is not happy. A group of fishermen were talking about bringing their trawlers to the area. That's the extent of out opposition. Any time Unauthorised air craft, fly in our airspace, we need the RAF to scramble & intercept. Really.


----------



## Adieu

Steo said:


> Literally nothing we can do, bar saying to the ambassador to pass word back, that the government is not happy. A group of fishermen were talking about bringing their trawlers to the area. That's the extent of out opposition. Any time Unauthorised air craft, fly in our airspace, we need the RAF to scramble & intercept. Really.



Maybe Putin's messing around will finally drive the EU towards military integration


----------



## AMOS

Adieu said:


> Could be a Putin negotiating tactic, could also be actually stupid enough to start this crap
> 
> At this point I'm genuinely shocked that nobody has assassinated the toxic little dwarf yet


I'm sure plenty want to but can't get close enough


----------



## Crungy

Interesting turn of events, not sure if that will keep them out long term. 

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/31/europe/ireland-fishermen-russia-navy-intl/index.html


----------



## nightflameauto

bostjan said:


> I don't know why, but this picture is amusing to me:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what the context is, but I can kinda guess. The woman's back says, roughly, "Go eat a dick, Putin."



Putinator's complete focus on her chest while looking like he can't decide if he likes it is the selling point of that picture.

This whole situation has the makings of a cartoon villian's plot blowing up in his face if he puts his foot in it. I mean, sure, we're teetering on the brink in a number of other ways, so why wouldn't one of the world's top level aggressive turds start waving his hands around and saying, "LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME!"

I got bad vibes from it, and my gut's telling me something fucky's gonna end up happening, but I don't have enough intimate knowledge of it myself to know what that's gonna be.


----------



## Demiurge

nightflameauto said:


> Putinator's complete focus on her chest while looking like he can't decide if he likes it is the selling point of that picture.



I would judge him for the goofy expression, but I don't know what my "ooh, boobs!" face looks like and it could very well be the same.


----------



## nightflameauto

Demiurge said:


> I would judge him for the goofy expression, but I don't know what my "ooh, boobs!" face looks like and it could very well be the same.


I happen to know mine is either surprised smile (like) or wince (not like). He looks like he's torn.


----------



## Xaios

nightflameauto said:


> Putinator's complete focus on her chest while looking like he can't decide if he likes it is the selling point of that picture.


He's lookin to get some putin tang.


----------



## DiezelMonster

U.S. National security advisor calls for all US politicians to leave Ukraine as new comes in that Putin has green lit an invasion!

It's not on any major news sources right now but floating on instagram @realnewsnownobullshit

So I don't know how much I believe it.


----------



## spudmunkey

DiezelMonster said:


> It's not on any major news sources right now but floating on instagram @realnewsnownobullshit


----------



## Konfyouzd

ArtDecade said:


> US and allies will sanction Moscow. Russia will invade. More sanctions.
> 
> Otherwise, hot war. End of planet.


----------



## AwakenTheSkies

This is fucked. I don't know how much of this is fear mongering and how much is true. I am from the west part of Ukraine (don't currently live there though). I'm sad and angry that this is happening.


----------



## DiezelMonster

spudmunkey said:


> View attachment 103203
> 
> View attachment 103204




Yeah sorry, It wasn't when I saw it this morning, only got to post when I did and hadn't checked again LOL

thanks


----------



## ramses

Yes, Putin will invade Ukraine.


Unless ... an offer is made such that Putin can accept it while saving face.

Asshole dictators have to act, or be offered a plausible way to save face.

Alas, it seems that Putin won't budge on Ukraine being able to choose its future, which may include joining NATO.

So, I guess this is it. We are at war with asshole dictator Putin.


----------



## ixlramp

bostjan said:


> I have no idea what the context is


Putin's face, thumbs-up reaction and complete cool in the situation is quite amusing:
(Note: I link a RT video *only* because it is a good video of the incident)


----------



## OmegaSlayer

Old geezers that would send youth to die, just to make big money.
That's what war is and what it has ever been.

And with the current inflation, USA needs a war much more than Russia.

We really should just refuse to take weapons to fight for these loosers, as we don't get any advantage from world turmoil.


----------



## Adieu

ramses said:


> Yes, Putin will invade Ukraine.
> 
> 
> Unless ... an offer is made such that Putin can accept it while saving face.
> 
> Asshole dictators have to act, or be offered a plausible way to save face.
> 
> Alas, it seems that Putin won't budge on Ukraine being able to choose its future, which may include joining NATO.
> 
> So, I guess this is it. We are at war with asshole dictator Putin.



Dunno

He'd have to be insane to... oh, wait, he is insane. Question is "how insane?"

The Ukraine-Russia border is huge and porous and pretty much 100% of Ukrainians can blend in Russia.

Take a moment to appreciate the security circus in Russia that would follow... Imagine America's "War on Terror", but with the enemy faction being CANADA. People who live next door and look exactly like your own and sound either exactly like your own, or, worse yet, sliiiightly different, BUT LESS SO THAN YOUR OWN COUNTRYMEN FROM A COUPLE STATES AWAY.

Every Russian-looking person in Russia would suddenly be perceived as a potential threat. Cops and military would routinely mistakenly round up millions of people from Russian regions like Kursk, who to the Moscow Standard Russian ear sound a hell of a lot more "Ukrainian" in dialect than people from Kyiv in actual Ukraine.

And then there's the sheer amount of Russian citizens with clearly Ukrainian last names (something like 20%, probably). That paramilitarized regime would be unable to avoid alienating the hell out of them and eventually causing lots of strife. Etc.


----------



## OmegaSlayer

Adieu said:


> Dunno
> 
> He'd have to be insane to... oh, wait, he is insane. Question is "how insane?"
> 
> The Ukraine-Russia border is huge and porous and pretty much 100% of Ukrainians can blend in Russia.
> 
> Take a moment to appreciate the security circus in Russia that would follow... Imagine America's "War on Terror", but with the enemy faction being CANADA. People who live next door and look exactly like your own and sound either exactly like your own, or, worse yet, sliiiightly different, BUT LESS SO THAN YOUR OWN COUNTRYMEN FROM A COUPLE STATES AWAY.
> 
> Every Russian-looking person in Russia would suddenly be perceived as a potential threat. Cops and military would routinely mistakenly round up millions of people from Russian regions like Kursk, who to the Moscow Standard Russian ear sound a hell of a lot more "Ukrainian" in dialect than people from Kyiv in actual Ukraine.
> 
> And then there's the sheer amount of Russian citizens with clearly Ukrainian last names (something like 20%, probably). That paramilitarized regime would be unable to avoid alienating the hell out of them and eventually causing lots of strife. Etc.


One Russian out of 3 is said to have Ukrainian relatives...just to say, and confirm what you observed


----------



## bostjan

Gorbachev is a vocal opponent of Putin, no? Isn't Gorbachev's family mixed Ukrainian-Russian? Maybe one goal of all of this is a way to target him for obsolescence? Then the last major relic of the Soviet era will be gone and Putin can rewrite history if he wishes to do so.

There might be hundreds of such little reasons that play into this metaphorical staring contest.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Gorbachev is a vocal opponent of Putin, no? Isn't Gorbachev's family mixed Ukrainian-Russian? Maybe one goal of all of this is a way to target him for obsolescence? Then the last major relic of the Soviet era will be gone and Putin can rewrite history if he wishes to do so.
> 
> There might be hundreds of such little reasons that play into this metaphorical staring contest.



No

Literallly craptons of Russians have Ukrainian roots, including a large percentage of Putin's inner circle (Kiriyenko, Matviyenko, etc.).

Gorbachev was never seen as even a bit Ukrainian, regardless of his actual family origins. Probably because a whole lot of Soviet top brass WERE Ukrainian (including heads of state Brezhnev, Khruschev, Chernenko).


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> No
> 
> Literallly craptons of Russians have Ukrainian roots, including a large percentage of Putin's inner circle (Kiriyenko, Matviyenko, etc.).
> 
> Gorbachev was never seen as even a bit Ukrainian, regardless of his actual family origins. Probably because a whole lot of Soviet top brass WERE Ukrainian (including heads of state Brezhnev, Khruschev, Chernenko).


Okay, weird, since Gorbachev definitely speaks with a pretty thick Ukrainian-ish accent, and several of my friends (native Russians) have poked fun at him for that.

Krushchev was Russian. Otherwise, yes, those guys were Ukrainian or Ukrainian enough, but they are all dead, so I'm not sure how that comes into play with my point.


----------



## Adieu

Ok, technically, Khruschev was from a border region by birth, and from Ukraine by career...

As to Gorbachev, he had a rural Russian accent, not a Ukrainian one.

Which pretty much illustrates what I meant when I said that a hot war with Ukraine would cause utter internal chaos in Russia, simply on account of the vast amount of totally-Ukrainian, somewhat-Ukrainian, maybe-Ukrainian, and seemingly-Ukrainian-but-not-really persons throughout all levels of Russian society.


----------



## possumkiller

So is this all some kind of big western conspiracy to get another economy-building war started?


----------



## Adieu

possumkiller said:


> So is this all some kind of big western conspiracy to get another economy-building war started?



Yeah, according to Russian propaganda, it's all caused by wacky Anglo-Saxons* who want to deploy more strategic missiles in your backyard.... or something.


*the anglo-saxon thing is NEW. Apparently they're trying to suck up to the EU.


----------



## Adieu

Anyway, my dear American friends, watch carefully, THIS is how things go when you appoint an awkward attention whore as your fearless leader and it starts losing the plot because no one wants to deal with it anymore.

#2024caveatemptor


----------



## bostjan

Biden is saying that Russia is preparing a false flag attack to justify further intervention.

Is Putin going to declare it as a false false flag operation operation? F3O2?


----------



## nightflameauto

bostjan said:


> Biden is saying that Russia is preparing a false flag attack to justify further intervention.
> 
> Is Putin going to declare it as a false false flag operation operation? F3O2?


I feel like we're seconds away from a false-flag-ception. Who knows who is gaslighting who at this point? 

It's bluffs all the way down, until it isn't.


----------



## bostjan

nightflameauto said:


> I feel like we're seconds away from a false-flag-ception. Who knows who is gaslighting who at this point?
> 
> It's bluffs all the way down, until it isn't.


I mean, the fact that there's no way to prove it's not (whether it is or is not) is what fuels all of the craziest conspiracy theories.

I love that "all the way down" reference. 

But between all of the crazy Jan 6th stuff being attributed to Antifa and now Biden accusing, pre-emptively, Putin of false flags in Ukraine- I don't know. It's difficult not to have the first thought to be "what if Biden is planning a false flag operation in Ukraine and is going to claim it's a Russian false flag?" Biden might not be that clever, but neither am I, and I thought of it in less than a second after reading the headline.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Biden is saying that Russia is preparing a false flag attack to justify further intervention.
> 
> Is Putin going to declare it as a false false flag operation operation? F3O2?



Well, duh, first they'll bomb the bejesus out of their own pet mercs currently masquerading as insurgents in Luhansk and Donetsk, then blame it on Ukraine and roll in heavy armor to "protect the citizens" (since they preventively passed out Russian passports to like half of them)

That was always the backup plan since 2014.

Question is will they go for it or not?


----------



## DiezelMonster

uh oh









Explosion reported in Ukraine's separatist-held Donetsk


A large explosion hit the center of the separatist-held city of Donetsk in East Ukraine, Reuters reported late Friday, citing Ria News Agency. A car was...




www.dailysabah.com





is this the false flag you guys are talking about?


----------



## tedtan

Yeah, and Biden was speaking with reporters earlier today saying that he’s certain Russia will invade Kiev within the next two days Based on this.


----------



## DiezelMonster

tedtan said:


> Yeah, and Biden was speaking with reporters earlier today saying that he’s certain Russia will invade Kiev within the next two days Based on this.



For someone who keeps saying he doesn't want to escalate and get involved, Biden sure is trying to make this happen huh?


----------



## Adieu

DiezelMonster said:


> uh oh
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Explosion reported in Ukraine's separatist-held Donetsk
> 
> 
> A large explosion hit the center of the separatist-held city of Donetsk in East Ukraine, Reuters reported late Friday, citing Ria News Agency. A car was...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailysabah.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> is this the false flag you guys are talking about?



Pretty much

It's already a proven fake since:
1) late afternoon, EMPTY parking lot in front of busy local "government" building. No people no vehicles there, nobody injured nothing else damaged, not even a gawker in the pics. Lol.
2) exploded vehicle is an ancient rust bucket... allegedly belonging to a local bigwig (that just ain't how they roll, these people think and live like rappers)
3) the bigwig wasn't big enough for anybody serious to give a damn.

Local terrorist "administration" already issued evacuation orders for women and children (videos timestamped 2 days earlier but speaking the date of their release as some breaking news crisis) and Putin immediately approved $125ish "aid packages" for some mythical projected 700,000 "refugees" from the non-existent Ukrainian "offensive" on Luhansk and Donetsk. Less than an hour after the staged "attack" (= junkyard soviet-era truck getting blown up in an empty parking lot)


----------



## wheresthefbomb

"Mirror, mirror, on the wall
which flag is the falsest
of them all?"


----------



## Xaios

I believe the thread title has officially bern answered:
CBC News: Putin orders forces to 'maintain peace' in Eastern Ukraine after recognizing separatist regions.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/putin-russian-security-council-eastern-ukraine-1.6359253


----------



## IbanezDaemon

No way Putin was gonna look like he was just sabre rattling so this morning's events come as no real surprise.


----------



## Adieu

One of two possibilities:

1) This IS the invasion. Although why recognize the proxies for that? Who knows.

2) This is the RETREAT with beaucoup saber-rattling to avoid looking pathetic. Recognizing the totally obvious status quo doesn't really do much on its own, although he may continue to stir sh!t for years to come by hinting at supporting the territorial claims dreamt up by his pet fake rebels (who as of now don't ACTUALLY control the entirety of Luhansk and Donetsk regions).

Could also be a mix thereof. Standard formula: thugs flying rebel colors do the attacking, he rolls in with official Russian flags and uniforms to "defend" any territorial gains while claiming to not be a participant at all and hoping that no one dares shoot at them as that might be "cause" for official full Russian participation. Then rinse and repeat.

Bonus: offensive casualties don't count, aren't recognized, and don't make bad press back home since the official stance is they are just "friendlies", but not "our boys".


----------



## bostjan

Putin: "Ukraine was entirely created by Russia"
Putin's PR guy: "What Mr. Putin meant was that modern Ukraine was re-created by the Soviet Union, which was led by some Russian people at the time."
Putin: "A stable statehood in Ukraine has not developed, and political, electoral procedures serve only as a cover, a screen for the redistribution of power and property between various oligarchic clans."
PR guy: "Yes, well, you know, Ukraine has some problems, that's all Mr. Putin is trying to say."
Putin: "Not surprisingly, Ukrainian society faced the rise of extreme nationalism, which quickly took the form of aggressive Russophobia and neo-Nazism. Hence the participation of Ukrainian nationalists and neo-Nazis in terrorist gangs in the North Caucasus, and the increasingly louder territorial claims against Russia."
PR guy (sweating): "... ahem, well, there are some extremist groups in Ukraine, and Russia wants to 'keep peace' and protect the people of Ukraine."
Putin: "If I want to, I can take Kiev if a fortnight"
PR guy (frantic): "No no no, what Mr. Putin said was that he could beat Kiev in Fornite."
Putin (heading for Ukrainian border):







.... I probably shouldn't make light of this....

But, those are all real Putin quotes. Obviously, I made up the PR guy part, but there is so much strong rhetoric from Putin that he's somehow going to look slightly less insane if he does invade than if he doesn't at this point. Neither option seems ideal for either Russia or for Ukraine. It's an open secret that Russia has actively interfered with Ukrainian elections and has encouraged Russian nationalism in Ukraine. Think more than one move ahead and consider where all of this is leading. Does Putin need to score political points domestically to remain in power? What does Putin want at this point? If you think all of this sabre-rattling is to strut around like a tough guy and then not get into a fight that will define his legacy, then I think you are wrong. This is either for Putin to prove that he's the smartest guy in the room by rolling out some sort of surprise we don't yet expect, or he's going to actually go for territorial expansion.


----------



## sleewell

i am sick of the US feeling like they need to jump in all across the globe when we can't even fix our own problems. American lives will be lost, trillions we don't even have will be spent/borrowed and then when we leave whatever was going to happen in the first place will eventually happen and we will just keep getting made fun of for it. some times bad things happen in the world but that doesn't mean we need to be the globe's police force because quite frankly its not working. spend that money on making our country better instead of invading a country every few years and staying there for decades. 

if this is about oil just come out and say it. this whole rouse about protecting democracy is complete and total bullshit. we have this truly insane military budget and so those people feel like we have to use it every few years so they can ask for more the next year. meanwhile we have kids in poverty, people struggling all over in this country. makes no sense. 

i find it super hilarious that we have the gall to say someone would make up a reason to invade a country. ummmm hello weapons of mass destruction much.... that was all a big lie wasn't it?


----------



## nightflameauto

sleewell said:


> i am sick of the US feeling like they need to jump in all across the globe when we can't even fix our own problems. American lives will be lost, trillions we don't even have will be spent/borrowed and then when we leave whatever was going to happen in the first place will eventually happen and we will just keep getting made fun of for it. some times bad things happen in the world but that doesn't mean we need to be the globe's police force because quite frankly its not working. spend that money on making our country better instead of invading a country every few years and staying there for decades.
> 
> if this is about oil just come out and say it. this whole rouse about protecting democracy is complete and total bullshit. we have this truly insane military budget and so those people feel like we have to use it every few years so they can ask for more the next year. meanwhile we have kids in poverty, people struggling all over in this country. makes no sense.
> 
> i find it super hilarious that we have the gall to say someone would make up a reason to invade a country. ummmm hello weapons of mass destruction much.... that was all a big lie wasn't it?


I would say as this "conflict" ramps up, we should be watching our government closely. They like to use this type of situation to slam through legislation that's not very well received while there's a flurry of news about some war, conflict, or altercation with the hopes no one will notice they're prepping the baseball bat sized dildo for us commoners in the name of handing more money to their friends.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Putin: "Ukraine was entirely created by Russia"
> Putin's PR guy: "What Mr. Putin meant was that modern Ukraine was re-created by the Soviet Union, which was led by some Russian people at the time."
> Putin: "A stable statehood in Ukraine has not developed, and political, electoral procedures serve only as a cover, a screen for the redistribution of power and property between various oligarchic clans."
> PR guy: "Yes, well, you know, Ukraine has some problems, that's all Mr. Putin is trying to say."
> Putin: "Not surprisingly, Ukrainian society faced the rise of extreme nationalism, which quickly took the form of aggressive Russophobia and neo-Nazism. Hence the participation of Ukrainian nationalists and neo-Nazis in terrorist gangs in the North Caucasus, and the increasingly louder territorial claims against Russia."
> PR guy (sweating): "... ahem, well, there are some extremist groups in Ukraine, and Russia wants to 'keep peace' and protect the people of Ukraine."
> Putin: "If I want to, I can take Kiev if a fortnight"
> PR guy (frantic): "No no no, what Mr. Putin said was that he could beat Kiev in Fornite."
> Putin (heading for Ukrainian border):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .... I probably shouldn't make light of this....
> 
> But, those are all real Putin quotes. Obviously, I made up the PR guy part, but there is so much strong rhetoric from Putin that he's somehow going to look slightly less insane if he does invade than if he doesn't at this point. Neither option seems ideal for either Russia or for Ukraine. It's an open secret that Russia has actively interfered with Ukrainian elections and has encouraged Russian nationalism in Ukraine. Think more than one move ahead and consider where all of this is leading. Does Putin need to score political points domestically to remain in power? What does Putin want at this point? If you think all of this sabre-rattling is to strut around like a tough guy and then not get into a fight that will define his legacy, then I think you are wrong. This is either for Putin to prove that he's the smartest guy in the room by rolling out some sort of surprise we don't yet expect, or he's going to actually go for territorial expansion.



PR guy exists. His expressions as he tries to rectify the bullsh!t are priceless.




Caption: Peskov explaining why Putin didn't get the COVID-19 vaccine


----------



## Adieu

sleewell said:


> i am sick of the US feeling like they need to jump in all across the globe when we can't even fix our own problems. American lives will be lost, trillions we don't even have will be spent/borrowed and then when we leave whatever was going to happen in the first place will eventually happen and we will just keep getting made fun of for it. some times bad things happen in the world but that doesn't mean we need to be the globe's police force because quite frankly its not working. spend that money on making our country better instead of invading a country every few years and staying there for decades.
> 
> if this is about oil just come out and say it. this whole rouse about protecting democracy is complete and total bullshit. we have this truly insane military budget and so those people feel like we have to use it every few years so they can ask for more the next year. meanwhile we have kids in poverty, people struggling all over in this country. makes no sense.
> 
> i find it super hilarious that we have the gall to say someone would make up a reason to invade a country. ummmm hello weapons of mass destruction much.... that was all a big lie wasn't it?



Actually, USA (...and Russia too) are treaty-bound to defend the integrity of Ukraine.

It was a deal done back in the 90s in exchange for nuclear disarmament.

Cause yeah, they had NUKES in the 90s. Lots and loooots of nukes. And the reason they no longer have them is that America and Russia swore to keep them protected in perpetuity for giving them up.

PS and the United Kingdom too

PPS Supreme Leader Kim in NK prolly facepalming right now thinking "this is why you never ever surrender your nukes"


----------



## Randy

DiezelMonster said:


> For someone who keeps saying he doesn't want to escalate and get involved, Biden sure is trying to make this happen huh?



I'm not 100% of any particular mind on this, but I think the thought process over the last few weeks was that Russia was going to claim benevolence, then stage a false flag to justify coming in and the position of Biden was to basically expose Putin's cover by pointing at his true intention weeks out so it's not a "surprise" when it happens. Basically trying to get ahead of the propaganda.

I'm not sure how earnest Biden or anyone else is with the claim of "staying out of it"


----------



## thebeesknees22

Adieu said:


> Actually, USA (...and Russia too) are treaty-bound to defend the integrity of Ukraine.
> 
> It was a deal done back in the 90s in exchange for nuclear disarmament.
> 
> Cause yeah, they had NUKES in the 90s. Lots and loooots of nukes. And the reason they no longer have them is that America and Russia swore to keep them protected in perpetuity for giving them up.
> 
> PS and the United Kingdom too
> 
> PPS Supreme Leader Kim in NK prolly facepalming right now thinking "this is why you never ever surrender your nukes"



I was gonna say the same thing. We signed a treaty. We should honor it. ...we should give Putin a bloody lip. Like for real fight back hard especially given all the election meddling and everything else over the years that he's done pretty much everywhere.


It won't happen though. We'll just sanction him and shrug and then Putin will make a move an another area in a few more years. Rinse/repeat until he makes a move on someone that can actually fight back for real. He may die of old age before that happens though and we'll be dealing with someone else by then. (or russia will cave from infighting from the power vacuum Putin will leave behind when he's finally dead) ... we shall see!


----------



## bostjan

Naw, @sleewell is right, we have no business trying to police Russia out of Ukraine through military force.



Adieu said:


> Actually, USA (...and Russia too) are treaty-bound to defend the integrity of Ukraine.
> 
> It was a deal done back in the 90s in exchange for nuclear disarmament.
> 
> Cause yeah, they had NUKES in the 90s. Lots and loooots of nukes. And the reason they no longer have them is that America and Russia swore to keep them protected in perpetuity for giving them up.
> 
> PS and the United Kingdom too
> 
> PPS Supreme Leader Kim in NK prolly facepalming right now thinking "this is why you never ever surrender your nukes"


They physically had the nukes, but, IIRC, Russia had all of the keys and codes to launch them, so those nukes were useless unless Ukrainian hackers tried to redneck engineer them to work without the codes and keys (which they probably could have, but not without a fair amount of risk).

Belarus was part of the same agreement, such that US sanctions against Belarus for human rights abuses have been in breach of the treaty already. 

I guess the lesson for everyone in this story is never sign a treaty that you don't expect someone to break. Russia's breach of the Budapest treaty is "justified" by them saying that this Ukraine isn't the same Ukraine that signed the treaty, whatever the hell that is supposed to mean.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Naw, @sleewell is right, we have no business trying to police Russia out of Ukraine through military force.
> 
> 
> They physically had the nukes, but, IIRC, Russia had all of the keys and codes to launch them, so those nukes were useless unless Ukrainian hackers tried to redneck engineer them to work without the codes and keys (which they probably could have, but not without a fair amount of risk).
> 
> Belarus was part of the same agreement, such that US sanctions against Belarus for human rights abuses have been in breach of the treaty already.
> 
> I guess the lesson for everyone in this story is never sign a treaty that you don't expect someone to break. Russia's breach of the Budapest treaty is "justified" by them saying that this Ukraine isn't the same Ukraine that signed the treaty, whatever the hell that is supposed to mean.



Doubtful.

Ukraine wasn't the USSR's Philippines or Alaska... Ukraine was the USSR's Texas and/or California. Richest, most developed, most populous part outside the capital agglomeration.


----------



## StevenC

Nah, I don't buy that. If you want nukes, then you have a responsibility to ensure the safety of other countries against those with nukes. That's just what balance of power is about. 

If you don't want to be involved in any conflict, that's a stance to take. But the reality of the situation is that we, as an international community, have a duty to protect each other. And in particular with regards to Russia, it's incredibly hypocritical to be upset about them meddling in US elections but not anyone else's. 

The entity of the West made its bed and has to lie in it. We either care about anything we claim to care about or we don't.


----------



## bostjan

Maybe this is a bit of a stretch, but when the Belarus controversy came up several years ago, the Obama administration published this memo (via the Department of State): https://web.archive.org/web/20140419030507/http://minsk.usembassy.gov/budapest_memorandum.html

Note how the Budapest treaty is referred to as a "memorandum" and never called a treaty.

I don't doubt that this could set a precedent for the executive branch to look the other way in case of a Russian invasion.


And here is the text of the treaty: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ukraine._Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances


----------



## possumkiller

StevenC said:


> we, as an international community, have a duty to protect each other


Do we? It doesn't seem like we, as an international community, did a very good job of protecting Iraq or Afghanistan or Syria or Palestine or Hong Kong or Uyghurs or Yemen or are there only certain people we, as an international community, have a duty to protect?


----------



## Adieu

...actually, I just meant they could figure out nukes without Big Brother's help and guidance.

But I guess I see the first part of your point.

Although I'd still much rather see the Ukrainians kill Putin than the other way around.


----------



## bostjan

Hello mystery first-time poster. 

I happen to agree. Old fashioned wars were about access to resources. Modern warfare was more about scoring political points and manufacturing more allies than enemies for the sake of economics, which is the same things as old fashioned war, but through a couple layers of proxies.

Yemen is very much an example of this newer modern warfare. The rebels are clearly proxies for the Iranian government and the government is a proxy for the Saudi government, which itself has its strings being pulled by the US and the rest of the West.

Russia seems to be taking the old fashioned approach with Ukraine, which no one knows quite how to process.


----------



## StevenC

possumkiller said:


> It doesn't seem like we, as an international community, did a very good job of protecting Iraq or Afghanistan or Syria or Palestine or Hong Kong or Uyghurs or Yemen


Agreed.


----------



## Randy

No idea who that guy was but I wasn't intent on waiting to find out.


----------



## valkyrie

Randy said:


> No idea who that guy was but I wasn't intent on waiting to find out.


Oh, it was just a mod getting mad about people not being supportive enough of the US military industrial complex. Haha that makes a lot more sense than the stated reason


hopefully I can get some logic pro discussion in on the other board before the inevitable follow-up


----------



## Randy

valkyrie said:


> Oh, it was just a mod getting mad about people not being supportive enough of the US military industrial complex. Haha that makes a lot more sense than the stated reason
> View attachment 103638
> 
> hopefully I can get some logic pro discussion in on the other board before the inevitable follow-up



No idea why you didn't just post under this username then? I didn't even read the post, I got a notification it was flagged because any time a person makes a new account and the first thing they do is post in P&CE it raises alarm based on, like, the last 10+ years of doing this.

Duplicate accounts are a no-no, otherwise there was nothing wrong with whatever you said feel free to continue.


----------



## Adieu

2 accounts 1 with 45 posts the other with 1? Cause yeah that ain't suspicious at all


----------



## Randy

I mean, forget political differences... Russia known troll farm hub (which we've been spammed by before), we open a thread about Russia/Ukraine then rando people start making accounts and posting abrasive stuff right off the rip. No idea how that doesn't look crazy suspicious?


----------



## MaxOfMetal

Randy said:


> I mean, forget political differences... Russia known troll farm hub (which we've been spammed by before), we open a thread about Russia/Ukraine then rando people start making accounts and posting abrasive stuff right off the rip. No idea how that doesn't look crazy suspicious?



Come on Randy, we all know you're just a shill for the Military Industrial Complex. 

What's next, @Drew the rabid MAGAt?


----------



## valkyrie

Randy said:


> No idea why you didn't just post under this username then? I didn't even read the post, I got a notification it was flagged because any time a person makes a new account and the first thing they do is post in P&CE it raises alarm based on, like, the last 10+ years of doing this.
> 
> Duplicate accounts are a no-no, otherwise there was nothing wrong with whatever you said feel free to continue.


I had some questions to ask regarding DAWs, tried to log in and couldnt remember my credentials. You can see that this account hasnt been active for years, so rather than doing the recovery rigmarole i said fuck it ill just make a new one. Saw the recent post here and thought it sounded interesting. 


Randy said:


> I mean, forget political differences... Russia known troll farm hub (which we've been spammed by before), we open a thread about Russia/Ukraine then rando people start making accounts and posting abrasive stuff right off the rip. No idea how that doesn't look crazy suspicious?


I can see how that looks suspicious. I would just expect mods to put the tiniest effort into checking if a new account making anti-Russian, anti-US posts is a Russian bot or not before flexing the banhammer. I dont think anything I posted was abrasive, IIRC the discussion was all of us agreeing on things


----------



## Randy

I wish




MaxOfMetal said:


> Come on Randy, we all know you're just a shill for the Military Industrial Complex.


I wish


----------



## Randy




----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> View attachment 103641



Can I say "F*ck that guy (and his lil master too)" on this forum?


----------



## Randy

Adieu said:


> Can I say "F*ck that guy (and his lil master too)" on this forum?


----------



## narad

Randy said:


> I mean, forget political differences... Russia known troll farm hub (which we've been spammed by before), we open a thread about Russia/Ukraine then rando people start making accounts and posting abrasive stuff right off the rip. No idea how that doesn't look crazy suspicious?



Of course there are also anti-Russian trolls, it's just that my handler has invested years of high-end gear purchases to give me a better defense against banning when coming out as anti-Putin in the OT threads.


----------



## Adieu

narad said:


> Of course there are also anti-Russian trolls, it's just that my handler has invested years of high-end gear purchases to give me a better defense against banning when coming out as anti-Putin in the OT threads.



Wait you guys get paid?

Where does one sign up? I usually do this for free, but alas working for a living takes up a huge chunk of my time


----------



## narad

Adieu said:


> Wait you guys get paid?
> 
> Where does one sign up? I usually do this for free, but alas working for a living takes up a huge chunk of my time



I wanted a house with a family and a dog, but my handler said my cover was gear collector and delivered 8 speaker cabinets to store in my studio apartment.


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> Wait you guys get paid?
> 
> Where does one sign up? I usually do this for free, but alas working for a living takes up a huge chunk of my time


Brought to you by US Defense™


----------



## Drew

Randy said:


> View attachment 103641


I love his closing comment, "we should try that on our southernm border!"

Trump straight-up suggested annexing Mexico. You heard it here first, folks.


----------



## thebeesknees22

Drew said:


> I love his closing comment, "we should try that on our southernm border!"
> 
> Trump straight-up suggested annexing Mexico. You heard it here first, folks.



He doesn't realize that that doesn't actually do what he thinks it would do.

Annexing Mexico.......All that does is create a border farther south which he would then complain about needing a wall there..... and on top of that those people he wanted out would then be apart of a US territory which means they would be free to travel to and from the mainland US. (and it also makes those born in US territories citizens or US nationals which he would probably freak out about) lol


----------



## bostjan

If we annex all the way down to the Darien Gap, we could just build a small wall between North and South America. Most of those countries there have a >100 year long history of being "secretly" under US control off and on anyway. It'd be great for the US economy until people start demanding "rights" and "freedoms," but then we just point at the people who live in the original 50 states and the fact that they've been victims of a caste system enforced via police brutality and maybe that'd keep 'em suppressed for a couple more decades. We could even justify it by saying that those countries are all failed states that were given independence from "The United States of Central America" (which never existed, but a lot of people somehow think it did), which was based on the USA, so it only makes sense to annex them all back. [/satire]

But anyway, Trump is gone, at least for now, so, unless he wants to recruit his own army, he'll have to wait until he somehow usurps power again (maybe with Putin's help). I doubt Biden will get the USA involved in The Mexican-American War II, nor The Banana Wars II, but, the way everything else is going, I can't guarantee anything won't happen.

As for Ukraine, there are leaks from Russia that an attack on Kiev is planned for tonight. If that's true, that's some serious escalation!


----------



## tedtan

Germany halted the Nord Stream 2 pipeline yesterday based on the Russian invasion of Ukrainian and the US have just added sanctions against it, so between the two, that should kill off the Nord Stream 2 project. There goes $11 billion.


----------



## nightflameauto

You didn't go far enough @bostjan . Trump will get power back when he releases his troves of evidence against the pedophile Democrats and the videos of them molesting and eating toddlers. He'll first kill every registered Democrat in the country, with Hillary Clinton being the last so she can watch her entire party decimated.

The demon that has possessed Nancy Pelosi for the entire time she's been in office will finally reveal itself and align itself with the other demon that's in Mitch McConnel and both will swear fealty to God Emperor for Life Trump.

Then the country will turn to the south and begin the crawl to the tip of South America.

Immediately after annexing the entirety of the Americas, since Canada will obviously feel left out and just give themselves up without a fight, God Emperor for Life Trump will realize he has nothing left to live for and sacrifice himself in the Rose Garden in front of his family, passing his title to Don Jr and sending the entire world into glorious restorative peace as countries across the rest of the globe announce they will turn their governments over to God Emperor for Life Trump II.

I really, truly, and honestly wish that not every single bit of the story I wrote here wasn't taken from shit I read online over the past couple weeks. And not written by satirists. They must have some good drugs in red country.


----------



## Ralyks

Trump is certainty making himself sound like Russian sympathizer with praising Putin and everything.


----------



## Demiurge

Samarin said:


> I wonder what would be U.S. reaction if 4 million North Americans living throughout South America, out of which 800.000 are U.S. citizenz, would be subjected to the following:
> 
> 1. North-America friendly president overthrown
> 2. Army sent to kill people that did not conform to the anti North American governent
> 3. Crackdown on english language media and North America friendly public officials
> 4. Ban on teaching in english language and forceful assimilation/nationalistic fear mongering
> 5. Russian "missle defence systems" popping up throughout South America.
> 
> Would U.S. even wait until all points are carried out to react?



Well, as you know, the US doesn't invade another sovereign nation for anything less than a rumor of roving Winnebagos carrying WMD supplies. But if you're straining to make a cogent analogy just to show that the US might possibly do something just as bad, the point has already been lost.

Can I get some more background information on this Tom Clancy smash hit, though? When did South America become a single country? Do they have a king or an emperor? What are Canada and Mexico doing about the interests of their 3.2M citizens in all this, and why would Mexico and francophone Canadians care about a crackdown on speaking English in Latin America?


----------



## CanserDYI

Explosions in Kyiv tonight almost simultaneously as Putin declared a special forces operation in Ukraine.

“Anyone who tries to interfere with us, or even more so, to create threats for our country and our people, must know that Russia’s response will be immediate and will lead you to such consequences as you have never before experienced in your history."

Fucking yikes.


----------



## tedtan

Yeah, it looks like an larger scale invasion may be about to happen.


----------



## Ralyks

Well... Fuck.


----------



## Adieu

Samarin said:


> I wonder what would be U.S. reaction if 4 million North Americans living throughout South America, out of which 800.000 are U.S. citizenz, would be subjected to the following:
> 
> 1. North-America friendly president overthrown
> 2. Army sent to kill people that did not conform to the anti North American governent
> 3. Crackdown on english language media and North America friendly public officials
> 4. Ban on teaching in english language and forceful assimilation/nationalistic fear mongering
> 5. Russian "missle defence systems" popping up throughout South America.
> 
> Would U.S. even wait until all points are carried out to react?



Привет троллям!

What 4 million? What nationalism? What killings? Their PRESIDENT is a Jewish native Russian-speaking comedian (previous job, not criticism).


----------



## Adieu

Well, shit.

Explosions. Not in Donetsk or Luhansk either, but in major cities outside the faux-rebel regions.


----------



## tedtan

CNN is reporting explosions in several cities, likely targeting Ukrainian air defenses (planes, surface to air missiles, etc.).


----------



## tedtan

CNN is also reporting that Russian troops are now crossing over into Ukraine in Odessa and Kharkiv, so it looks like its official.


----------



## Adieu

Interestingly, almost all Russian-language sources have gone quiet.

Even a Google search in Russian only shows a fresh BBC Russia result on Putin's bogus "special op in Donbas", with everything else several days old. Independent broadcaster TV Rain (Дождь) is streaming live, but every single less anti-establishment outlet is staying silent.


----------



## narad

It's like Rocky IV all over again.


----------



## possumkiller

So now that it's happened, what is everyone going to do about it? Let him have it or start WW3 over it?


----------



## narad

Samarin said:


> If U.S. invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan on false accusations "does not count", I wonder if anything else does. But the main precedent here is actually Kosovo. It was part of Serbia that was invaded without U.N resolution and then recognized as a separate state.
> 
> So if I would have made an example based on country "Alpha-X" and country "Centaury-Z", would you pull up Google maps and ask me to show the next geographical smash hit of discovering Alpha-X and Centaury-Z on planet earth? This is the type of condescending approach that hinders any dialogue and mutual understanding.



There's no precedent. History does not provide an analogous example in which the US was fractured into smaller states with their own language and culture, wanting to be internationally recognized (and successfully so) as a sovereign state, only to have the US come back and take it by force. The closest I can think of is late colonialism, but even that is more than a century away from being relevant.

Even so, even if imaginary US did fight to take back such an imaginary territory at the cost of tens of thousands of imaginary lives, it wouldn't make it right. It wouldn't magically create a case for it, ethically. Not even American citizens typically view the government as being incapable of wrongdoing.


----------



## IbanezDaemon

possumkiller said:


> So now that it's happened, what is everyone going to do about it? Let him have it or start WW3 over it?



Apart from imposing economic sanctions and expelling Russian Diplomats, not very much.


----------



## Adieu

The problem is he doesn't appear to be SANE.

Imagine for a moment he wins tomorrow. WHAT THEN?

He absorbs +40 million voters who vehemently dislike him? He makes an unknown amount of mortal enemies who look exactly like Russians and sound pretty much the same too?

Add an economy in tatters, all manner of sanctions and embargos, and an unknowable amount of new internal enemies who can't forgive him for their financial ruin....

Trump said it best. What a "genius".


----------



## Adieu

PS if not, what's the goal then? Install puppet regime and retreat? Unloved regimes don't last in Ukraine and that would totally clash with his Soviet glory restoration rhetoric.

Also, the cost is guaranteed to be prohibitive.

The little twerp has totally lost the plot.


----------



## 4Eyes

possumkiller said:


> So now that it's happened, what is everyone going to do about it? Let him have it or start WW3 over it?


I'm afraid we just woke up into ww3, I really hope I'm not right


----------



## Randy

4Eyes said:


> I'm afraid we just woke up into ww3, I really hope I'm not right


If everything is taken to it's conclusion, yeah but I doubt we race there. Despite the sanctions and the name calling against Russia, the West has mostly signaled they're just gonna let this (meaning the invasion) happen IMO.


----------



## thebeesknees22

Adieu said:


> The problem is he doesn't appear to be SANE.
> 
> Imagine for a moment he wins tomorrow. WHAT THEN?
> 
> He absorbs +40 million voters who vehemently dislike him? He makes an unknown amount of mortal enemies who look exactly like Russians and sound pretty much the same too?
> 
> Add an economy in tatters, all manner of sanctions and embargos, and an unknowable amount of new internal enemies who can't forgive him for their financial ruin....
> 
> Trump said it best. What a "genius".



That was my thought too. He would have all these people that hate him under his control. Do they get to vote? Are they just prisoners with no vote? If they vote then his opposition party just got a lot more powerful which he won't stand for. So would he ..what... go holocaust on them? or deport 40+ million people?

I don't think he has a plan on what to do post victory. It seems he just assumes they'll just fall in line. Maybe they will, maybe they won't but that's a big risk.


Putin is old too. It's clear he feels the clock ticking. (he didn't look well tbh in that hour long spiel either.) He doesn't care about anything other than expansion and leaving his mark on history....whatever that may end up being.


----------



## KnightBrolaire

welp time to buy raytheon and lockheed stock


----------



## Randy

thebeesknees22 said:


> leaving his mark on history....whatever that may end up being.


----------



## thebeesknees22

Randy said:


>


haha pretty much


----------



## possumkiller

Randy said:


> If everything is taken to it's conclusion, yeah but I doubt we race there. Despite the sanctions and the name calling against Russia, the West has mostly signaled they're just gonna let this (meaning the invasion) happen IMO.


So far the NATO reaction looks like letting him have Ukraine and beefing up forces in allied territory.


----------



## LostTheTone

thebeesknees22 said:


> That was my thought too. He would have all these people that hate him under his control. Do they get to vote? Are they just prisoners with no vote? If they vote then his opposition party just got a lot more powerful which he won't stand for. So would he ..what... go holocaust on them? or deport 40+ million people?
> 
> I don't think he has a plan on what to do post victory. It seems he just assumes they'll just fall in line. Maybe they will, maybe they won't but that's a big risk.
> 
> 
> Putin is old too. It's clear he feels the clock ticking. (he didn't look well tbh in that hour long spiel either.) He doesn't care about anything other than expansion and leaving his mark on history....whatever that may end up being.



It's certainly very unclear exactly what Russia is hoping to achieve here. It's not like owning all of Ukraine would suddenly change Russia's economic woes. And while this kind of adventurism does play well within Russia, it's not like there are legitimate elections anyway. So what is the point exactly? 

I suppose if you are utterly bought in to the idea that Russia just can't stand NATO expansion then maybe this keeps Ukraine out of NATO. But NATO wasn't very keen on having Ukraine on board anyway. And since all the states that Russia might really seriously care about being in NATO already are (Baltics, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Turkey) then there isn't a whole lot of difference no matter what. You might argue perhaps that Russia would rather have Ukraine on their side than not, but that only matters if you're actually going to fight a land war against NATO, and that's a dreadful idea. 

Honestly I don't even really buy that Putin is just trying to leave some kind of weird post-Soviet legacy. When they write the history books, about the least important thing is going to be "helped Donbas break away from Ukraine". 

I don't believe that Russia will actually try to conquer Ukraine. That's just not how the world works. A new government that is strategically aligned with Russia, but which remains Ukrainian is much more likely. Perhaps that achieves... Something? Some imports and exports switch to Russian sources I guess, rather than European. But man that's a tiny little prize for all this fuss. 

This is I fourth time that Putin has done something like this... And it still seems like it achieves almost nothing, except Putin maybe flexing to some internal Russian power blocks.


----------



## nightflameauto

The question needs to be asked. If Putin just gets Ukraine outright, while it doesn't appear on the surface to help his cause even among his own people, will it embolden him into thinking he can keep expanding? I mean, the dude's clearly not all there mentally and has taken his troll-like stance to severe extremes, but is he crazy enough to launch attacks at other countries? Or do most think he's not that far gone yet?

Also, with his issued warning, all it's gonna take is the wrong moron to push the wrong button and we could be in for it. God damn. The world just keeps getting more and more _interesting_ these past few years.


----------



## ArtDecade

Sanctions work, but they are a slow road to victory. At the end of the day, Russia is locked out of 60-70 percent of the world's markets. Their only solace is China. Russia is a massive partner with China, but the rest of the planet is an even larger one. China will want concessions from the West, but at the end of the day, China will be the chip that needs to fall into place to keep Putin in line. That said, Putin will still not like being the smallest of the big fish in the pond.


----------



## LostTheTone

nightflameauto said:


> The question needs to be asked. If Putin just gets Ukraine outright, while it doesn't appear on the surface to help his cause even among his own people, will it embolden him into thinking he can keep expanding? I mean, the dude's clearly not all there mentally and has taken his troll-like stance to severe extremes, but is he crazy enough to launch attacks at other countries? Or do most think he's not that far gone yet?
> 
> Also, with his issued warning, all it's gonna take is the wrong moron to push the wrong button and we could be in for it. God damn. The world just keeps getting more and more _interesting_ these past few years.



That's the thing... Even if he WERE to keep expanding, where does he even go? The two countries that would border Russia that aren't NATO members are Moldova and Finland. Moldova are tiny and irrelevant. Finland are an EU member, and are _strenuously _opposed to Russian occupation. I think that if that were to happen, then that triggers a proper war with NATO even though they aren't members. 

So the only other places to expand are in Asia and the Caucuses. The Asian parts are (with due respect to Mongolians) economically irrelevant. Azerbaijan has oil, but the Baku government is already pretty friendly with Russia. And of course, Russia already has their own oil, and oil is becoming less and less relevant.

If you are up for a wild theory... It is possible that this expansion is aimed at Turkey, who are a historic Russian enemy, and there is certainly no love lost between the two strongman regimes. But then, now that Russia already has control of Sevastopol, they don't need Ukrainian ports to get involved in the Black Sea. If you were a proper madman/evil genius, you might be inclined to think that while Turkey are a NATO member the other members won't stick their neck out if it seems that Turkey acts aggressively towards Russia, and Erdogan could probably be provoked. 

But... What would the prize even be? Controlling the Hellespont just doesn't matter any more. And the Turks are a proper modern military force, with modern arms and training provided by NATO. Oh and the whole of Turkey is made of mountains, and the Turks actually operate in that terrain against Kurds and Syrian rebels. That's a dreadful idea, even by the standards of ill advised invasions. 

So what is the final goal, if Putin is thinking about military expansion?


----------



## Adieu

nightflameauto said:


> The question needs to be asked. If Putin just gets Ukraine outright, while it doesn't appear on the surface to help his cause even among his own people, will it embolden him into thinking he can keep expanding? I mean, the dude's clearly not all there mentally and has taken his troll-like stance to severe extremes, but is he crazy enough to launch attacks at other countries? Or do most think he's not that far gone yet?
> 
> Also, with his issued warning, all it's gonna take is the wrong moron to push the wrong button and we could be in for it. God damn. The world just keeps getting more and more _interesting_ these past few years.



Depends what you consider "other countries" (in his mind, First World Nations or China are one thing, and everything else is just a geographical misunderstanding)

The 'stans? DEFINITELY.

The Baltics, Poland, Turkey? Maybe... Sure seems like being unable to attack them risk-free for any slight real or imagined at any time IS the main reason of his beef with NATO.


----------



## bostjan

Kiev has been shelled by the Russian military. Civilian targets.


----------



## Adieu

Btw, the two obvious strategies for dealing with all this would be to take two pages out of his own playbook:

1) crowdfund private military contractors to bloody his nose (no flag, no target to threaten with nuclear retaliation)

2) quietly put a hit out on the toxic little gnome


----------



## nightflameauto

Adieu said:


> Btw, the two obvious strategies for dealing with all this would be to take two pages out of his own playbook:
> 
> 1) crowdfund private military contractors to bloody his nose (no flag, no target to threaten with nuclear retaliation)
> 
> 2) quietly put a hit out on the toxic little gnome


I'm honestly surprised #2 hasn't come to pass already.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Kiev has been shelled by the Russian military. Civilian targets.



Shelled? Like artillery? Sounds like mistranslation or misinformation, shouldn't be any Russian artillery within their range of 20 or so klicks


----------



## thebeesknees22

Adieu said:


> Btw, the two obvious strategies for dealing with all this would be to take two pages out of his own playbook:
> 
> 1) crowdfund private military contractors to bloody his nose (no flag, no target to threaten with nuclear retaliation)
> 
> 2) quietly put a hit out on the toxic little gnome




I kind of wonder if the financial squeeze is hard enough on his inner circle, if one of them will just have enough and off him or try to off him. I mean...they love money amiright. 

*putin accidentally falls out of window. splat.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Depends what you consider "other countries"
> 
> The 'stans? DEFINITELY.
> 
> The Baltics, Poland, Turkey? Maybe... Sure seems like being unable to attack them risk-free for any slight real or imagined at any time IS the main reason of his beef with NATO.



A Russian puppet government in Turkmenistan would make literally zero difference to anything; it might actually reduce the levels of corruption. 

Why does it benefit Putin to shoot up some Uzbeks? Having these kind of countries under his thrall is almost certainly a net negative for him. So why bother? And it's not like the locals are friendly outgoing types. They are used to dictators, but they are also very Islamic and very opposed to anyone who isn't also Islamic bossing them around.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Btw, the two obvious strategies for dealing with all this would be to take two pages out of his own playbook:
> 
> 1) crowdfund private military contractors to bloody his nose (no flag, no target to threaten with nuclear retaliation)
> 
> 2) quietly put a hit out on the toxic little gnome



Butbut... The CIA would never murder foreign leaders, right?


----------



## 4Eyes

LostTheTone said:


> So what is the final goal, if Putin is thinking about military expansion?


return NATO to its pre 1997 state, strengthen Russian influence in east Europe, potentially take out post soviet era countries out of EU and recreate some sort of Soviet union stronger than ever....because that's what greatest leaders do, recreate fallen empires, right?

and that thought doesn't make me happy by slightest, because Putin is bombing targets 200km away from my home.


----------



## Adieu

nightflameauto said:


> I'm honestly surprised #2 hasn't come to pass already.



Well, Russian sources say manhole covers have been welded shut before any public outings for YEARS now. And he's surrounded by snipers (sometimes seen on camera) and bulletproof glass "walls" (that are carefully hidden from cameras)

Which actually again raises the question of what the hell the little freak wants.

Build palace > deny its existence > don't use palace
Have daughters > deny their existence
Have mistresses > deny their existence
Steal billions or trillions > ...you get the idea

It's ridiculous, but I think his true unreachable dream is to be this fool




... and brazenly chill in front of his own equine statue in gold and the world's biggest carpet while jamming r'n'b covers with his progeny and forcing everyone to listen to it. And have the fawning bootlickers clap and bow and deploy choirs of virgin schoolgirls to sing his praises too. (Btw that's all real and The Arkadag is an evil little emperor too, but at least he appears to enjoy the hell out of it)

But Putin CAN'T. He's scared and shy.


----------



## LostTheTone

4Eyes said:


> return NATO to its pre 1997 state, strengthen Russian influence in east Europe, potentially take out post soviet era countries out of EU and recreate some sort of Soviet union stronger than ever....because that's what greatest leaders do, recreate fallen empires, right?
> 
> and that thought doesn't make me happy by slightest, because Putin is bombing targets 200km away from my home.



The thing that all empire learn though is that simply holding ground is pointless. When you're in charge, you have to fix the potholes and root out all the conspiracies and all that. And a chunk of the locals will hate you and try to murder you anyway. Afghanistan is the perfect example; it costs more to try and hold it than it does to just ignore it. 

While I believe that Putin probably is genuinely a Russian nationalist, he was around to see first hand that reducing Chechnya to rubble provided absolutely no benefit to anyone at all. 

The one thing that I don't think Putin is is a communist idealogue. He wants to be in charge. But he's not ideological. The Soviets fundamentally believed that getting as many people as possible living under the hammer and sickle was of huge philosophical importance. They were happy to scoop up satellite states and divert a lot of money and effort into stabilizing them. And while it was definitely worth the effort to do so in East Germany and Poland, and at least Azerbaijan had oil, the Turkmen SSR was not something that ever paid for itself. It was just assumed that growing the geographic extent of the USSR was a good thing; no-one asked if it was worth the effort.


----------



## Crungy

I was wondering if they're taking a nod (or vice versa) from China and the Taiwan situation. They seem to be on the same page from news stories I've seen with Putin and Jinping. 

I'm not super up to date on that situation but it sounded to me like they were supportive of each other's endeavors.


----------



## nightflameauto

Crungy said:


> I was wondering if they're taking a nod (or vice versa) from China and the Taiwan situation. They seem to be on the same page from news stories I've seen with Putin and Jinping.
> 
> I'm not super up to date on that situation but it sounded to me like they were supportive of each other's endeavors.


Even though there is some animosity between Xi and Putin, I do think they are supportive of each other's intentions to "reclaim" their territories. There's some folks discussing already that if there is zero consequence for Putin aside from sanctions, Xi will take it as a cue that it's A-OK for him to put the hurtin' on Taiwan.


----------



## LostTheTone

nightflameauto said:


> Even though there is some animosity between Xi and Putin, I do think they are supportive of each other's intentions to "reclaim" their territories. There's some folks discussing already that if there is zero consequence for Putin aside from sanctions, Xi will take it as a cue that it's A-OK for him to put the hurtin' on Taiwan.



Point of order - China can't reclaim Taiwan, because the CCP has never owned Taiwan. In fact, Taiwan's proper name is "The Republic Of China" because their government's lineage is from the former Republic of China that lost the mainland to the communists. At least the USSR actually had Ukraine inside it. The CCP is basically saying "Oh yeah, this is clearly a part of China, because China used to own it before we killed everyone and tore the country up". Not very convincing.


----------



## nightflameauto

LostTheTone said:


> Point of order - China can't reclaim Taiwan, because the CCP has never owned Taiwan. In fact, Taiwan's proper name is "The Republic Of China" because their government's lineage is from the former Republic of China that lost the mainland to the communists. At least the USSR actually had Ukraine inside it. The CCP is basically saying "Oh yeah, this is clearly a part of China, because China used to own it before we killed everyone and tore the country up". Not very convincing.


I'm aware, which is why I put "reclaim" in quotes. But that's been their public stance on the issue for a very long time, as stupid as it sounds to those of us with any sense of the history of the area.


----------



## ArtDecade

Russia wants to demonstrate their military prowess by invading an outgunned neighbor. The US should do the same thing. Canada, we apologize in advance. 

Commence *Operation Dick Swinging*.


----------



## Crungy

Heyo!


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> Shelled? Like artillery? Sounds like mistranslation or misinformation, shouldn't be any Russian artillery within their range of 20 or so klicks


Modern artillery range is something like 50-100 km, but you may be right.

The caption reads: "People are seen outside the cordoned off area around the remains of a shell in a street in Kyiv on February 24, 2022 (Sergei Supinsky / AFP)"

I'm also seeing reports that the Russian military bombed a Turkish ship hours after Ukrainian diplomats asked Turkey to close off waterways to the Russian Navy.


----------



## Kaura

I guess OP finally got his answer.


----------



## Drew

LostTheTone said:


> Butbut... The CIA would never murder foreign leaders, right?


There's a specific part of US legal code that prohibits the US from engaging in military action against, essentially, a person - we can declare war on russia, we can launch a strike against a military target or even I believe a division or unit within an army... but we can't authorize a drone strike targeting Putin. 

I think very publicly repealling that would send a message, no? 

Also, this bears watching: 



tl;dr - Ukraine is arguing, with a fair amount of justification, that Russia doesn't actually have a seat (and with it, veto power) on the UN Security Council. The USSR does. When the USSR disintegrated, the Russian Federation assumed their seat, but it was never put to a vote, and the charter was never updated to replace USSR, so the question on whether the Russian Federation is the successor state to the USSR, in the UN Security Council, is one the Council has never actually addressed. 

If this sticks, well... when China assumed Taiwan's seat on the council, they did so over US opposition but otherwise with the support of the rest of the council, and we _still _managed to drag the process out a decade. There's no guarantee Russia would even get that same level of support, and in fact I think it's doubtful today in wake of this invasion, but even if they did they could legitimately lose their seat on the Security Council into the early 2030s while the process of voting to amend the charter was stonewalled at every step of the way by the US. 

This is kind of, well, brilliant.


----------



## DiezelMonster

Kaura said:


> I guess OP finally got his answer.


I sure did pal....I sure did..


----------



## bostjan

Drew said:


> There's a specific part of US legal code that prohibits the US from engaging in military action against, essentially, a person - we can declare war on russia, we can launch a strike against a military target or even I believe a division or unit within an army... but we can't authorize a drone strike targeting Putin.
> 
> I think very publicly repealling that would send a message, no?
> 
> Also, this bears watching:
> 
> 
> 
> tl;dr - Ukraine is arguing, with a fair amount of justification, that Russia doesn't actually have a seat (and with it, veto power) on the UN Security Council. The USSR does. When the USSR disintegrated, the Russian Federation assumed their seat, but it was never put to a vote, and the charter was never updated to replace USSR, so the question on whether the Russian Federation is the successor state to the USSR, in the UN Security Council, is one the Council has never actually addressed.
> 
> If this sticks, well... when China assumed Taiwan's seat on the council, they did so over US opposition but otherwise with the support of the rest of the council, and we _still _managed to drag the process out a decade. There's no guarantee Russia would even get that same level of support, and in fact I think it's doubtful today in wake of this invasion, but even if they did they could legitimately lose their seat on the Security Council into the early 2030s while the process of voting to amend the charter was stonewalled at every step of the way by the US.
> 
> This is kind of, well, brilliant.



Unlike the USSR/Russia issue, though, the China/Taiwan issue was settled with Resolution 2758.

I agree that this is an unexpected move. I doubt it will work, but whoever thought of that deserves a star. Since Ukraine was politically an equal part of the USSR, this charge holds a little more water than if it came from the USA or UK or whatever.

As for the USA not engaging a particular person in war... well... I think everybody knows that's not the case in practice.


----------



## possumkiller

Drew said:


> There's a specific part of US legal code that prohibits the US from engaging in military action against, essentially, a person - we can declare war on russia, we can launch a strike against a military target or even I believe a division or unit within an army... but we can't authorize a drone strike targeting Putin.


Tell that to all the middle east generals drone striked... 

Or was it legal since it killed the people around them as well and not just a single person?


----------



## Adieu

Fidel's ghost says "whaaaat?"


----------



## ArtDecade

possumkiller said:


> Tell that to all the middle east generals drone striked...
> 
> Or was it legal since it killed the people around them as well and not just a single person?



In the US, companies are considered people so it is easy to get around logic if you are determined to do so.


----------



## Drew

bostjan said:


> Unlike the USSR/Russia issue, though, the China/Taiwan issue was settled with Resolution 2758.
> 
> I agree that this is an unexpected move. I doubt it will work, but whoever thought of that deserves a star. Since Ukraine was politically an equal part of the USSR, this charge holds a little more water than if it came from the USA or UK or whatever.
> 
> As for the USA not engaging a particular person in war... well... I think everybody knows that's not the case in practice.


I think this is one of those things where for it to stick, yeah, they're gonna neet the US or the UK to support it... but as a politically equal part of the USSR to Russia, they certainly have standing to say, "hey, this shouldn't be Russias seat, our claim is just as valid as theirs."


----------



## nightflameauto

Russian forces seize control of Chernobyl nuclear plant and hold staff hostage: Ukrainian officials | CNN


Russian forces seized the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in northern Ukraine and have taken personnel in the station captive, spokeswoman for the State Agency of Ukraine on Exclusion Zone Management Yevgeniya Kuznetsovа told CNN.




www.cnn.com





They've taken Chernobyl. Some theories are saying this is just so they have a good staging area where they know nobody will attack them due to the possibility of radioactive leakage. Zelenksy is, rightfully, not taking it so lightly.


----------



## Adieu

nightflameauto said:


> Russian forces seize control of Chernobyl nuclear plant and hold staff hostage: Ukrainian officials | CNN
> 
> 
> Russian forces seized the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in northern Ukraine and have taken personnel in the station captive, spokeswoman for the State Agency of Ukraine on Exclusion Zone Management Yevgeniya Kuznetsovа told CNN.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They've taken Chernobyl. Some theories are saying this is just so they have a good staging area where they know nobody will attack them due to the possibility of radioactive leakage. Zelenksy is, rightfully, not taking it so lightly.



Typical cowardly/sly crap. Our gnomish overlord doesn't give a damn if his troops start to glow in the dark if it can make everyone nervous or gain an advantageous position.

Doubt he would cause contamination intentionally, because both Belarus and Russia are way, way too close and would also be affected.


----------



## MASS DEFECT

There must be something under Chernobyl's Nuke Plant that Putin is willing to risk everything to get to it. 

(a leak from the next Godzilla script.)


----------



## 4Eyes

Adieu said:


> Doubt he would cause contamination intentionally, because both Belarus and Russia are way, way too close and would also be affected.


we may be past the point where his evil mind bother to care...


----------



## Adieu

4Eyes said:


> we may be past the point where his evil mind bother to care...



Nah, personal safety is the one capital letter Value he has


----------



## Crungy

Maybe he's trying to weaponize the Elephants Foot.


----------



## Randy

Not at all looking to underestimate Putin's ruthlessness and how far he's willing to go or how miserable he can make things, but the whole event feels like stereotypical half-baked Russian version of doing a thing while leaving out most of the components necessary to actually accomplish something with it.

Feels like some kind of elaborate scheme in Ukraine using influence to launder money from the East and that either dried up or they got impatient and they're like "why don't we just TAKE Ukraine" not 100% working out that they're gonna be cut off from the rest of the world with or without it.

Like when you watch a true crime show and someone kills someone else to cover up a minor crime (like shoplifting) except a major crime is even harder to cover up and the penalty is a lot worse. Congrats, you're not getting probation, you're getting 25 years in prison. Half-baked.


----------



## possumkiller

From the latest video I have seen of Zelensky, it seems like reality is setting in. He says that it has been made clear that they will be left to fight on their own and all the western leaders he tries to ask for help are silent. Apparently Putin has also contacted him and is willing to negotiate with him and he seems like he is open to it in the absence of help from the west.


----------



## Adieu

Response seems weak.

I'm kind of hoping this is a short delay intended to highlight that Ukraine played no part in starting this mess, but it is starting to look like Ukrainian leadership is afraid of anything that smells like "escalation" and hoping this whole thing is just a show of force whose only endgame is to move the borders of fake rebels DNR and LNR to actual Donetsk and Luhansk Region borders as per the map.

Surprised and dismayed that Ukraine isn't trying to stir any sh!t in Russia yet. A few well-placed political assassinations, random acts of violence against people in Russian uniform within Russia, and mass vandalism against government property could totally shift Putin's attention, with his idgit repressive machine turning inward to look for opportunistic internal enemies, alienating the Russian population and potentially causing their own downfall with the kind of indiscriminate and heavy-handed response that they are known for.

Oh well, here's hoping they are just waiting for tensions to steep and choosing to start at a time when no one can tell for sure who the real actor is.


----------



## Louis Cypher

Kimmel on Tucker Carlson’s pro-Russia stance

https://www.thenational.scot/news/19950038.nigel-farage-blames-eu-nato-russian-invasion-ukraine/
Farage blames ‘EU and Nato’ for Russian invasion of Ukraine

what can you say


----------



## Shoeless_jose

It's so fucked like I don't want further escalation by USA but seeing the Ukrainians dig in against this just absurd level of aggression I hate that they are fighting and dying on their own for absolutely no reason.

Like I see no end goal for Russia here that makes any sense it's just all so insane.


----------



## Randy

Adieu said:


> Response seems weak.
> 
> I'm kind of hoping this is a short delay intended to highlight that Ukraine played no part in starting this mess, but it is starting to look like Ukrainian leadership is afraid of anything that smells like "escalation" and hoping this whole thing is just a show of force whose only endgame is to move the borders of fake rebels DNR and LNR to actual Donetsk and Luhansk Region borders as per the map.
> 
> Surprised and dismayed that Ukraine isn't trying to stir any sh!t in Russia yet. A few well-placed political assassinations, random acts of violence against people in Russian uniform within Russia, and mass vandalism against government property could totally shift Putin's attention, with his idgit repressive machine turning inward to look for opportunistic internal enemies, alienating the Russian population and potentially causing their own downfall with the kind of indiscriminate and heavy-handed response that they are known for.
> 
> Oh well, here's hoping they are just waiting for tensions to steep and choosing to start at a time when no one can tell for sure who the real actor is.


Ukraine striking Russian airport over the border, I'd say that indicates they're not afraid to hit back. At the moment anyway.


----------



## 4Eyes

Adieu said:


> Response seems weak.
> 
> I'm kind of hoping this is a short delay intended to highlight that Ukraine played no part in starting this mess, but it is starting to look like Ukrainian leadership is afraid of anything that smells like "escalation" and hoping this whole thing is just a show of force whose only endgame is to move the borders of fake rebels DNR and LNR to actual Donetsk and Luhansk Region borders as per the map.
> 
> Surprised and dismayed that Ukraine isn't trying to stir any sh!t in Russia yet. A few well-placed political assassinations, random acts of violence against people in Russian uniform within Russia, and mass vandalism against government property could totally shift Putin's attention, with his idgit repressive machine turning inward to look for opportunistic internal enemies, alienating the Russian population and potentially causing their own downfall with the kind of indiscriminate and heavy-handed response that they are known for.
> 
> Oh well, here's hoping they are just waiting for tensions to steep and choosing to start at a time when no one can tell for sure who the real actor is.


well, Putin turned out as nazi terrorist with nuke arsenal who lost his mind and is not afraid to use force and attack sovereign state. nuclear weapons are only reason why US and NATO are holding back and he basically threatened to whole world in case they'll try to intervene his actions against Ukraine. and as Ukraine is not NATO member, using NATO forces in Ukraine could be used by Putins regime as trigger to start catastrophic scenarios. 

on the other hand, Putin is holding EU by balls because of their strong dependency on Russian gas and oil. He can destabilize whole EU just by switching off gas and oil transit and then just watch EU slowly fall apart. Once EU falls down he'll come as a hero to save people and they will applaud him... without shooting single missile.

so everybody will sit and watch, pretending that sanctions and humanitarian help is all they can do. I hope


----------



## High Plains Drifter

Dineley said:


> It's so fucked like I don't want further escalation by USA but seeing the Ukrainians dig in against this just absurd level of aggression I hate that they are fighting and dying on their own for absolutely no reason.
> 
> Like I see no end goal for Russia here that makes any sense it's just all so insane.


As trite as this might come across, I sincerely think that Putin is simply hell-bent on projecting his power and hatred to the rest of the world by making the most absolute shit-stained signature on Europa/ Asia that he possibly can before he dies... whether there is an end goal of occupying Ukraine, instilling fear in his adversaries, gaining more land-mass, or simply elevating himself into the ranks of Stalin, Hitler, Pot, Mao, Lenin, etc. I just don't see any method to the madness outside of his own egocentric legacy. His own citizens are against him but as a complete mad-man who answers to no one, he simply gives no fucks about anyone. He is a monster... void of heart... void of soul... no longer human. He's fucking sick.


----------



## bostjan

Well, treaties are difficult.

Ukraine, being invaded pre-emptively for considering to join NATO, means that they have not joined NATO, so is NATO supposed to protect them?

The biggest thing that I see is that Ukraine has the treaty with UK, USA and Russia as co-protectors. If Russia invades, the UK and USA are bound by the treaty to act. But Obama (via the Secretary of State) already said that the treaty was just a "memo," and not legally binding.

The UK and NATO seem to be preparing for Russia to invade Romania or Poland next. I have no idea if this is out of being overly cautious, or if they have reason to believe that Putin is going to try to blitzkrieg through Eastern Europe. If it's the latter, then, well, I hope being vaporized won't hurt too much.


----------



## Adieu

Why exactly was it considered bad taste to conduct "decapitation ops" against rogue heads of state, again?

Seems a lot cheaper, easier, and more humane.


----------



## thebeesknees22

Adieu said:


> Why exactly was it considered bad taste to conduct "decapitation ops" against rogue heads of state, again?
> 
> Seems a lot cheaper, easier, and more humane.



It's basically a way of saying we won't assassinate you as long as you don't try and assassinate one of us. It's just more/less a truce between heads of states to not off each other left and right.


----------



## possumkiller

Pretty sure they are after Zelensky and his family. 

This whole thing feels like the world being a National Geographic cameraman watching a lion cub fighting the alpha that's trying to eat it.


----------



## bostjan

Reports from yesterday of the Russian army fighting with Ukrainian forces less than 15 miles from Kiev.

Does anyone remember, in the mid-2000's, when president-to-be Victor Yushenko was poisoned, and the men who poisoned him fled to Russia, which in turn refused to extradite the men? Weren't sources in the Russian media also accusing Yushenko of being a Nazi, and using similar language that Putin is currently using against Zelensky, despite the fact that Yushenko's family was hiding Jewish children from the Nazis whilst his father was becoming a war hero for the Red Army? If you want to bring up heads of state getting picked off, I can't help but think of how Yushenko was very nearly killed by Putin's spies, and how no one really even remembers that.


----------



## Drew

bostjan said:


> Well, treaties are difficult.
> 
> Ukraine, being invaded pre-emptively for considering to join NATO, means that they have not joined NATO, so is NATO supposed to protect them?
> 
> The biggest thing that I see is that Ukraine has the treaty with UK, USA and Russia as co-protectors. If Russia invades, the UK and USA are bound by the treaty to act. But Obama (via the Secretary of State) already said that the treaty was just a "memo," and not legally binding.
> 
> The UK and NATO seem to be preparing for Russia to invade Romania or Poland next. I have no idea if this is out of being overly cautious, or if they have reason to believe that Putin is going to try to blitzkrieg through Eastern Europe. If it's the latter, then, well, I hope being vaporized won't hurt too much.


Just imagine if Trump were president right now. From what he's saying now, not only would he be egging Russia on, he might even be actively supporting the invasion, potentially with boots on the ground, of a nation that was in the process of trying to join a treaty that wer're a founding member of, as a coalition to defend against aggression from the nation invading them. 

Like, I can't see us not getting thrown out of NATO, or the whole thing collapsing and the EU instead stepping up as a cllective defense body, righteously pissed at both the US and Russia. 

Jesus christ, I can't stress enough how absolutely insane to me that we'd elect a man with no belief at all in maintaining existing US relationships or preserving existing US values, and who would ally with traditional enemies for the very reasons they WERE traditional enemies. 

Putin may not have actually gotten Trump elected, but you can see clearly why he WANTED to.


----------



## BMFan30

Putin is a half inch dick excuse of a man and so are his incel school shooter military opening fire on innocent civilians.

At least Nik Nocturnal is spreading a bit of word about it, although it's not new (this particular war or any other that the west usually doesn't know about) but Russia and Ukraine have been at odds far more than just 8 years. 

The outrage needs to be greater so I thank Nik for going off script and spreading the word in a respectful manner. That's why I chuck anger at the Russian govt and not the it's people because they truly don't want this for Ukraine.


----------



## BMFan30

Putin says he didn't order their military to open fire or drop bombs on civillians yet they do it and the Russians that protest it in Russia are beat down and kicked off the streets.

Putin is fucking territorial pig trying the same old soviet era bullshit by re-istablishing the soviet union which is far older than just the last 8 years. Ukraine will never willingly join them or their manufactured famines.

This is just fucking heartless:


----------



## Adieu

Putin doesn't want no Soviet Union.

Soviet Union woulda executed that twerp for "grand embezzlement of socialist property". Art. 93 pt. 1 of the Soviet Penal code (1962 version): death sentence.

He wants to be Emperor. And he needs to die for the sake of world stability.


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> Putin doesn't want no Soviet Union.
> 
> Soviet Union woulda executed that twerp for "grand embezzlement of socialist property". Art. 93 pt. 1 of the Soviet Penal code (1962 version): death sentence.
> 
> He wants to be Emperor. And he needs to die for the sake of world stability.


You know what I meant, Russia has always fought to try to own Ukraine. It's not just an a recent 8 year conflict like a lot of the west believes.

He's been spewing his nonsense beliefs about it since he took his seat in Russia and now he's acting on it. That's why he's got Russian tanks running over old men leaving the supermarket like I linked in the video.

He's also got police beating down any person protesting the killing of Ukrainian civilians while they protest on Russian soil even if they are a pregnant woman if they dare protest it. You are right he's the Hitler of our time.

I'm from Donetsk but I appreciate anyone who spreads the truth and gets the word out to more people, especially if they are Russian and hate their government as much as I do.

I hope somebody assassinates Putin already because Putin will never walk out onto the streets like Ukrainian president Zelenski has already, along with almost every other city leader in Ukraine. Putins manicure and back pussy can't take it. But I really hope he dies already.


----------



## BMFan30

Drew said:


> Just imagine if Trump were president right now. From what he's saying now, not only would he be egging Russia on, he might even be actively supporting the invasion, potentially with boots on the ground, of a nation that was in the process of trying to join a treaty that wer're a founding member of, as a coalition to defend against aggression from the nation invading them.


If Trump was president he would do more than Biden has by only freezing some Russian assets and accounts like Putin really cares about that right now.

He would have boots on the ground protecting Ukraine without even a glimpse of thought unlike this Biden back pussy has promised but severely under-delievered by "standing up to that Putin bully" then turning around and doing almost nothing about it when push came to shove already. 8 million votes, my ass that lying libcunt that needs a ginger to answer all his questions for him like she's president instead of Biden.


----------



## Adieu

If Trump were President, he'd be hosting Putin's coronation and throwing confetti


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> If Trump were President, he'd be hosting Putin's coronation and throwing confetti


I don't know about all that, I think he would stand up to him despite whatever meeting he's had with Putin previously. I just don't think he would act liberal about it, him being right wing but who knows since he's not actually in office.

I just have to wonder why Biden has puffed his chest out but when the conflict devolved within the last day, he's only frozen some accounts to appear he's doing something. But Trump feels like he would act one way in media then do something else with his actions which is the opposite of what Biden has done.Since Trump understood mainstream media and social media well. But I guess time will tell.

Either way, I really hope this conflict stops because it's starting to feel like WW3 is on the brink already. I wish more help were to come to Ukraine than just crates of weapons to people that are learning to use them starting from today.


----------



## DiezelMonster

According to Putin, if anyone gets involved directly Putin had this to say

"Whoever tries to hinder us ... should know that Russia's response will be immediate. And it will lead you to such consequences that you have never encountered in your history."

I take that as the threat of nuclear war, @BMFan30, that means "boots on the ground" 

At this point there has been chatter of cyber attacks against NATO and NATO countries, which NATO has claimed they will deem an act of war, NATO sent military aid (lethal aid) into Ukraine via Poland.

It's getting dicey


----------



## JSanta

BMFan30 said:


> If Trump was president he would do more than Biden has by only freezing some Russian assets and accounts like Putin really cares about that right now.
> 
> He would have boots on the ground protecting Ukraine without even a glimpse of thought unlike this Biden back pussy has promised but severely under-delievered by "standing up to that Putin bully" then turning around and doing almost nothing about it when push came to shove already. 8 million votes, my ass that lying libcunt that needs a ginger to answer all his questions for him like she's president instead of Biden.



How do you reconcile this line of thinking only days after Trump came out praising Putin as a genius? You know, the same Trump that blackmailed Ukraine and withheld $400 million in defense funding? No matter what you think of Biden, there's no saying what Trump would have actually done. Someone cozying up with dictators is not the kind of leadership I want in the States.


----------



## Xaios

BMFan30 said:


> I don't know about all that, I think he would stand up to him despite whatever meeting he's had with Putin previously. I just don't think he would act liberal about it, him being right wing but who knows since he's not actually in office.


No. Not a chance. In addition to viewing Putin as the perfect autocrat, he is _terrified_ of whatever dirt Putin has on him, and if we know anything about Trump, he looks after himself first and everyone else never. If Putin told him to stay out of the conflict, he wouldn't move a finger. His response would have made Biden's middling level of intervention look like George W Bush with Iraq.


----------



## BMFan30

DiezelMonster said:


> According to Putin, if anyone gets involved directly Putin had this to say
> 
> "Whoever tries to hinder us ... should know that Russia's response will be immediate. And it will lead you to such consequences that you have never encountered in your history."
> 
> I take that as the threat of nuclear war, @BMFan30, that means "boots on the ground"
> 
> At this point there has been chatter of cyber attacks against NATO and NATO countries, which NATO has claimed they will deem an act of war, NATO sent military aid (lethal aid) into Ukraine via Poland.
> 
> It's getting dicey


Yeah, he's come through on more than his word already.

If you watch the vid I linked above you will see the Russian military coming at Ukrainian civilians even if they aren't coming at the Russian soldiers since a Russian tank runs over an old man in a car on the street who's probably leaving a store.


JSanta said:


> How do you reconcile this line of thinking only days after Trump came out praising Putin as a genius? You know, the same Trump that blackmailed Ukraine and withheld $400 million in defense funding? No matter what you think of Biden, there's no saying what Trump would have actually done. Someone cozying up with dictators is not the kind of leadership I want in the States.





Xaios said:


> No. Not a chance. In addition to viewing Putin as the perfect autocrat, he is _terrified_ of whatever dirt Putin has on him, and if we know anything about Trump, he looks after himself first and everyone else never. If Putin told him to stay out of the conflict, he wouldn't move a finger. His response would have made Biden's middling level of intervention look like George W Bush with Iraq.


I didn't know about that @JSanta I don't actually follow American politics so I'm only going off small shitbits and pieces based on him saying one thing in media and doing something else in reality later and my statement was based on that theory alone, not anything else I wasn't aware about.

Biden acted like he will do a lot more than he has done when the time came but barely has done anything to combat Putin in reality. Biden talked a big talk like he will stand up to him but only has frozen some accounts and basically told people not to drink Stolichnaya in the meantime when shit finally did hit the fan.

Don't get me wrong, I'm still grateful for that because it's better than nothing at all but it's still nothing in comparison to the severity of the situation that's unfolding in real time. But Biden may do more soon, I don't actually know what's about to happen in the future.

I'm not defending Trump either, he was on the logs of Epsteins Lolita Express like all the other political dirtbags. Which doesn't put him above Bidens creepy public child groping by any means.


----------



## thebeesknees22

Trump doesn't do anything for anyone period unless it personally benefits him. He's literally said that before (although not word for word)... but his actions clearly speak for itself because that's what he's done time and time again.

Unless someone lined his pockets more than the Russian Oligarchs have, he wouldn't do sh*t. And ....given his track record, he wouldn't do anything even if someone gave him more cash than they do. He'd just take it and run and watch everything burn down in his wake. Why? because it's too much of a risk for himself, and he doesn't risk himself for anyone. Period.

Biden is following through on plans laid out long before he took office. He can't put boots on the ground because that == WW3 (even though I myself would like to see him bomb the shit out of putin)
He can't act on the SWIFT stuff without European countries agreeing to it, which at the moment they aren't. This would most likely be the biggest financial blow it seems.
He has sanctioned Putin himself as of today so all his finances outside of russia are now a target.
Cyber attacks are seemingly on the table (nothing that would hurt the russian people apparently. Sounded very targeted and focused. (i doubt it'll be anything super critical because Russia can also easily do the same to the US which would potentially quickly escalate into WW3 as well))


TL: DR - trump wouldn't do a damn thing other than what he's doing right now, which is fawning over Putin. He did after all get impeached for with holding over $400 million in military aid to Ukraine the first time he was impeached. He doesn't give a damn about Ukraine. Never has, never will.

Europe needs to step up hard in this as well. It can't all be just the US. This is their backyard afterall.


----------



## spudmunkey

BMFan30 said:


> I don't know about all that, I think he would stand up to him despite whatever meeting he's had with Putin previously.



The guy who threatened to withold $400 million in already-appropriated funds unless Ukraine announced an investigation into his political rival? The guy who wanted to pull out of NATO? The guy who didn't seem to do anything when it came out Russia was paying the Talaban a bounty on American soldiers? The guy who abandoned Syrian allies and turned over the base to Russia? The guy who asked if he could use Russian communications equipment so he could talk to Putin without American intelligence agencies knowing about it? The guy whose campaign chair pled guilty to conspiracy to defraud the US while working as a pro-Russian lobbyist in Ukraine and being an unregistered foreign agent? The guy who had the GOP re-write their platform during his campaign to weaken support for Ukraine? The guy who's been trying to get a Trump Tower Moscow deal off the ground since his campaign? The guy who said Crimea would rather be with Russia anyway? The guy who, when asked if he would condem the killing of reporters in Russia, refused and responded with, “There are a lot of killers. Do you think our country is so innocent?” The guy who said, “I want to thank [Putin] because we’re trying to cut down our payroll” after Russia expelled US diplomats? The guy who said sanctions were "being too tough on Putin" after the poisoning of a defector in the UK? And who actually refused to present a public condemnation of an attack on Ukrainian ships, even though one was written for him by his own Secretary of State, because he didn't want to escalate anything? The guy who asked the G7 to let Russia back in, and even tried inviting them in 2020?

That guy is going to "stand up to" Putin?


----------



## nickgray




----------



## Xaios

nickgray said:


> Pure madness.


The fuck is that from?


----------



## BMFan30

thebeesknees22 said:


> Trump doesn't do anything for anyone period unless it personally benefits him. He's literally said that before (although not word for word)... but his actions clearly speak for itself because that's what he's done time and time again.
> 
> Unless someone lined his pockets more than the Russian Oligarchs have, he wouldn't do sh*t. And ....given his track record, he wouldn't do anything even if someone gave him more cash than they do. He'd just take it and run and watch everything burn down in his wake. Why? because it's too much of a risk for himself, and he doesn't risk himself for anyone. Period.
> 
> Biden is following through on plans laid out long before he took office. He can't put boots on the ground because that == WW3 (even though I myself would like to see him bomb the shit out of putin)
> He can't act on the SWIFT stuff without European countries agreeing to it, which at the moment they aren't. This would most likely be the biggest financial blow it seems.
> He has sanctioned Putin himself as of today so all his finances outside of russia are now a target.
> Cyber attacks are seemingly on the table (nothing that would hurt the russian people apparently. Sounded very targeted and focused. (i doubt it'll be anything super critical because Russia can also easily do the same to the US which would potentially quickly escalate into WW3 as well))
> 
> 
> TL: DR - trump wouldn't do a damn thing other than what he's doing right now, which is fawning over Putin. He did after all get impeached for with holding over $400 million in military aid to Ukraine the first time he was impeached. He doesn't give a damn about Ukraine. Never has, never will.
> 
> Europe needs to step up hard in this as well. It can't all be just the US. This is their backyard afterall.





spudmunkey said:


> The guy who threatened to withold $400 million in already-appropriated funds unless Ukraine announced an investigation into his political rival? The guy who wanted to pull out of NATO? The guy who didn't seem to do anything when it came out Russia was paying the Talaban a bounty on American soldiers? The guy who abandoned Syrian allies and turned over the base to Russia? The guy who asked if he could use Russian communications equipment so he could talk to Putin without American intelligence agencies knowing about it? The guy whose campaign chair pled guilty to conspiracy to defraud the US while working as a pro-Russian lobbyist in Ukraine and being an unregistered foreign agent? The guy who had the GOP re-write their platform during his campaign to weaken support for Ukraine? The guy who's been trying to get a Trump Tower Moscow deal off the ground since his campaign? The guy who said Crimea would rather be with Russia anyway? The guy who, when asked if he would condem the killing of reporters in Russia, refused and responded with, “There are a lot of killers. Do you think our country is so innocent?” The guy who said, “I want to thank [Putin] because we’re trying to cut down our payroll” after Russia expelled US diplomats? The guy who said sanctions were "being too tough on Putin" after the poisoning of a defector in the UK? And who actually refused to present a public condemnation of an attack on Ukrainian ships, even though one was written for him by his own Secretary of State, because he didn't want to escalate anything? The guy who asked the G7 to let Russia back in, and even tried inviting them in 2020?
> 
> That guy is going to "stand up to" Putin?


Thanks for clearing things up, along with the other 3 or 4 users that posted before you. I have already changed my opinion which was based only on one thing since I mentioned I don't actually really follow American politics so I was heavily unaware of most of it. My previous opinion was based on Trump saying one thing in media and doing another + him being right wing, not on anything specific.

If you read my massive post before you, then you'll see I wasn't even really rating Trump above Biden because they both seem to be massive nonces from Biden publicly groping kids and Trump being on the logs of the lolita express funded by Epstein.

I was only partly aware of some of the things Trump has said about Ukraine and at the time chalked that up to him pulling switcheroos but I wasn't aware of everything you and some other posters stated.


----------



## BMFan30

4Eyes said:


> well, Putin turned out as nazi terrorist


Putin hit civilians while they slept like Hitler too.



High Plains Drifter said:


> As trite as this might come across, I sincerely think that Putin is simply hell-bent on projecting his power and hatred to the rest of the world by making the most absolute shit-stained signature on Europa/ Asia that he possibly can before he dies... whether there is an end goal of occupying Ukraine, instilling fear in his adversaries, gaining more land-mass, or simply elevating himself into the ranks of Stalin, Hitler, Pot, Mao, Lenin, etc. I just don't see any method to the madness outside of his own egocentric legacy. His own citizens are against him but as a complete mad-man who answers to no one, he simply gives no fucks about anyone. He is a monster... void of heart... void of soul... no longer human. He's fucking sick.


That's why he sent the most unexperienced, young soldiers that barely got past their military training in first to try to divide Ukrain into fractions which will be easier to split from there. He might go ahead and start invading the neighbors of Ukraine after that. I agree with you though, this isn't going to end well for him as soon as other countries start getting more involved. Putin is just a Nazi.


LostTheTone said:


> The one thing that I don't think Putin is is a communist idealogue


I've linked a vid in here that shows Russian tanks with communist flags on them, if it wasn't that 18 min video I posted then it was posted to that same "Channel 4 News" YT channel recently today.


----------



## thebeesknees22

BMFan30 said:


> Thanks for clearing things up, along with the other 3 or 4 users that posted before you. I have already changed my opinion which was based only on one thing since I mentioned I don't actually really follow American politics so I was heavily unaware of most of it. My previous opinion was based on Trump saying one thing in media and doing another + him being right wing, not on anything specific.
> 
> If you read my massive post before you, then you'll see I wasn't even really rating Trump above Biden because they both seem to be massive nonces from Biden publicly groping kids and Trump being on the logs of the lolita express funded by Epstein.
> 
> I was only partly aware of some of the things Trump has said about Ukraine and at the time chalked that up to him pulling switcheroos but I wasn't aware of everything you and some other posters stated.



ha it took me too long to write my response. I was writing and doing meetings at the same time. By the time I hit reply there were a bunch of other responses


----------



## Randy

Does Ukraine have a standing army? Why are all the pictures of the people defending Kyiv dudes in street clothes?


----------



## BMFan30

Randy said:


> Does Ukraine have a standing army? Why are all the pictures of the people defending Kyiv dudes in street clothes?


Yes, but barely. Their Airbase is especially weak. When you compare that to Russias behemoth army then you start to realize why Ukraine has been mobilized, forcing everyone from age 18-60 to stay in the country and fight.

As sad as it is for them to be taking guns out of crates for the first time, it seems to be the only option. Even with some women staying behind to fight including some women who are leaders of cities along with president Zelenski out on Ukrainian streets.



thebeesknees22 said:


> ha it took me too long to write my response. I was writing and doing meetings at the same time. By the time I hit reply there were a bunch of other responses


No worries. I'm glad you and the other posters got back to me and cleared things up, swiftly changing my opinion to the right one instead of assuming based of basically nothing at all.


----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> Does Ukraine have a standing army? Why are all the pictures of the people defending Kyiv dudes in street clothes?



It seems like an odd game of cat and mouse between combat recon units and special ops so far.

No sign of head on armor vs. armor or massed infantry vs. infantry engagements anywhere.

Putinists appear to be scouting and trying a half-baked attempt at shock and awe from air and artillery, while Ukraine is deploying irregulars all over the place to avoid getting caught off guard by a sudden offensive.


----------



## BMFan30

LostTheTone said:


> It's certainly very unclear exactly what Russia is hoping to achieve here. It's not like owning all of Ukraine would suddenly change Russia's economic woes. And while this kind of adventurism does play well within Russia, it's not like there are legitimate elections anyway. So what is the point exactly?



Actually owning all of Ukraine will most definitely up his ante in currency. There's an old joke that says Ukraine has "chernaya zemlya" where you can piss in it today and find a fruit tree in it's place tomorrow. Basically Ukrainian soil is glistening pitch black, which means it's rich in minerals that easily will grow anything quickly.

Plus, you know; he will gain a whole country which is in itself profitable no matter what type of soil it has. Probably will go ahead and grab Moldova while he's at it, then get greedy and want neighboring countries like Hitler did.


----------



## Adieu

It's called chernozem and it's a prairie soil type, not a joke.

It's useful, but the days of going up against the world for farmland are pretty much over. Especially for near-empty frikkin Russia.

It's the population he'd want, except they don't want HIM and his delusion that there's only a small percentage of hardasses against him is very far from the truth.


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> It's called chernozem and it's a prairie soil type, not a joke.
> 
> It's useful, but the days of going up against the world for farmland are pretty much over. Especially for near-empty frikkin Russia.
> 
> It's the population he'd want, except they don't want HIM and his delusion that there's only a small percentage of hardasses against him is very far from the truth.


Thanks I was hesitant to post that, trying to edit it on the go knowing I knew I got the term slightly wrong off the top of my memory but it is "chernozem" the joke is pissing into it but the reality is it's extremely useful soil. I wasn't saying that the soil is the sole reason he is invading, I was just saying if he did, it would benefit him in the end as an adjacent reason.

If it was the population he'd want then it would make no sense to get it, since most of the population is leaving to be refugees in neighboring countries that are gracefully accepting them which I'm grateful for. The population that has stayed, as you stated don't want him.

So I think you're right he's as fucked in the head as amphetamine Hitler with no afterthought on what the end game would be even if he was victorious. Only 2 things will happen. He won't be able to take it, or he will and start another world war. Either way, he is fucked in the head like you said already.


----------



## spudmunkey

Russia is already the world's largest exporter of wheat, so it'd seem odd to try to acquire more farmland.

The "we don't want Nato at our border" has been such a hilarious rationalization, because taking over Ukraine would mean Russia would go from bordering three NATO countries to 7.


----------



## Randy




----------



## Cyanide_Anima

My conservative friends are all angry that, in their opinion, the world is just leaving Ukraine behind to fend for themselves. That more direct actions need to be taken. And I'm just sitting here "Like what, bro? We announce we are going in after being warned by an insane person openly brandishing nuclear weapons that there will be dire consequences if any other countries take action?"

Are people really this dense? A lot of these guys are military, so of course they believe that the US army can just waltz right in like fucking GI Joes and just simply take Putin out no prob. It worked that easy with the middle east right? and those guys are just shlubs with rusty AKs. So what if Putin has nukes, a modern air force, missiles, a Navy, etc. I Mean, we got guys who wear BERETS. BERETS, man. BERETS.


----------



## Adieu

Cyanide_Anima said:


> My conservative friends are all angry that, in their opinion, the world is just leaving Ukraine behind to fend for themselves. That more direct actions need to be taken. And I'm just sitting here "Like what, bro? We announce we are going in after being warned by an insane person openly brandishing nuclear weapons that there will be dire consequences if any other countries take action?"
> 
> Are people really this dense? A lot of these guys are military, so of course they believe that the US army can just waltz right in like fucking GI Joes and just simply take Putin out no prob. It worked that easy with the middle east right? and those guys are just shlubs with rusty AKs. So what if Putin has nukes, a modern air force, missiles, a Navy, etc. I Mean, we got guys who wear BERETS. BERETS, man. BERETS.



Put a bounty on his azz and let capitalism sort him out


----------



## Cyanide_Anima

Adieu said:


> Put a bounty on his azz and let capitalism sort him out


Likely happened days ago.


----------



## tedtan

Cyanide_Anima said:


> My conservative friends are all angry that, in their opinion, the world is just leaving Ukraine behind to fend for themselves. That more direct actions need to be taken. And I'm just sitting here "Like what, bro? We announce we are going in after being warned by an insane person openly brandishing nuclear weapons that there will be dire consequences if any other countries take action?"
> 
> Are people really this dense? A lot of these guys are military, so of course they believe that the US army can just waltz right in like fucking GI Joes and just simply take Putin out no prob. It worked that easy with the middle east right? and those guys are just shlubs with rusty AKs. So what if Putin has nukes, a modern air force, missiles, a Navy, etc. I Mean, we got guys who wear BERETS. BERETS, man. BERETS.



True, but the Middle East was asymmetrical war, whereas the US vs. Russia would symmetrical war. It may not seem like it at surface levels, but those are VERY different engagements with asymmetrical war being much more difficult it win*.


* barring nukes by the symmetrical players.


----------



## possumkiller

Cyanide_Anima said:


> My conservative friends are all angry that, in their opinion, the world is just leaving Ukraine behind to fend for themselves. That more direct actions need to be taken. And I'm just sitting here "Like what, bro? We announce we are going in after being warned by an insane person openly brandishing nuclear weapons that there will be dire consequences if any other countries take action?"
> 
> Are people really this dense? A lot of these guys are military, so of course they believe that the US army can just waltz right in like fucking GI Joes and just simply take Putin out no prob. It worked that easy with the middle east right? and those guys are just shlubs with rusty AKs. So what if Putin has nukes, a modern air force, missiles, a Navy, etc. I Mean, we got guys who wear BERETS. BERETS, man. BERETS.


I thought the conservatives were on Putin's side?


----------



## Adieu

possumkiller said:


> I thought the conservatives were on Putin's side?


Putin might yet save the Republican party from Trump.

Russian tanks rolling around Europe and some smug asshat threatening anyone who even thinks of intervening with a nuclear "or else" resonates strongly with older Americans


----------



## OmegaSlayer

I absolutely don't like the behaviour in any part involved, none is clean and innocent
From Russia, to Ukraine, to Nato, to US, to EU...and not in the last year, in the last 70 years


----------



## Adieu

OmegaSlayer said:


> I absolutely don't like the behaviour in any part involved, none is clean and innocent
> From Russia, to Ukraine, to Nato, to US, to EU...and not in the last year, in the last 70 years



Huh? What did Ukraine do wrong?


----------



## OmegaSlayer

Adieu said:


> Huh? What did Ukraine do wrong?


Trust UE, US and Nato
Ukraine should have remained neutral, like Swizterland, Finland, Sweden and other more wise Countries
There's nothing good to gain by taking sides in wars and "alliances"
West is still trying to erase hunger from Africa by selling weapons instead of really helping
Also, not accepting nazist like Battalion Azov and Pravyi Sektor

Ukraina unfortunately has been totally fooled and used
The West wanted a case against Russia, they got it and now you've been left alone with the youth dying, which is unacceptable


----------



## Adieu

No they stayed quite neutral for way too long which is exactly how they ended up in this situation


----------



## LostTheTone

spudmunkey said:


> Russia is already the world's largest exporter of wheat, so it'd seem odd to try to acquire more farmland.
> 
> The "we don't want Nato at our border" has been such a hilarious rationalization, because taking over Ukraine would mean Russia would go from bordering three NATO countries to 7.



Indeed - This isn't the old Soviet Union who had a chronic inability to farm stuff effectively and saw an annual humiliating struggle to source grain from capitalist countries. Ukraine is a lovely greenhouse and yes you can grow stuff there. But Russia actually is getting more farmable land because of climate change.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> No they stayed quite neutral for way too long which is exactly how they ended up in this situation



Ehhhh... That's complicated.

Remember, the USSR only closed shop in 1991, and Ukraine is certainly much less westernized than say Poland. Russia has always been trying to cling on to it, and they are also very corrupt an only arguably democratic. So aligning with NATO (the only real way to not be "neutral") was always going to be really difficult. 

Finland and Sweden have the privilege of choosing not to join NATO - I suspect that they actually will change thier minds following this, because both countries are quite worried about the Russians already - but they are neutral like Switzerland. They are modern democracies with modern armies, and with strong reservists. It's a political decision only, and they could join NATO tomorrow if they wanted to. 

Maybe if Ukraine had pushed for membership to NATO in 2010 this wouldn't be happening, but it is arguable whether Ukraine is even eligable to join in 2020.


----------



## possumkiller

LostTheTone said:


> they are neutral like Switzerland.


I really question the neutrality of a country that can be surrounded by fascists on all sides and not be taken over by any of them. Seriously, what would anyone do to Hitler if he took Switzerland? Declare war on him? Not to mention their profiting off of shady business dealings with the scum of the earth.


----------



## LostTheTone

possumkiller said:


> I really question the neutrality of a country that can be surrounded by fascists on all sides and not be taken over by any of them. Seriously, what would anyone do to Hitler if he took Switzerland? Declare war on him? Not to mention their profiting off of shady business dealings with the scum of the earth.




Oh of course you do 

You see a nation who tries to avoid war, arms themselves appropriately to put off invasion, and who shoots down dozens of German planes that dared to enter their airspace and you say "Yeah, they're obviously Nazis". 

Did you know Ireland was neutral in the war too? You gunna start throwing baseless bullshit at them too?


----------



## possumkiller

LostTheTone said:


> Oh of course you do
> 
> You see a nation who tries to avoid war, arms themselves appropriately to put off invasion, and who shoots down dozens of German planes that dared to enter their airspace and you say "Yeah, they're obviously Nazis".
> 
> Did you know Ireland was neutral in the war too? You gunna start throwing baseless bullshit at them too?


Ireland wasn't an island in a sea of axis powers. 

Were there any other countries Hitler invaded that were trying to avoid war I wonder? 

Switzerland's military would have fared as well as the other European armies that tried to resist the blitzkrieg. 

There is a reason why the axis never felt like they needed to take Switzerland. It's pretty suspicious if you ask me.


----------



## LostTheTone

possumkiller said:


> Ireland wasn't an island in a sea of axis powers.
> 
> Were there any other countries Hitler invaded that were trying to avoid war I wonder?
> 
> Switzerland's military would have fared as well as the other European armies that tried to resist the blitzkrieg.
> 
> There is a reason why the axis never felt like they needed to take Switzerland. It's pretty suspicious if you ask me.



The reason they never tried to invade Switzerland was because Switzerland had no strategic value but is made entirely of mountains and was very vigorously defended. So what would be the point?

Sweden also was not invaded, despite bordering occupied Norway on one side and Finland, who had been forced onto the German side of the war by the Soviet invasion. Why not invade Sweden? They have iron ore that the Germans desperately needed! Why not invade Portugal for it's tungsten? 

Just... Stop.

You clearly do not know the history of this.


----------



## OmegaSlayer

GDP in Ukraine *averaged 93.39 USD Billion from 1987 until 2020*, reaching an all time high of 183.31 USD Billion in 2013 and a record low of 31.26 USD Billion in 2000

That's when Ukraine started to be buddy buddy with Europeans

Which reminds me exactly of what happens in my Italy


1997 is when we started be buddy buddy with European Union

I was there, I was already an adult and I can tell you that everything EU touches starts to wither in favour of Germany becoming richer; Germany which, coincidentely, started ransacking Ukraine

Italy was a marvelous place, after 25 years of European Union it has become a third world toilet

I also want people to remember Afghanistan, Iraq, Lybia...all people that was left by themselves after a war

I don't justify neither Putin, nor whoever starts a war, what I say is that

"War is the massacre of people that don't know each other, for the interest of people that know each other but they don't massacre each other"

We people shed the tears, but few count the dollars...we can't have peace if Governments spend more money for weapons than for Research & Development


----------



## LostTheTone

OmegaSlayer said:


> GDP in Ukraine *averaged 93.39 USD Billion from 1987 until 2020*, reaching an all time high of 183.31 USD Billion in 2013 and a record low of 31.26 USD Billion in 2000
> 
> That's when Ukraine started to be buddy buddy with Europeans
> 
> Which reminds me exactly of what happens in my Italy
> View attachment 103881
> 
> 1997 is when we started be buddy buddy with European Union
> 
> I was there, I was already an adult and I can tell you that everything EU touches starts to wither in favour of Germany becoming richer; Germany which, coincidentely, started ransacking Ukraine
> 
> Italy was a marvelous place, after 25 years of European Union it has become a third world toilet
> 
> I also want people to remember Afghanistan, Iraq, Lybia...all people that was left by themselves after a war
> 
> I don't justify neither Putin, nor whoever starts a war, what I say is that
> 
> "War is the massacre of people that don't know each other, for the interest of people that know each other but they don't massacre each other"
> 
> We people shed the tears, but few count the dollars...we can't have peace if Governments spend more money for weapons than for Research & Development



Peter Hitchens calls the EU "the continuation of Germany by other means". And he's right, honestly. The Euro in particular is a mechanism that allows Germany's hyper-competitive economy to use a much softer currency, justified by the aggregate less competitive economies that are part of it. Germany, as a powerhouse exporter, loves having a weaker currency because it makes their goods cheaper everywhere else, and makes investing into Germany cheaper.

But countries like Italy and Greece, who should have substantially weaker currencies than the aggregate Euro (ie, they are dragged up by Germany) are really hamstrung because their exports are now more expensive, and its harder to attract foreign investment. This means that its effectively impossible for them to become more competitive, in either relative or absolute terms. Normally they would print money, deflate the currency, attract foreign investment and then improve the economic underpinnings. But they can't. 

For any EU member not from north West Europe, the EU is a system whereby Germany bribes you not to ever compete with their industry, while also regulating vaping and a million and one weird things. And if you're dirt poor like Romania (or Ukraine) maybe that's a good deal. But if you are a country like Italy or Spain or even Greece, this is not a good deal.


----------



## Adieu

OmegaSlayer said:


> GDP in Ukraine *averaged 93.39 USD Billion from 1987 until 2020*, reaching an all time high of 183.31 USD Billion in 2013 and a record low of 31.26 USD Billion in 2000
> 
> That's when Ukraine started to be buddy buddy with Europeans
> 
> Which reminds me exactly of what happens in my Italy
> View attachment 103881
> 
> 1997 is when we started be buddy buddy with European Union
> 
> I was there, I was already an adult and I can tell you that everything EU touches starts to wither in favour of Germany becoming richer; Germany which, coincidentely, started ransacking Ukraine
> 
> Italy was a marvelous place, after 25 years of European Union it has become a third world toilet
> 
> I also want people to remember Afghanistan, Iraq, Lybia...all people that was left by themselves after a war
> 
> I don't justify neither Putin, nor whoever starts a war, what I say is that
> 
> "War is the massacre of people that don't know each other, for the interest of people that know each other but they don't massacre each other"
> 
> We people shed the tears, but few count the dollars...we can't have peace if Governments spend more money for weapons than for Research & Development



NO

2014 is when Russia brazenly openly annexed a huge chunk called Crimea under a bullsh!t referendum conducted by "friendly men" (debadged Russian servicemen with assault rifles) and concurrently ran a false flag "rebellion" by mercenary paramilitaries in two other regions, Luhansk and Donetsk, which it DIDN'T recognize and maintained as an open wound to distract attention from the whole Crimea hijack

That's how the economy got buggered. Losing two of your most productive states and one middling one and having a festering shooting war with mercs whose sole mission is to maintain it WITHOUT WINNING OR ENDING IT tends to do that.

Don't project your local issues.

PS also of note: Russian economy never regained its pre-2014 levels either.


----------



## Adieu

For Putin, "meddling with Ukraine" is probably what he sees as his life's work (AND so far, so failed at that).

It's the only thing he has ever intentionally and systematically done that wasn't directly related to generating personal profits.

And also the only thing that has lost him lots and lots of status and money.

In the hundreds of billions of dollars of personal property and the low trillions in lost national GDP.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> For Putin, "meddling with Ukraine" is probably what he sees as his life's work (AND so far, so failed at that).
> 
> It's the only thing he has ever intentionally and systematically done that wasn't directly related to generating personal profits.
> 
> And also the only thing that has lost him status and money.
> 
> In the hundreds of billions of dollars of personal property and the low trillions in lost national GDP.



So why is he doing it then?


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> NO
> 
> 2014 is when Russia brazenly openly annexed a huge chunk called Crimea under a bullsh!t referendum conducted by "friendly men" (debadged Russian servicemen with assault rifles) and concurrently ran a false flag "rebellion" by mercenary paramilitaries in two other regions, Luhansk and Donetsk, which it DIDN'T recognize and maintained as an open wound to distract attention from the whole Crimea hijack
> 
> That's how the economy got buggered. Losing two of your most productive states and one middling one and having a festering shooting war with mercs whose sole mission is to maintain it WITHOUT WINNING OR ENDING IT tends to do that.
> 
> Don't project your local issues.
> 
> PS also of note: Russian economy never regained its pre-2014 levels either.



All of this goes under "Ukraine being ransacked". This is the same period as things like Hunter Biden's involvement with Barsima. Ukraine deliberately tried to open itself up to the west, and that meant that a lot of money starting pumping in and out of Ukraine, but it's nominal economy did not really benefit, only the high level business economy with profit ending up in brown paper envelopes, not being spent in Ukrainian stores.


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> So why is he doing it then?



Pride, dick measurement contest, stubbornness, losing gambler's tunnel vision, weird obsessive stalker crush.... take your pick

He has in Ukraine: poisoned presidential candidates; installed and lost presidents; annexed provinces openly, covertly, temporarily, and permanently; fought 2.5 wars, bought out entire political parties; created 2 "republics", weathered years of sanctions that saw GDP growth go negative and the ruble decline 3x against the dollar; built circumvention pipelines, pissed off all of Europe with manufactured will they/won't they gas shutoff scares; sold gas to same Europeans at a loss for a decade just to hook them; and raised a whole freaking generation of Russians on some fairy tales about genocidal sorta-Polish Ukrainian Nazi collaborators poisoning the "good ones" against him

It's like CIA vs. Fidel but even clumsier and stupider. And with far higher relative antes.

Oh and he spends literally BILLIONS on mostly anti-Ukraine propaganda. Yearly.

It's the stupidest possible thing he could have done with all that money and power. Especially in retrospect, since it would have been far far cheaper and more effective to just charm bribe and subsidize himself into their hearts 20 years ago.


----------



## StevenC

LostTheTone said:


> Did you know Ireland was neutral in the war too? You gunna start throwing baseless bullshit at them too?


Lol, no they weren't. They were playing both sides. Plenty of Irish people fought in both wars, but in the first the rest used the opportunity to attack the British and gain independence. In the second they were negotiating with the Nazis to get Northern Ireland.


----------



## Randy

Worth noting that Ukraine was historically crippled by corruption (that included influence by Russian oligarchs) and that was actually a key point of contention in the Giuliani "stuff", the quid pro quo phone call (which was dangling anti tank missiles Ukraine needed against Russia, btw hmmm) and the blackballing and ouster of Marie Yovanovitch.

Ukraine and the west with making inroads with expelling Russian interests and surprise once things got close, first Russia tried to disarm Ukraine using the leader from the West they compromised (Trump) and when he was removed, they decided to stage a full scale invasion.

It's some bullshit to blame this on Hunter Biden, like some low level nepotism and normal "pay to play" from the last decade is coequal with shelling civilians RIGHT NOW. I wonder what the fuck if wrong with people sometimes.


----------



## Adieu

Lol Hunter who? That guy just pimped out his last name to a company looking to make its roster look more posh than it was at first glance.

He has sh!t-all to do with anything.


----------



## Crungy

If Hunter were involved I think it would be purely accidental in his quest for nose beers and fucking women half his age.


----------



## Adieu

Crungy said:


> If Hunter were involved I think it would be purely accidental in his quest for nose beers and fucking women half his age.



Yeah, that fool looks to be the approximate equivalent of a Trump son


----------



## Crungy

Maybe a little likable in a Kramer sort of way. Maybe.


----------



## 4Eyes

I'm not sure what's more frightening, the fact it's happening, or the fact that Russia openly declared war to Finland and Sweeden, in case they choose thier side and are threathening world with nukes. Based on recent statements from russian government representatives. I know it's just dick swinging, but still when Putin says he's ready to nuke the west, you take it bit more seriously like when Kim said it in the past for instance.


----------



## KnightBrolaire

I'm seeing firsthand reports that say the Ukrainians have killed 3500 russians already. Russians have been caught trying to infiltrate the ukrainian military, and they've been firing rockets at civilian apartment buildings. Ukrainian govt is handing out AKs and broadcasting how to make molotovs to the civilians.


----------



## OmegaSlayer

Adieu said:


> NO
> 
> 2014 is when Russia brazenly openly annexed a huge chunk called Crimea under a bullsh!t referendum conducted by "friendly men" (debadged Russian servicemen with assault rifles) and concurrently ran a false flag "rebellion" by mercenary paramilitaries in two other regions, Luhansk and Donetsk, which it DIDN'T recognize and maintained as an open wound to distract attention from the whole Crimea hijack
> 
> That's how the economy got buggered. Losing two of your most productive states and one middling one and having a festering shooting war with mercs whose sole mission is to maintain it WITHOUT WINNING OR ENDING IT tends to do that.
> 
> Don't project your local issues.
> 
> PS also of note: Russian economy never regained its pre-2014 levels either.


Your mistake here is believing that the issues are local

They're all but local

In fact the boycott of Russia is not buying gas from them, from which Italy, for example, depends on the 49% of National necessity

So yeah, we cripple our economy, and we're forced to buy less available, less quality and pricier gas from United States

Ukraine loses, Russia loses, part of EU lose, United States win

It's a while that United States fill tankers and they sent them abroad without a destination, they are directed to the harbour which pays more

That's capitalism 101 and it makes me quite sick


----------



## Randy

I'll take crooked oil profiteering whoever the beneficiary over... whatever you call what's going on right now.


----------



## Randy




----------



## LostTheTone

KnightBrolaire said:


> I'm seeing firsthand reports that say the Ukrainians have killed 3500 russians already. Russians have been caught trying to infiltrate the ukrainian military, and they've been firing rockets at civilian apartment buildings. Ukrainian govt is handing out AKs and broadcasting how to make molotovs to the civilians.



I believe it that the Ukrainians are making a proper fight of it - Fighting in the open field was never going to go well for them, but fighting in and around cities and civilian infrastructure is very very hard for a modern army. Tanks are great and all, but anti-tank missiles are man portable and can be fired from pretty much anywhere anytime. 

If the Ukrainians can bog the Russians down in and around Kiev then it'll take a long time to get this cleared up, and every day that Ukraine still stands, Russia is losing face. Ukraine is a tiny irrelevance, and if Russia can't just toss them aside then Russia aren't up to snuff. Look at how bitter and drawn out the fighting was in Chechnya. Sure, Grozny gave in eventually. But "eventually" does not make anyone look good.


----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


> I'll take crooked oil profiteering whoever the beneficiary over... whatever you call what's going on right now.



What is going on right now is literally the same thing as the profiteering. 

The West profiteers through crooked business dealings, Russia comes in and installs a puppet regime. But it's the same thing. In a lot of places, people simply don't want to do crooked deals with the Russians (or Chinese). Hunter Biden is clearly an idiot, and a personal liability, but he won't have you murdered for looking at him funny.


----------



## Randy

I don't consider garden variety white collar corruption to be the same as civilians getting blown up.


----------



## ArtDecade

OmegaSlayer said:


> Your mistake here is believing that the issues are local
> 
> They're all but local
> 
> In fact the boycott of Russia is not buying gas from them, from which Italy, for example, depends on the 49% of National necessity
> 
> So yeah, we cripple our economy, and we're forced to buy less available, less quality and pricier gas from United States
> 
> Ukraine loses, Russia loses, part of EU lose, United States win
> 
> It's a while that United States fill tankers and they sent them abroad without a destination, they are directed to the harbour which pays more
> 
> That's capitalism 101 and it makes me quite sick



I'm sorry. You have utterly, utterly lost the plot. You are lashing out at Capitalism 101 as you hit every single point of Putin's propaganda list. He is playing you like a toy piano. And that is coming from someone that isn't even a capitalist.


----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


> I don't consider garden variety white collar corruption to be the same as civilians getting blown up.



I never said they were the same, I said that both are just different means to the same end.


----------



## Randy

ArtDecade said:


> I'm sorry. You have utterly, utterly lost the plot. You are lashing out at Capitalism 101 as you hit every single point of Putin's propaganda list. He is playing you like a toy piano. And that is coming from someone that isn't even a capitalist.


Russia had a long, fucked up history of threatening to eradicate the rest of the civilized world. After the fall of the Soviet Union, they had that hole to climb out of in trying to rebuild their economy and rejoin the rest of the world.

If Russia were an actual civilized country, they'd probably be there by now (see: Japan and Vietnam). The mitigating factor in what holds Russia back is corrupt leadership frequently engaging in human rights abuses just to make sure *they* remain in power internally. Russia's been crawling their way back to relevance with shit like Putin poisoning dissenters weighing them down all the way.

I don't know if Putin lost his marbles or he's getting impatient/desperate or the sanctions based on his personal actions are too much for them to overcome but he seemingly unilaterally decided to blow the top off of diplomacy and joining the West, and now he's trying to just strong arm or topple them (USSR v2.0) 

Relevant because all this talk about the unfair distribution of oil money or whatever fucking bullshit is 100% the result of the shitty internal shit Putin does that's bled over into his ability to lead or negotiate at the international level.


----------



## ArtDecade

Every step the Russian people have made since the collapse of the Soviet Union has been in spite of Putin and his leadership. There is more amassed Russian oligarch wealth in Miami than in all the hands of all actual Russians living in their country. The greatest hypocrisy is Putin lashing out at the west from his yacht in a German bay while drinking wine from France and checking his American stocks on an iPhone. He is not looking to return to the Soviet Union. He isn't a communist. He is an out and out dictator. What the world needs is for Russians to take back the reigns from their leadership and to finally sort out the direction they want their country to take.


----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


> Relevant because all this talk about the unfair distribution of oil money or whatever fucking bullshit is 100% the result of the shitty internal shit Putin does that's bled over into his ability to lead or negotiate at the international level.



It's not really a "distribution of wealth" thing. The life cycle of dictatorships is that a brutal autocrat takes over, the milk it for all its worth, and eventually they lose their grip on power and are overthrown by the next brutal autocrat.

There have never been any time when Russia was not an autocracy, the only question is whether the present dictators regime will last longer than the man himself.


----------



## LostTheTone

ArtDecade said:


> What the world needs is for Russians to take back the reigns from their leadership and to finally sort out the direction they want their country to take.



That would be lovely, but that's not going to happen. Democracies don't sprout from the ground like dragons teeth. It took Britain 700 years to go from autocracy to democracy, from Magna Carta to universal suffrage. 

Control isn't taken overnight. It takes generations.


----------



## StevenC

The best thing about P&CE used to be that we all generally respected that each of us had a basic understanding of history, politics, political science, economics, and reality. 

Now it's just a "no I know the true truth" fest.


----------



## ArtDecade

LostTheTone said:


> That would be lovely, but that's not going to happen. Democracies don't sprout from the ground like dragons teeth. It took Britain 700 years to go from autocracy to democracy, from Magna Carta to universal suffrage.
> 
> Control isn't taken overnight. It takes generations.


Of course. We are looking at growing pains. And although I would normally agree with you that it takes generations for real change to occur, I think we are living in drastically different times due to the internet and ability to communicate instantly. This means that shifts in reasoning and "groupthink" can happen happen at a much different rate. But will that equate to "real" change? I dunno.


----------



## Randy

Are there any teeth to this SWIFT shit? At this point everyone but US looking to remove Russia, but I'm not 100% how much Putin's money is passing through official channels anyway? It still blows my mind excluding a country that's invading another one from bank transfers is considered "the nuclear option"


----------



## Randy

StevenC said:


> The best thing about P&CE used to be that we all generally respected that each of us had a basic understanding of history, politics, political science, economics, and reality.
> 
> Now it's just a "no I know the true truth" fest.


I think those skirmishes always break out from time to time.


----------



## thebeesknees22

Randy said:


> Are there any teeth to this SWIFT shit? At this point everyone but US looking to remove Russia, but I'm not 100% how much Putin's money is passing through official channels anyway? It still blows my mind excluding a country that's invading another one from bank transfers is considered "the nuclear option"



From what I understand it's Germany and other European countries that are holding up the SWIFT action since it'll effect them quite a bit. And I assume Biden won't announce support for that until he actually has the support from enough countries to make that happen. That's the gist I got from my mild digging anyway. I could be wrong on that of course.

It seems like there would be some teeth to it. It would essentially cut off Russia's banking system from the rest of the world. Like your personal banking accounts all actually have a SWIFT code attached to them for each bank etc... if that's gone then...


----------



## Randy




----------



## TedEH

StevenC said:


> The best thing about P&CE used to be that we all generally respected that each of us had a basic understanding of history, politics, political science, economics, and reality.


Do you mean the forum section, or the internet as a whole, or in life in general? Either one works, really.


----------



## 4Eyes

Randy said:


> Are there any teeth to this SWIFT shit? At this point everyone but US looking to remove Russia, but I'm not 100% how much Putin's money is passing through official channels anyway? It still blows my mind excluding a country that's invading another one from bank transfers is considered "the nuclear option"


According to latest news only two countries were blocking removing Russia from SWIFT, IT and DE...and I've seen some news that IT is going to support it, so it's DE turn. And as they're going to deliver weapons to Ukraine I think that DE will support RU ban from SWIFT as well. Especially, when RU doesn't seem to stop and ordered wide spread attack across whole UKR

edit: full EU support for removing RU from SWIFT


----------



## LostTheTone

ArtDecade said:


> Of course. We are looking at growing pains. And although I would normally agree with you that it takes generations for real change to occur, I think we are living in drastically different times due to the internet and ability to communicate instantly. This means that shifts in reasoning and "groupthink" can happen happen at a much different rate. But will that equate to "real" change? I dunno.



I did my post-grad with a a Chinese pro-democracy activist who was effectively living in exile. He said that in China the normal people are deeply ambivalent at the prospect of democracy. On the one hand, they understand that it is the only real answer to party tyranny. On the other, they are terrified of the cost of overthrowing the party, and equally scared of what will happen in a nation of 2bil if the central authority stops working even for a day. 

There is a historic memory of famines and purges that runs deep. And so, for the time being, their fear overrides their hope for change. Because, in a sense, the party do make the trains run on time, or at least keep starvation to a minimum.

I think the same is probably true of Russia. The message can spread quickly, and Russia has never been as centralised as China is today. But there is a real feeling that things have only gotten as vaguely solid as they have become because of the strongman leadership. Frustratingly, they are probably right too. Getting Dagestan and Moscow to work together is not likely by peaceful means, and they would stop if they weren't forced.


----------



## LostTheTone

4Eyes said:


> According to latest news only two countries were blocking removing Russia from SWIFT, IT and DE...and I've seen some news that IT is going to support it, so it's DE turn. And as they're going to deliver weapons to Ukraine I think that DE will support RU ban from SWIFT as well. Especially, when RU doesn't seem to stop and ordered wide spread attack across whole UKR
> 
> edit: full EU support for removing RU from SWIFT



About fucking time.

Seemingly after being really early into the first two world wars, Germany has been content to show up late to this one.


----------



## littlebadboy

Jinjer, being one of the newer bands I follow, are Ukrainians. I kinda got concerned how they were doing being based in Kiev.

Here is Eugene's statement:


----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> Are there any teeth to this SWIFT shit? At this point everyone but US looking to remove Russia, but I'm not 100% how much Putin's money is passing through official channels anyway? It still blows my mind excluding a country that's invading another one from bank transfers is considered "the nuclear option"



Plenty

It's like a ban on international transactions done the regular way

Putin's pocket doesn't matter at all, the idea is to make him back off in fear of becoming a national liability. Not because he cares about the nation (lol), but because that would provoke regime change. He lacks the kind of North Korean or Iranian ideology to survive long heavy sanctions.

It's also why the threaten-vs.-do split on sanctions exists. Some feel that elites and the inner circle going "Sir, lots of somebodies gonna come murder you very soon if you let this happen" would be more fast and effective than actually letting nature take its course.

Of course, they have a pretty sh!tty understanding of how police state autocracies work...


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Plenty
> 
> It's like a ban on international transactions done the regular way
> 
> Putin's pocket doesn't matter at all, the idea is to make him back off in fear of becoming a national liability. Not because he cares about the nation (lol), but because that would provoke regime change. He lacks the kind of North Korean or Iranian ideology to survive long heavy sanctions.
> 
> It's also why the threaten-vs.-do split on sanctions exists. Some feel that elites and the inner circle going "Sir, lots of somebodies gonna come murder you very soon if you let this happen" would be more fast and effective than actually letting nature take its course.
> 
> Of course, they have a pretty sh!tty understanding of how police state autocracies work...



I think the problem is that we are in somewhat uncharted waters with this sort of stuff. As you say, Putin definitely isn't an ideological guy and doesn't even claim to have a system or religion or whatever going on, so he doesnt have much to hide behind if sanctions really do bite.

But then... He's not an idiot, and must have been expecting sanctions. The ability to eject Russia from SWIFT is good, but the same kind of technology means that he can (in theory) just start his own. If Indian or Brazilian banks will deal in RUSwift then it'll just be an annoyance to those moving millions.

I dont think that the West has the balls to level sanctions that would actually lead to Putin's replacement. It's not like Russia has been a spectacularly prosperous place anyway, and sanctions really do need to be ruinous for it to spark a revolt. Think about how Cuba has carried on, even without Soviet support.

Proper sanctions would mean, in effect, a unified decree that the West will not ever breathe the same air as Russia. Complete bans on imports and exports, illegal to own Russian bonds and rubel denominated anything, Russian gas and oil to be treated like bricks of heroin. But that won't happen.

We should still ban them from Swift, even if we think that they can find a way out. Make them prove it. That's the key to beating Putin at this stuff. Even if he finds solutions, doing so is expensive and time consuming and he doesn't have the money to burn.


----------



## Adieu

Long-term, it'd be about economic damage to keep the threat poor.

Short-term, SWIFT is about apolitical people turning on Putin out of outrage over their personal economic losses.

Simply put, get people to topple or murder him simply because he messed with their business and livelihood.


----------



## Randy

> The defenders of the small Ukrainian island of Zmiinyi in the Black Sea may still be alive, according to a statement released on Saturday by the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine (SBGSU).
> 
> "We [have a] strong belief that all Ukrainian defenders of Zmiinyi (Snake) Island may be alive,” the statement said.


----------



## ramses

littlebadboy said:


> Jinjer, being one of the newer bands I follow, are Ukrainians. I kinda got concerned how they were doing being based in Kiev.


I have been reloading their Instagram page since the invasion started.

I wish them and all Ukranians the best!


----------



## ramses

Instead of the usual nonsensical political bitching in this kind of threads, I'll take a different route ...

Legends and myths are being born in Ukraine right now. For Instance:

*"I need ammunition, not a ride." — V. O. Zelenskyy.*

That quote is going into the history books, right next to Leonidas' "Molon Labe !!" at Thermopylae.


----------



## Randy

Russia shelling nuclear waste containment facility? Fuck is wrong with these guys.


----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> Russia shelling nuclear waste containment facility? Fuck is wrong with these guys.



Fresh news or the old grab from 2 days ago? If 2 days ago, that was fortunately just a grab at a backdoor gateway from their puppet state staging area in Belarus


----------



## Randy

Adieu said:


> Fresh news or the old grab from 2 days ago? If 2 days ago, that was fortunately just a grab at a backdoor gateway from their puppet state staging area in Belarus


From an hour ago


----------



## Adieu

I'm extremely pro-Ukraine but highly confused: why would there be radioactive waste storage in Kyiv? And who is reporting this?


----------



## Randy

Radioactive Waste Facility in Kyiv Struck by Russian Missile, Ukraine Says


“There is no way to assess the scale of the destruction” at the moment, the State Nuclear Regulatory Inspectorate of Ukraine said.




www.vice.com







> A Russian missile hit a radioactive waste burial facility in Kyiv overnight, the State Nuclear Regulatory Inspectorate of Ukraine posted on Facebook. The organization said there is “no way to assess the scale of the destruction” at the moment, but said it believes there no immediate threat to human life caused by the radiation alone (though Kyiv obviously remains a warzone.)


----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> Radioactive Waste Facility in Kyiv Struck by Russian Missile, Ukraine Says
> 
> 
> “There is no way to assess the scale of the destruction” at the moment, the State Nuclear Regulatory Inspectorate of Ukraine said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vice.com



Only source reporting this. Never heard of them, not sure what to make of it.


----------



## Randy

Adieu said:


> Only source reporting this. Never heard of them, not sure what to make of it.


The link on the page goes right to the nuclear regulatory FB page:


----------



## Randy




----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> View attachment 103920



Ok yeah that's real.


----------



## LostTheTone

ramses said:


> Instead of the usual nonsensical political bitching in this kind of threads, I'll take a different route ...
> 
> Legends and myths are being born in Ukraine right now. For Instance:
> 
> *"I need ammunition, not a ride." — V. O. Zelenskyy.*
> 
> That quote is going into the history books, right next to Leonidas' "Molon Labe !!" at Thermopylae.



Whatever you can say about Zelensky, he has risen to the occasion. 

We don't get a lot of laconic maxims these days, motherfuckers be getting too wordy, but "Send bullets, not evac" is the kind of thing that think will stick in the memory for a while.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

This just feels so fucking pointless like I know there are other wars ongoing but most of them have their roots in religious rivalries that hate each other and while any war is awful in those ones they seem to be both chosing to hate one another but in this where there is really no point of contention besides geography no real end game for Russia and basically just pitting people Against others of such similar cultural background just feels so fucking awful.

Like religious nutbars you know will not see reason but at least they usually share the blame for the conflict equally


----------



## possumkiller

Dineley said:


> This just feels so fucking pointless like I know there are other wars ongoing but most of them have their roots in religious rivalries that hate each other and while any war is awful in those ones they seem to be both chosing to hate one another but in this where there is really no point of contention besides geography no real end game for Russia and basically just pitting people Against others of such similar cultural background just feels so fucking awful.
> 
> Like religious nutbars you know will not see reason but at least they usually share the blame for the conflict equally


Which is probably why there are so many Russian troops surrendering. I don't know what they are showing in the US but here they are showing interviews with captured Russian soldiers who say they had no idea what is going on and they were told that Ukraine was invading Russia and they were deploying. 

One thing that troubles me is the state of the Russian military. Looking at abandoned equipment, captured soldiers, and vehicles. These soldiers look like teenagers who thought they were playing call of duty. The equipment looks a bit ragged and outdated (which isn't that surprising as we were still using vehicles from the Vietnam era in 2006 Iraq). But I saw the personal effects taken from a prisoner with his military id card. That shit was still laminated paper. Are they really that far behind or did they send in the cannon fodder to make people think it's going to be easier and save the better trained and equipped forces for later?


----------



## possumkiller

There is a Polish reporter in Red Square saying Russian civilians are scared shitless. There were protests in something like 60 Russian cities but they arrested more than 3000 people. Now if people gather in large groups or get too close to government buildings they are preemptively arrested.


----------



## LostTheTone

Dineley said:


> This just feels so fucking pointless like I know there are other wars ongoing but most of them have their roots in religious rivalries that hate each other and while any war is awful in those ones they seem to be both chosing to hate one another but in this where there is really no point of contention besides geography no real end game for Russia and basically just pitting people Against others of such similar cultural background just feels so fucking awful.
> 
> Like religious nutbars you know will not see reason but at least they usually share the blame for the conflict equally



It's not religion really - Religion is just a convenient tribal identity to fight over. When we see marginally different types of Muslim fighting each other for reasons that are arcane at best, it's pretty obvious this isn't a struggle rooted in legitimate theology. It's rooted in who gets to own the country, our lot or their lot. 

I agree that the war in Ukraine is especially pointless, but conflicts are a human thing not a religious or cultural thing. Remember; Hitler's wars were not religious, nor were Stalin and Mao's orgies of bloodshed.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

possumkiller said:


> Which is probably why there are so many Russian troops surrendering. I don't know what they are showing in the US but here they are showing interviews with captured Russian soldiers who say they had no idea what is going on and they were told that Ukraine was invading Russia and they were deploying.
> 
> One thing that troubles me is the state of the Russian military. Looking at abandoned equipment, captured soldiers, and vehicles. These soldiers look like teenagers who thought they were playing call of duty. The equipment looks a bit ragged and outdated (which isn't that surprising as we were still using vehicles from the Vietnam era in 2006 Iraq). But I saw the personal effects taken from a prisoner with his military id card. That shit was still laminated paper. Are they really that far behind or did they send in the cannon fodder to make people think it's going to be easier and save the better trained and equipped forces for later?




Shit man appreciate the insight I'm basically going off semi vetted social media posts from inside Ukraine that are being reposted by accounts I feel have solid principles) credibility. I'm not even bothering with MSM on this overall only looking for stuff from people on the ground. And fuck it's just heartbreaking.

Like I said before I know there are other horrible awful things happening like in Yemen and such but like those feel like stopping them would be soooo much harder whereas this just feels like Russia should just eat some crow and end it


----------



## possumkiller

There was video of a meeting between Putin and his top brass that looks like they were caught off guard with his announcement of invasion and terrified themselves as he was berating them like children.

His top intelligence guy told him that he supports the possibility of Ukrainian independence which seems to be what this is about. Putin doesn't recognize Ukraine as an independent state and is trying to get them back under Russian (more like reliving Soviet glory days) control.


----------



## LostTheTone

possumkiller said:


> Which is probably why there are so many Russian troops surrendering. I don't know what they are showing in the US but here they are showing interviews with captured Russian soldiers who say they had no idea what is going on and they were told that Ukraine was invading Russia and they were deploying.
> 
> One thing that troubles me is the state of the Russian military. Looking at abandoned equipment, captured soldiers, and vehicles. These soldiers look like teenagers who thought they were playing call of duty. The equipment looks a bit ragged and outdated (which isn't that surprising as we were still using vehicles from the Vietnam era in 2006 Iraq). But I saw the personal effects taken from a prisoner with his military id card. That shit was still laminated paper. Are they really that far behind or did they send in the cannon fodder to make people think it's going to be easier and save the better trained and equipped forces for later?



This is part of the thing with the Russians. Their army is not a joke, but their regular forces haven't fought anywhere in a generation. Their special forces are first class, and their air force is probably good enough, since they've been doing airstrikes. But the normal dudes are untested to say the least.

When they are moving in big groups of tanks, they probably do ok because nothing is really going to stop them. But having to fight up close and personal through a ruined city with civilians in it is a different thing. Normal people just kinda aren't up to it. Fighting In Someone's House (British military term) is both a specialist job and also needs specialist equipment. The Russians are reportedly hoarding artillery rockets because they are running out, do you think they have skip loads of flashbangs and breaching charges laying around?


----------



## Adieu

possumkiller said:


> Which is probably why there are so many Russian troops surrendering. I don't know what they are showing in the US but here they are showing interviews with captured Russian soldiers who say they had no idea what is going on and they were told that Ukraine was invading Russia and they were deploying.
> 
> One thing that troubles me is the state of the Russian military. Looking at abandoned equipment, captured soldiers, and vehicles. These soldiers look like teenagers who thought they were playing call of duty. The equipment looks a bit ragged and outdated (which isn't that surprising as we were still using vehicles from the Vietnam era in 2006 Iraq). But I saw the personal effects taken from a prisoner with his military id card. That shit was still laminated paper. Are they really that far behind or did they send in the cannon fodder to make people think it's going to be easier and save the better trained and equipped forces for later?



A bunch of Ukrainian sources are reporting that local Gypsies boosted a tank from the Russians in Kherson Region... and it's actually pretty believable.


----------



## LostTheTone

possumkiller said:


> There was video of a meeting between Putin and his top brass that looks like they were caught off guard with his announcement of invasion and terrified themselves as he was berating them like children.
> 
> His top intelligence guy told him that he supports the possibility of Ukrainian independence which seems to be what this is about. Putin doesn't recognize Ukraine as an independent state and is trying to get them back under Russian (more like reliving Soviet glory days) control.



I still struggle to believe that Putin just scoffs at the idea of an independent Ukraine, and he just wants to own it for the sake of owning it. 

Because, seriously, what glory days? The days like Afghanistan? Or like when they crushed the Czechs? 

I would say that if that's really what he is thinking, he is genuinely going senile. Because he will have started a war at huge cost, with major impacts on him, with nothing that he actually stands to gain. And he still hasn't even won the war yet, and he can't keep this up for very long. So...


----------



## High Plains Drifter

Putin's invasion of Ukraine is much like religion... Preach deceptively, instill fear, threaten resistors, and promise victory to those that follow without question... All the while justifying the means.


Dineley said:


> This just feels so fucking pointless like I know there are other wars ongoing but most of them have their roots in religious rivalries that hate each other and while any war is awful in those ones they seem to be both chosing to hate one another but in this where there is really no point of contention besides geography no real end game for Russia and basically just pitting people Against others of such similar cultural background just feels so fucking awful.
> 
> Like religious nutbars you know will not see reason but at least they usually share the blame for the conflict equally


Putin's invasion of Ukraine is much like religious brainwashing... Preach deceptively, instill fear, threaten resistors, and promise victory to those that follow without question... All the while justifying the means.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

High Plains Drifter said:


> Putin's invasion of Ukraine is much like religion... Preach deceptively, instill fear, threaten resistors, and promise victory to those that follow without question... All the while justifying the means.
> 
> Putin's invasion of Ukraine is much like religious brainwashing... Preach deceptively, instill fear, threaten resistors, and promise victory to those that follow without question... All the while justifying the means.


Yeah just seems he doesn't actually have the followers though besides those who are sort of just following chain of command in armed forces but no actual buy in or belief.

Plus with social media like you can clearly see that neither of these nations people want to fight each other you think that knowledge alone would allow the many to push back against this dirt bag.


Fuck sorry not sure why this is hitting me so hard and like I'm glad US not jumping in but still hate seeing them fight alone


----------



## LostTheTone

High Plains Drifter said:


> Putin's invasion of Ukraine is much like religion... Preach deceptively, instill fear, threaten resistors, and promise victory to those that follow without question... All the while justifying the means.
> 
> Putin's invasion of Ukraine is much like religious brainwashing... Preach deceptively, instill fear, threaten resistors, and promise victory to those that follow without question... All the while justifying the means.



I think you mean "Religion is very much like every other kind of tribalism".

Look, the godless communists do the same stuff as the hyper religious ISIS and Lord's Resistance Army, and indeed the same thing as western secular democracies. War is a collectivist undertaking, it requires an "us and them" mindset, it requires a cause larger than the individual because individuals will need a reason to die. 

"The various modes of worship, which prevailed in the Roman world, were all considered by the people as equally true; by the philosopher, as equally false; and by the magistrate, as equally useful." - That quote is about Ancient Rome, two thousand years ago. For the whole of it's lifespan, religion has always been about material, venal, physical concerns. Always.


----------



## possumkiller

Also am I the only one who worries about all these different armies using uniforms and equipment that look so similar? I just saw a clip of Russians in uniforms with a camo pattern almost exactly the same as the current US army issue. 20 and 30 years ago it was way easier to tell who is who.


----------



## Adieu

possumkiller said:


> Also am I the only one who worries about all these different armies using uniforms and equipment that look so similar? I just saw a clip of Russians in uniforms with a camo pattern almost exactly the same as the current US army issue. 20 and 30 years ago it was way easier to tell who is who.



Pretty sure it was the Ukrainians who (officially) used a similar US-style camo print.

Russians in stolen/fake Ukrainian kit trying to sow chaos or destroy high-value targets seems to be a recurring theme the last couple days

Most overtly Russian vehicles fielded in Ukraine seem to have large letters "Z" spray painted in white on the sides and/or backs for some reason (odd since it isn't a letter in their alphabet)


----------



## possumkiller

Adieu said:


> Pretty sure it was the Ukrainians who (officially) used a similar US-style camo print.
> 
> Russians in stolen/fake Ukrainian kit trying to sow chaos or destroy high-value targets seems to be a recurring theme the last couple days
> 
> Most overtly Russian vehicles fielded in Ukraine seem to have large letters "Z" spray painted in white on the sides and/or backs for some reason (odd since it isn't a letter in their alphabet)


Ukrainians are using a digital pattern that is very similar to but using different colors than USMC. The Russian forces I've seen have been wearing uniforms that look similar to the Ukrainians as well as some that look almost the same as the US army pattern.


----------



## possumkiller

possumkiller said:


> Ukrainians are using a digital pattern that is very similar to but using different colors than USMC. The Russian forces I've seen have been wearing uniforms that look similar to the Ukrainians as well as some that look almost the same as the US army pattern.


Basically if it wasn't for these guys wearing yellow bands or the red bands on some Russians, I would be hard pressed to tell them apart. I think that would make it very difficult for international volunteers in urban combat.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Most overtly Russian vehicles fielded in Ukraine seem to have large letters "Z" spray painted in white on the sides and/or backs for some reason (odd since it isn't a letter in their alphabet)



Yeah the Z is a weird choice, but invasion stripes are a real thing. The idea is that you slap the same design on literally every piece of kit so that your troops don't need to actually know what all the armor/SPG/whatever really are, they just need to know that if its painted this way, its on your side. The Z is a bit half-hearted if you ask me, but that's the idea.

The thing is that friendly fire always benefits the defenders - You don't need to have as good of a coordination when you are stubbornly staying put; your lads aren't running forward past the lines. You do need to really work together when you're moving forward though, and its hard to predict how far your dudes will go.


----------



## 4Eyes

Adieu said:


> A bunch of Ukrainian sources are reporting that local Gypsies boosted a tank from the Russians in Kherson Region... and it's actually pretty believable.


There were reports from civilians that russian units prepared in Belarus region were drinking a lot and selling fuel for vodka and cigaretes before start of the invasion. Couple of days later russian unit had to stop their moves near Konotop city because their tanks ran out of fuel.


----------



## Crungy

The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.


----------



## LostTheTone

4Eyes said:


> There were reports from civilians that russian units prepared in Belarus region were drinking a lot and selling fuel for vodka and cigaretes before start of the invasion. Couple of days later russian unit had to stop their moves near Konotop city because their tanks ran out of fuel.



Quite possibly true - In authoritarian regimes where commanders aren't allowed to actually command based on their own initiative this is a really common form of corruption/wastage. At every level, the army isn't thinking about managing their own logistics because they are expressly not allowed to. So they sell and steal because when they run out of stuff it is officially not their problem.


----------



## Adieu

Also Russian tanks = not exactly known for fuel economy

At first I thought Ukraine got caught flatfooted when they let all that sh!t through without engaging at the border, but in retrospect it might have been a wise trick. Reports seem to suggest Russian units are thinly scattered, overextended, and without supplies or support. Half the defeated Russian vehicles don't even seem particularly damaged, just ditched with shot out tires and the like because they had no backup and the crews bailed under fire.

Also, staying put and not forming dug in defense lines kept the Ukrainians from getting lit up from the air, and the initial Russian objective to present as "friendlies" to Eastern Ukraine really limited their chances to put superior firepower to any use.

So far this is starting to seem like a massive Russian f*ckup. If they just wanted to sow chaos and perhaps try to hit or kidnap the leadership with special forces in disguise, they might as well have forgone the armored invasion proper part and hidden behind the "these ain't our guys, no sir" excuse of plausible deniability.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Also Russian tanks = not exactly known for fuel economy
> 
> At first I thought Ukraine got caught flatfooted when they let all that sh!t through without engaging at the border, but in retrospect it might have been a wise trick. Reports seem to suggest Russian units are thinly scattered, overextended, and without supplies or support. Half the defeated Russian vehicles don't even seem particularly damaged, just ditched with shot out tires and the like because they had no backup and the crews bailed under fire.
> 
> Also, staying put and not forming dug in defense lines kept the Ukrainians from getting lit up from the air, and the initial Russian objective to present as "friendlies" to Eastern Ukraine really limited their chances to put superior firepower to any use.
> 
> So far this is starting to seem like a massive Russian f*ckup



Yep, I agree. 

If I were a Ukrainian general being asked "How do we stop the Russians?" the answer is obviously "We can't". Because they really can't. The Russians can come in from all sides, there is just no way that you can stop them on the border, or even close to the border. Plus, within the disputed regions, we know that the Russians have had special forces and paramilitaries for a long time. Any static defenses are going to be well known about, and if that's happening in Donestsk then it's probably happening everywhere in Ukraine. Russian air power definitely is better than yours, and definitely works, so you just can't build defenses. 

So what do you do? You just don't defend like that. You fight in side cities. Cities aren't like bunkers. Yeah, they aren't armored, but they are huge and there's loads of places to hide and not even the Ukrainians know where that'll be until its happening. And you can't demolish literally every building. Modern artillery and air power is all built to hit specific targets of value, but you have to find those targets. You can't carpet bomb Kiev with modern artillery, they just don't have enough shells. 

Here's something to think about - 

The Battle Of The Somme was an advance across a 15mile front. Over 1000 heavy artillery pieces fired over 1.5mil shells over 7 days to try and knock down German defenses and kill troops on that 15mil front. That apocalyptic barrage didn't totally fail, but it wasn't anything like enough. 

Kiev is about 320 square miles, around 12 miles across at the widest point. In the whole Russian army they can probably field that much artillery, if they concentrate it all together at Kiev. But how many shells do they even have in the depots in the whole of Russia? And can they really just sit back and pound on a city with 3mil people living in it? 

At Grozny, the Russian's put the city under siege for over a year before finally taking it. And that's a much much smaller city, in a much less relevant part of the world. 

Ukraine doesn't need to win a battle, as long as they can hold out for maybe another week. Russia doesn't have the industry to keep up with the profligate deployment of every weapon in their arsenal. Hell, when the US was fighting in Iraq they had to keep buying extra ammo from Israel because the domestic American industry couldn't keep up with the millions of rounds of 5.56mm being expended. Russia are already having to ration rockets, and it won't be long before they are having to ration bombs and air-to-ground missiles.


----------



## Adieu

Also helps that he wants to lord over it, not vaporize it


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Also helps that he wants to lord over it, not vaporize it



Indeed. 

The more damage he has to do to Ukraine to win, the less glorious the victory.


----------



## Randy




----------



## narad

Randy said:


>




I hope there is some room for interpretation in that message.

Also, wow, Russian troll farm is in full force in those youtube comment replies.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

The “scared lion in a corner” defense. Piggy Putin needs to be removed by his inner circle.


----------



## Adieu

Ukrainian channels saying something about ballistic missiles (seemingly conventional warheads) launched from Belarus just now.


----------



## X1X

The guy on the right looks like he's ready to end Putin's regime


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

Adieu said:


> Ukrainian channels saying something about ballistic missiles (seemingly conventional warheads) launched from Belarus just now.


Nuclear?


----------



## Adieu

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Nuclear?



Regular conventional or so it seems.

Seems to be a pre-negotiation tactic (part of the nuclear readiness saber-rattling) mixed with an attempt to pull Belarus more firmly into the same boat.

Zelensky just announced that he refuses to negotiate in any country that's lobbing missiles at him.


----------



## Adieu

Hmm now Ukrainians saying they MAYBE shot it down because there is no known impact anywhere

Maybe a blank for saber-rattling only? (That part is my guess)


----------



## olejason

They've agreed to talks at the Belarus/Ukraine border on Monday. Maybe they'll concede the breakaway regions in the east and call it a day?


----------



## Adieu

olejason said:


> They've agreed to talks at the Belarus/Ukraine border on Monday. Maybe they'll concede the breakaway regions in the east and call it a day?


Unlikely

It would feel like a sort-of-loss to Ukraine and like total crushing defeat with a bullsh!t consolation prize to Putin

Acknowledge the status quo from a week ago after the last several days?

Putin has done too much crap and lost way too much face


----------



## Adieu

Remember, it's an absolutely generic Asian autocrat. Nothing remarkable except size and scope.

They view everything through the lens of "face" and humiliation.


----------



## LostTheTone

Jesus, I leave the house for a couple of hours...


----------



## Shoeless_jose




----------



## LostTheTone

Dineley said:


> View attachment 103935


Miracle of miracles, the EU are actually doing something worthwhile. I still can't help feeling these things are less sincere when they come once the ceasefire has already been started...


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> Miracle of miracles, the EU are actually doing something worthwhile. I still can't help feeling these things are less sincere when they come once the ceasefire has already been started...



There's not gonna be a ceasefire.

Putin's gonna make some ridiculous demands and then tell the world "I tried"

Oh btw Ukrainian news reports that renowned traitor and his good buddy Medvedchuk managed to escape from house arrest today. He just HAPPENS to be on Putin's short list for installed puppet replacement president.

Hmm...


----------



## Louis Cypher

Huge change in German foreign policy according to the BBC News site:

"Within a few days Vladimir Putin has managed to do what Nato allies have spent years trying to achieve: a massive increase of military spending in Germany.

German weapons for Ukraine. An additional $113 bn (£84 bn) for the German army. And a constitutional commitment to reach Nato’s military spending target of 2% of GDP.

This is arguably one of the biggest shifts ever seen in Germany’s post-war foreign policy. Before Thursday’s invasion of Ukraine, such a militaristic stance would have unthinkable in Germany. Traditionally Germany focuses on diplomacy and dialogue, not military might, and historically there are deep economic and cultural links between Russia and Germany. But Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has shocked and stunned Germany’s government and German voters. Olaf Scholz called Vladimir Putin inhumane and a warmonger, and pledged unwavering support for Ukraine. Judging by the applause and standing ovations for Ukraine in the German parliament, and the enormous anti-war demonstration in Berlin today, most Germans seem to agree with him."

UK still dragging its feet due to Londongrad and Tory party connections, plus calls for the UK to offer humanitarian aid to refugees and being given passage to the UK is being ignored by the Government


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> There's not gonna be a ceasefire.
> 
> Putin's gonna make some ridiculous demands and then tell the world "I tried"
> 
> Oh btw Ukrainian news reports that renowned traitor and his good buddy Medvedchuk managed to escape from house arrest today. He just HAPPENS to be on Putin's short list for installed puppet replacement president.
> 
> Hmm...



Regardless, "financing Ukraine" will make zero difference to anything at this point. The lag between purchasing weapons and those weapons actually arriving into the hands of frontline soldiers is just too long.

It was cutting it close when we (Britain) was sending over plane loads of Javelins before the invasion. But Ukraine's problem today is not finance, it's, you know, the Russians. They need weapons in troopers hands.

This war will not last another 7 days. Anything that is not literally sending ammo is just flatly irrelevent.


----------



## LostTheTone

Louis Cypher said:


> Huge change in German foreign policy according to the BBC News site:
> 
> "Within a few days Vladimir Putin has managed to do what Nato allies have spent years trying to achieve: a massive increase of military spending in Germany.
> 
> German weapons for Ukraine. An additional $113 bn (£84 bn) for the German army. And a constitutional commitment to reach Nato’s military spending target of 2% of GDP.
> 
> This is arguably one of the biggest shifts ever seen in Germany’s post-war foreign policy. Before Thursday’s invasion of Ukraine, such a militaristic stance would have unthinkable in Germany. Traditionally Germany focuses on diplomacy and dialogue, not military might, and historically there are deep economic and cultural links between Russia and Germany. But Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has shocked and stunned Germany’s government and German voters. Olaf Scholz called Vladimir Putin inhumane and a warmonger, and pledged unwavering support for Ukraine. Judging by the applause and standing ovations for Ukraine in the German parliament, and the enormous anti-war demonstration in Berlin today, most Germans seem to agree with him."
> 
> UK still dragging its feet due to Londongrad and Tory party connections



Dude, the UK already threw up two rounds of sanctions and started shipping in anti-tank missiles before the invasion. The UK also was the first voice calling to kick Russia out of Swift. Tomorrow Britain will announce the next round of sanctions targeting another 100 oligarchs.

Don't tell me that we've dragged our feet, when British sanctions started back when some EU countries, including Germany, were opposing the EU sanctions package.


----------



## Louis Cypher

LostTheTone said:


> Regardless, "financing Ukraine" will make zero difference to anything at this point. The lag between purchasing weapons and those weapons actually arriving into the hands of frontline soldiers is just too long.
> 
> It was cutting it close when we (Britain) was sending over plane loads of Javelins before the invasion. But Ukraine's problem today is not finance, it's, you know, the Russians. They need weapons in troopers hands.
> 
> This war will not last another 7 days. Anything that is not literally sending ammo is just flatly irrelevent.


Yeah I agree. Worrying Liz Truss this morning was talking up this conflict lasting years....


LostTheTone said:


> Dude, the UK already threw up two rounds of sanctions and started shipping in anti-tank missiles before the invasion. The UK also was the first voice calling to kick Russia out of Swift. Tomorrow Britain will announce the next round of sanctions targeting another 100 oligarchs.
> 
> Don't tell me that we've dragged our feet, when British sanctions started back when some EU countries, including Germany, were opposing the EU sanctions package.


This may have already been said thread is tldr but our 1st set was for 5 minor banks and 3 oligarchs that the US have had sanctions against sunce 2016. Germany went hard with the pipeline cancellation tho yes they and Italy have dragged their feet on the SWIFT banking block, but the EUs initial set of sanctions were much harder than our 3 oligarchs and 5 banks. When even the Express and Mail are critical of the government sanctions response then you know its poor


----------



## LostTheTone

Louis Cypher said:


> Yeah I agree. Worrying Liz Truss this morning was talking up this conflict lasting years....
> 
> This may have already been said thread is tldr but our 1st set was for 5 minor banks and 3 oligarchs that the US have had sanctions against sunce 2016. Germany went hard with the pipeline cancellation tho yes they and Italy have dragged their feet on the SWIFT banking block, but the EUs initial set of sanctions were much harder than our 3 oligarchs and 5 banks. When even the Express and Mail are critical of the government sanctions response then you know its poor



What more do you think Britain can actually do?


----------



## Shoeless_jose

Louis Cypher said:


> UK still dragging its feet due to Londongrad and Tory party connections, plus calls for the UK to offer humanitarian aid to refugees and being given passage to the UK is being ignored by the Government



Shit they voted for Brexit with a healthy dose of anti refugee rhetoric did they not!? Lol


----------



## Louis Cypher

@LostTheTone
Perhaps starting to make a huge effort to take refugees offer more and spend more on humanitarian help for those fleeing Ukraine, we have announced nothing about that, going by Liz Truss this morning we are trying to ensure they all stay in Poland! Maybe removing and revoking people like the Russian ministers son from the house of Lords after Boris made him a lord coz thats how much Russian money and influence there is in UK politics and the Tory Party. Getting the UK clean of Russians dirty money amd influence is like trying to get the eggs back out of a baked caked. Its too late. Can we survive during a cost of living crisis here and fuel cost crisis without Russian gas and oil? We should cancel that but the financial cost will be what to UK households already on the breadline.... I dunno tbh mate what we can do and I don't wanna fight as this isn't Brexit and it aint about sides or which country is doing the most. The Mail is already doing that by making sure its using this war to bang the brexit anti EU drum as always


----------



## Louis Cypher

Breaking news on BBC (Well timed given my post above!!)
"EU agrees to take Ukrainian refugees for 3 years
Katya Adler
Europe Editor
The EU has agreed unanimously amongst all member countries to take in Ukrainian refugees for up to three years without asking them to first apply for asylum, the German interior minister says."

@LostTheTone
Let's see over the next few days what the UK does bout refugees compared to that... I'm guessing we will do the same as we did with Afghanistan, promise a mediocre amount to come over and then 6 months on less than 10% of that promised number will even have started being processed


----------



## LostTheTone

Louis Cypher said:


> Breaking news on BBC (Well timed given my post above!!)
> "EU agrees to take Ukrainian refugees for 3 years
> Katya Adler
> Europe Editor
> The EU has agreed unanimously amongst all member countries to take in Ukrainian refugees for up to three years without asking them to first apply for asylum, the German interior minister says."
> 
> @LostTheTone
> Let's see over the next few days what the UK does bout refugees compared to that... I'm guessing we will do the same as we did with Afghanistan, promise a mediocre amount to come over and then 6 months on less than 10% of that promised number will even have started being processed



Refugees have nothing to do with sanctioning Russia dude.

And Brexit has nothing to do with this.

And Britain already had sanctions in place while the EU bickered over whether Italian leather goods would be included or not.

Remember that Germany previously said that British flight taking anti-tank missiles the threatened Ukraine would not be allowed to fly through their air space.

Today Germany has changed its tune. And they are a day late and a dollar fucking short of making any actual difference to the people of Ukraine. But don't worry, the Ukrainians who survive to flee the country will be welcomed. 

But remember guys, it's Britain who sent missiles and rushed out immediate sanctions who dragged their feet. Because the Germans will magnanimously allow the orphans to stay.


----------



## nikt

Info: 213k Ukrainian refugees crossed Polish border in 4 days.


----------



## Louis Cypher

LostTheTone said:


> Refugees have nothing to do with sanctioning Russia dude.
> 
> And Brexit has nothing to do with this.
> 
> And Britain already had sanctions in place while the EU bickered over whether Italian leather goods would be included or not.
> 
> Remember that Germany previously said that British flight taking anti-tank missiles the threatened Ukraine would not be allowed to fly through their air space.
> 
> Today Germany has changed its tune. And they are a day late and a dollar fucking short of making any actual difference to the people of Ukraine. But don't worry, the Ukrainians who survive to flee the country will be welcomed.
> 
> But remember guys, it's Britain who sent missiles and rushed out immediate sanctions who dragged their feet. Because the Germans will magnanimously allow the orphans to stay.


You ask me what i would do and i answered you. Not sure why it's OK for you to keep bashing the EU and yet you're immediately on me for my criticism of the UK response. I get it, your anti EU fair enough. Like I said its not a competition, even if you seem to think it is between the UK and EU countries as to who is doing what. Your comment tho about the itaian leather goods is GBnews/mail/talk radio BS. Check a few facts ay.... And arming Ukraine and sanctions do nothing right this minute to help the 100s of thousands of refugees who need the help of the West.


nikt said:


> Info: 213k Ukrainian refugees crossed Polish border in 4 days.


@LostTheTone
That fact and the immediate coordinated help for those people by the EU AND the UK is far more important than who's the best at doing sanctions. EU has stepped up to help them. Let's see what the UK does to help those 213k men women and children...... baring in mind the UK government are happy to refuse to help and let child refugees drown in the channel trying to cross


----------



## Randy




----------



## Louis Cypher

LostTheTone said:


> And Britain already had sanctions in place while the EU bickered over whether Italian leather goods would be included or not


That was a Daily Mail story from un named "sources" (Obviously) that no other outlet reported on. Quick Google search is always a good idea to fact check anything in the daily mail


----------



## Randy

Russia underestimating how measured the West and the US have been despite the position they've been put in. Threatening nukes because they sanctioned him might be the straw that broken the camels back.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

Randy said:


> Russia underestimating how measured the West and the US have been despite the position they've been put in. Threatening nukes because they sanctioned him might be the straw that broken the camels back.



In what sense do you mean that though like what do you think it will be precursor too?


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> Regardless, "financing Ukraine" will make zero difference to anything at this point. The lag between purchasing weapons and those weapons actually arriving into the hands of frontline soldiers is just too long.
> 
> It was cutting it close when we (Britain) was sending over plane loads of Javelins before the invasion. But Ukraine's problem today is not finance, it's, you know, the Russians. They need weapons in troopers hands.
> 
> This war will not last another 7 days. Anything that is not literally sending ammo is just flatly irrelevent.



It's a combination of a morale thing and ability to continue.

Also, Ukraine won't lay down and surrender even if major cities fall. This is a culture with a very defiant history and a cheerfully homicidal attitude towards occupations.

The only way this DOESN'T last 7 more days is if Putin capitulates or gets murdered.

PS as in, EVEN if g-d forbid Zelensky is the one who gets killed or capitulates, that wouldn't stop war at all


----------



## Randy

Dineley said:


> In what sense do you mean that though like what do you think it will be precursor too?


Considering the bark vs bite in the Ukrainian conflict, I get the impression the West could take anything from Russia or their allies that they want. By force or other means.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

Randy said:


> Considering the bark vs bite in the Ukrainian conflict, I get the impression the West could take anything from Russia or their allies that they want. By force or other means.



Okay fair enough just was curious how you felt things might play out.

I'm curious what China's position will be if the Western powers did assert some force on Putin?


----------



## Randy

Dineley said:


> Okay fair enough just was curious how you felt things might play out.
> 
> I'm curious what China's position will be if the Western powers did assert some force on Putin?


China aligns with Russia politically and because they are adverse to the West being involved in Asia (you'll notice India also frequently aligns with Russia), but the amount of money the US spends trading with China vs what they get from a shithole like Russia isn't even close. They say one thing but they know what side their bread is buttered on.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

Randy said:


> China aligns with Russia politically and because they are adverse to the West being involved in Asia (you'll notice India also frequently aligns with Russia), but the amount of money the US spends trading with China vs what they get from a shithole like Russia isn't even close. They say one thing but they know what side their bread is buttered on.



Yeah I kind of forgot about the trade aspect haha very much a no brainer.


----------



## spudmunkey

On the other hand...if Russia takes a beating and needs to turn to China for investment/loans, etc...then it's China's open door to expand their empire.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

Randy said:


> China aligns with Russia politically and because they are adverse to the West being involved in Asia (you'll notice India also frequently aligns with Russia), but the amount of money the US spends trading with China vs what they get from a shithole like Russia isn't even close. They say one thing but they know what side their bread is buttered on.


I hate to be the fly in the ointment, but they are doing much the same as Russia with Taiwan. Both are aligning, begging for all out war with the west. Don’t be so sure.


----------



## Randy

Spaced Out Ace said:


> I hate to be the fly in the ointment, but they are doing much the same as Russia with Taiwan. Both are aligning, begging for all out war with the west. Don’t be so sure.


I don't expect sympathy from China on Ukraine but as far as China actually provoking a fight with us because we're scrapping with Russia... eh, why?


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

Randy said:


> I don't expect sympathy from China on Ukraine but as far as China actually provoking a fight with us because we're scrapping with Russia... eh, why?


Not picking a fight, but more so taking the opportunity to attack sovereign countries. Even if they don’t, they could use it as a means to make money off of Russia by supplying them weapons, and letting them fight a war against Ukraine and the west (whomever joins in) before stepping in themselves when the west is pretty depleted in the war.


----------



## Randy

Spaced Out Ace said:


> to make money off of Russia by supplying them weapons


I mean, with what money tho?


----------



## ramses

Louis Cypher said:


> Huge change in German foreign policy according to the BBC News site:
> 
> "Within a few days Vladimir Putin has managed to do what Nato allies have spent years trying to achieve: a massive increase of military spending in Germany.
> 
> German weapons for Ukraine. An additional $113 bn (£84 bn) for the German army. And a constitutional commitment to reach Nato’s military spending target of 2% of GDP.
> 
> This is arguably one of the biggest shifts ever seen in Germany’s post-war foreign policy. Before Thursday’s invasion of Ukraine, such a militaristic stance would have unthinkable in Germany. Traditionally Germany focuses on diplomacy and dialogue, not military might, and historically there are deep economic and cultural links between Russia and Germany. But Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has shocked and stunned Germany’s government and German voters. Olaf Scholz called Vladimir Putin inhumane and a warmonger, and pledged unwavering support for Ukraine. Judging by the applause and standing ovations for Ukraine in the German parliament, and the enormous anti-war demonstration in Berlin today, most Germans seem to agree with him."
> 
> UK still dragging its feet due to Londongrad and Tory party connections, plus calls for the UK to offer humanitarian aid to refugees and being given passage to the UK is being ignored by the Government



Not only that. Germany is going to stop its imbecilic shutdown of nuclear plants, and will likely start building new ones. Great news!

I still find it hard to believe that Germany chose to become so largely dependent on Rusia's fossil fuels for Germany's energy production.


----------



## Randy

> Feb 27 (Reuters) - A referendum in Belarus on Sunday approved a new constitution ditching the country's non-nuclear status at a time when the former Soviet republic has become a launch pad for Russian troops invading Ukraine, Russian news agencies said.
> 
> The agencies cited the Belarus central elections commission as saying 65.2% of those who took part voted in favor. The result came as little surprise, given the tightly controlled rule of President Alexander Lukashenko.
> 
> The new constitution could see nuclear weapons on Belarusian soil for the first time since the country gave them up after the fall of the Soviet Union.


----------



## thebeesknees22

ramses said:


> ...
> 
> I still find it hard to believe that Germany chose to become so largely dependent on Rusia's fossil fuels for Germany's energy production.



no kidding. Talk about making a deal with the devil...


----------



## Adieu

Shit...

Is it too naive to dream that this suddenly resolves with the domino effect overthrow of the bloody liar dictators of Russia, Belarus, LNR, and DNR, and a quiet consensus to blame all this shit on executed leadership without further grudges?

Btw, if it needs a Ukrainian flag over Moscow to work, I'd take it happily. F*ck the Vlasovite tricolor rag anyway.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

Apparently Senator Tim Kaine was on TV saying they're hearing Russian troops starting to refuse to cross border into Ukraine. Not sure if this is meaningful amount or not but could be impactful


----------



## Adieu

Dineley said:


> Apparently Senator Tim Kaine was on TV saying they're hearing Russian troops starting to refuse to cross border into Ukraine. Not sure if this is meaningful amount or not but could be impactful



There were some such claims from the last batch of new POW meet and greet videos

New lot is young AF and hella sad looking conscripts aged like 19-22, and claimed they were told by their officers that they would be called "Enemies of the People" and possibly summarily executed if they disobeyed marching orders

There's also some hardass retired Belarusian paratrooper General on YouTube telling the boys formerly under his command to desert if ordered to march on Ukraine (well...kinda... he says "find a way not to, you know how" to avoid self-incriminating statements)


----------



## Randy




----------



## Shoeless_jose

Randy said:


> View attachment 103948




Maybe he will pull a Trump... "I was being sarcastic"


----------



## Adieu

The "training" thing is SOMEWHAT lost in translation

They are saying they shipped out to a "training exercise" from their home base, actually trained for some time, and weren't briefed and had no idea they were being ordered to attack across the border until they actually noticed they were crossing it.

The degree of BS varies from 10% to 100+% depending on their roles, ranks, and experience. Career special ops and such definitely knew, while some poor 19yo conscript ordered to drive a fuel truck with "follow that convoy" orders might actually be genuinely pretty confused


----------



## Randy

Shades of grey tho, methinks. 

Even if professional/experienced soldier, still can't escape the breakdowns and getting lost in the countryside stuff or parachuting in with no ground cover. Can be lucid about the mission but confused AF from moment to moment because of piss poor planning and kneejerk deployment.


----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> Shades of grey tho, methinks.
> 
> Even if professional/experienced soldier, still can't escape the breakdowns and getting lost in the countryside stuff or parachuting in with no ground cover. Can be lucid about the mission but confused AF from moment to moment because of piss poor planning and kneejerk deployment.



No, I mean the usual way of saying it translates as "IDFK they said we were training and it turns out we invaded Ukraine"

BUT... the proper translation would be more like "We deployed by the border, for training they said, and then IDFK what happened but we were suddenly invading across it to Ukraine without warning or explanation"

They're not saying they don't know they are in Ukraine. They are saying they were told they were going on an exercise when they left home.


----------



## Randy




----------



## Xaios

What's the consensus around here about the plausibility of this thing escalating all the way to nuclear armageddon? I'd be lying if I said that this whole doesn't have me extremely rattled.


----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> View attachment 103951



False

That's the scam number from the Russian Central Bank, which just "closed" trading and hasn't reopened it

Actual sales are 1:115 - 1:120ish, not the bs ~1:83 number Google and the Central Bank are showing


----------



## Adieu

Xaios said:


> What's the consensus around here about the plausibility of this thing escalating all the way to nuclear armageddon? I'd be lying if I said that this whole doesn't have me extremely rattled.



Negligible, UNLESS

1) Putin is actually mortally ill and this is supposed to be his last hurrah for historical glory, which everbody went and spoiled

2) Somebody tries to off him, fails, and Putin decides it was NATO


----------



## tedtan

I realize that asymmetrical warfare favors the local/defence forces, but I’m surprised how bad the Russian military looks after the last several days’ fighting in Ukraine. As primary successors to the USSR’s military personnel, training, and equipment, I would have expected more.

Putin looks full on impotent at this point.


----------



## Randy

Xaios said:


> What's the consensus around here about the plausibility of this thing escalating all the way to nuclear armageddon? I'd be lying if I said that this whole doesn't have me extremely rattled.


Meh, I'm kinda numb about it. It's "asteroids hits the Earth" level catastrophic, you will barely know it's going on before it's over. I'd be more afraid of Red Dawn than I would be a flash and then nothing.

As far as plausibility, I'm not looking to underestimate the seriousness of this whole thing but if Putin's nuclear arsenal functions anything like his invasion, he'll be lucky if the missiles don't go up and straight back down like Wiley Coyote.


----------



## Randy

tedtan said:


> I realize that asymmetrical warfare favors the local/defence forces, but I’m surprised how bad the Russian military looks after the last several days’ fighting in Ukraine. As primary successors to the USSR’s military personnel, training, and equipment, I would have expected more.
> 
> Putin looks full on impotent at this point.


If this were my country and we fell on our faces the way he has despite being this supposedly scary tough, exceptionally well armed boogyman... I'd start seriously assuming the money we're spending on "defense" is being embezzled by the billions. I can't say that's the case here but if it happened to me, that'd be my first thought. 

The story about broken down tanks and trucks lined up at the border to bulk up their numbers before the invasion, and the number of conscripted youth they're clearly sending in to carry this out has me seriously thinking this is a "paper tiger" situation. They still have enough resources to actually pull off this Ukraine invasion unfortunately, but if I'm a NATO country I'm zero percent worried about Russia's ground forces.


----------



## tedtan

tedtan said:


> I realize that asymmetrical warfare favors the local/defence forces, but I’m surprised how bad the Russian military looks after the last several days’ fighting in Ukraine. As primary successors to the USSR’s military personnel, training, and equipment, I would have expected more.
> 
> Putin looks full on impotent at this point.



And by that I don’t mean that to slight the Ukrainian miliatary in any way at all - they‘re fighting like a real military should. My hat’s off to the Ukrainian military and civilians



Randy said:


> As far as plausibility, I'm not looking to underestimate the seriousness of this whole thing but if Putin's nuclear arsenal functions anything like his invasion, he'll be lucky if the missiles don't go up and straight back down like Wiley Coyote.



Fuckin’ A!



tedtan said:


> What's the consensus around here about the plausibility of this thing escalating all the way to nuclear armageddon? I'd be lying if I said that this whole doesn't have me extremely rattled.



If Putin is at the point of having to resort to nuclear threats, he’s probably at the end of his conventional options. But even being crazier than normal, I don’t think the overall Russian military would follow through with nuclear attacks. Putin may be crazy, but someone in the higherarchy would refuse to follow through on such crazy orders (as they have in the past).


----------



## nickgray

tedtan said:


> but I’m surprised how bad the Russian military looks after the last several days’ fighting in Ukraine



Corruption and buying your own bullshit.


----------



## tedtan

nickgray said:


> Corruption and buying your own bullshit.



No doubt.


----------



## fantom

tedtan said:


> I realize that asymmetrical warfare favors the local/defence forces, but I’m surprised how bad the Russian military looks after the last several days’ fighting in Ukraine. As primary successors to the USSR’s military personnel, training, and equipment, I would have expected more.
> 
> Putin looks full on impotent at this point.



I highly doubt Putin sent in the real military. From my understanding, it's a bunch of riot police and draftees. He literally threatened NATO. You don't send your real military if you are afraid of a legitimate counter attack.


And anyone please explain to me why a chunk of the GOP is backing Putin?! Literally all that BS the last 5+ years about "freedom" and they are routing for an oppressive dictator to kill an elected leader of a democratic country to put in a puppet? Every single country in Europe and Asia is proudly displaying support for Ukraine and these counterculture asshats latch onto propaganda of a "peacekeeping" invasion threatening nuclear war like Jesus coming to save them. Wtf is wrong with Americans.


----------



## Adieu

fantom said:


> I highly doubt Putin sent in the real military. From my understanding, it's a bunch of riot police and draftees. He literally threatened NATO. You don't send your real military if you are afraid of a legitimate counter attack.
> 
> 
> And anyone please explain to me why a chunk of the GOP is backing Putin?! Literally all that BS the last 5+ years about "freedom" and they are routing for an oppressive dictator to kill an elected leader of a democratic country to put in a puppet? Every single country in Europe and Asia is proudly displaying support for Ukraine and these counterculture asshats latch onto propaganda of a "peacekeeping" invasion threatening nuclear war like Jesus coming to save them. Wtf is wrong with Americans.



"Real military" is worse. It's the teenagers who have been popping up in POW videos for the last half day. First wave didn't deploy them.

The stormtroopers trained to beat down his own populace were supposed to be the "elite" and Kadyrov's Chechen Guard was supposed to be the ultimate terror.

...instead they got lit up the day they deployed. Because their skillset is to terrorize youths and pensioners on the streets or kidnap Kadyrov's critics, not fight special forces in the field.

Whoops.


----------



## possumkiller

Randy said:


> View attachment 103942


This isn't out of the ordinary though. I spent seven years in the US army. Every unit has their black sheep vehicles that always stay broke down no matter how often they go to maintenance. When I drove up to Kirkuk from Kuwait during the 2003 invasion, we had a tow truck towing a tow truck towing a 978 fuel truck in our convoy. While in country, we just parked those black sheep vehicles to cannibalize for parts when other vehicles needed parts.


----------



## possumkiller

Randy said:


> Meh, I'm kinda numb about it. It's "asteroids hits the Earth" level catastrophic, you will barely know it's going on before it's over. I'd be more afraid of Red Dawn than I would be a flash and then nothing.
> 
> As far as plausibility, I'm not looking to underestimate the seriousness of this whole thing but if Putin's nuclear arsenal functions anything like his invasion, he'll be lucky if the missiles don't go up and straight back down like Wiley Coyote.


The thing is a nuclear war would not immediately erase all life from the planet. Probably not even from all the cities. Nukes are just really big explosions that give off radioactive waste. It will definitely be the end of the modern world as we know it, but there will be a lot of people left to suffer radiation poisoning, cancer, fallout, climate change and try to make some attempt at living through the aftermath and recreating society. Trust me, if all out nuclear war does end up happening, you really want to be one of the lucky ones to be near enough the blast to be vaporized.


But, if his conventional military is any indication of the state of the rest of his military, I am sure his nuclear systems are neglected and out of date. The crews are probably not well trained. The chain of command is probably corrupt and incompetent. Supposedly he made the same threats to Merkel in 2008. He's a blowhard schoolyard bully. I am 90% certain his own people will wind up taking care of him.


----------



## Randy

possumkiller said:


> This isn't out of the ordinary though. I spent seven years in the US army. Every unit has their black sheep vehicles that always stay broke down no matter how often they go to maintenance. When I drove up to Kirkuk from Kuwait during the 2003 invasion, we had a tow truck towing a tow truck towing a 978 fuel truck in our convoy. While in country, we just parked those black sheep vehicles to cannibalize for parts when other vehicles needed parts.


Considering how that occupation went, I'd say there's some (un) fortunate parallels


----------



## possumkiller

Randy said:


> Considering how that occupation went, I'd say there's some (un) fortunate parallels


Not even unique to that. Even in garrison, there are always some pain in the ass vehicles that get left behind in the motorpool when doing training in the field. Or if we did a training "deployment" to NTC in California, it was the same story. These vehicles would be chronically deadlined and the commander would circle X and tell us to tow it or put it on a trailer but it was coming with us.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

The Russian military looks pretty piss poor/disorganized, take your pick, and has me wondering if this is a more recent thing. Were they previously something to be feared? Or maybe they just have no real interest in this and are half assing it on purpose?


----------



## oversteve

Judging from what we see here in Ukraine calling those half dead russian vehicles a "black sheep" is overstatement, seems like half-scrapped tanks here is a common thing, the troops equipment is pretty poor with majority of them looking like average local bums in camo outfit. I don't want to glorify our country's troops too much and probably up to 2014 they looked the same or even worse but since then they were developing pretty quickly in anticipation of Russian invasion till 2019 when Zelensky was elected as president and financing of majority of the defence programs were somewhat stopped. Also we've got some nice stuff from partners abroad in a few last months that also helps our forces a lot


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> Judging from what we see here in Ukraine calling those half dead russian vehicles a "black sheep" is overstatement, seems like half-scrapped tanks here is a common thing, the troops equipment is pretty poor with majority of them looking like average local bums in camo outfit. I don't want to glorify our country's troops too much and probably up to 2014 they looked the same or even worse but since then they were developing pretty quickly in anticipation of Russian invasion till 2019 when Zelensky was elected as president and financing of majority of the defence programs were somewhat stopped. Also we've got some nice stuff from partners abroad in a few last months that also helps our forces a lot



Whoa are you there-there, currently fighting to kick the Putinist scourge out of your country?

What city?


----------



## oversteve

I'm in the western part so it's more like psychological warfare and help to the front here and preparation in case something worse happens


----------



## Adieu

Still... Слава Україні! Смерть ворогам!


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> Still... Слава Україні! Смерть ворогам!


Героям слава 

Oh btw about the "black sheep", here the viral vid from yesterday


----------



## Louis Cypher

BBC News website is reporting that Putins government and State TV are blaming comments made by NATO and have named the UK foreign secretary Liz Truss specifically for her comment's on Sunday about a Russia NATO war as being a reason for their Nuclear option escalation.... fcuking hell.....


----------



## oversteve

Louis Cypher said:


> BBC News website is reporting that Putins government and State TV are blaming comments made by NATO and have named the UK foreign secretary Liz Truss specifically for her comment's on Sunday about a Russia NATO war as being a reason for their Nuclear option escalation.... fcuking hell....


Well, it's a common thing for Russians... they have tried to penalize the Israel ambasador a day or to ago for Israel stating support to a Ukrainian Nazi Regime in this war  also just in case our current president is a jew


----------



## Wc707

oversteve said:


> I'm in the western part so it's more like psychological warfare and help to the front here and preparation in case something worse happens


As an American watching this from the States, I hope you and your family are well and can stay safe!


----------



## pick_d

tedtan said:


> I realize that asymmetrical warfare favors the local/defence forces, but I’m surprised how bad the Russian military looks after the last several days’ fighting in Ukraine. As primary successors to the USSR’s military personnel, training, and equipment, I would have expected more.



My guess is because it isn't treated as a "real war" by Russian side. Probably, they intended it to be like major 'police operation' because too many people in Russia have friends, family or relatives in Ukraine.
As you can see, Russian army didn't cut the electricity / water / communications etc. From what I heard, they control power plants, but don't shut down the energy, so certain cities are under siege, but many people still have electricity, water and internet connection. At least it is possible to contact to friends and families in Ukraine, which is small consolation in such desperate times. However, civilians will suffer anyways, that's inevitable.

If you expected it to be like "real war" (I don't want to point fingers and talk about examples) where no one cares about civilian casualties at all, that would be totally different and ugly picture, but I don't even want to think about that. Russia invading Ukraine is a total BS and complete nonsese even with this "military operation" in its current state. Just like some bad dream or sick joke.

Hope it won't escalate any further and stops ASAP.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

oversteve said:


> Judging from what we see here in Ukraine calling those half dead russian vehicles a "black sheep" is overstatement, seems like half-scrapped tanks here is a common thing, the troops equipment is pretty poor with majority of them looking like average local bums in camo outfit. I don't want to glorify our country's troops too much and probably up to 2014 they looked the same or even worse but since then they were developing pretty quickly in anticipation of Russian invasion till 2019 when Zelensky was elected as president and financing of majority of the defence programs were somewhat stopped. Also we've got some nice stuff from partners abroad in a few last months that also helps our forces a lot



Are you in Ukraine now? Or just from there originally either way hope you are safe


----------



## oversteve

Dineley said:


> Are you in Ukraine now? Or just from there originally either way hope you are safe


Yup, I'm living in Ukraine and safe sofar


----------



## Shoeless_jose

oversteve said:


> Yup, I'm living in Ukraine and safe sofar



Yes i should have read further before my quick reply. Glad you are safe and hope all this madness is resolved soon.


----------



## oversteve

pick_d said:


> My guess is because it isn't treated as a "real war" by Russian side. Probably, they intended it to be like major 'police operation' because too many people in Russia have friends, family or relatives in Ukraine.
> As you can see, Russian army didn't cut the electricity / water / communications etc. From what I heard, they control power plants, but don't shut down the energy, so certain cities are under siege, but many people still have electricity, water and internet connection. At least it is possible to contact to friends and families in Ukraine, which is small consolation in such desperate times. However, civilians will suffer anyways, that's inevitable.
> 
> If you expected it to be like "real war" (I don't want to point fingers and talk about examples) where no one cares about civilian casualties at all, that would be totally different and ugly picture, but I don't even want to think about that. Russia invading Ukraine is a total BS and complete nonsese even with this "military operation" in its current state. Just like some bad dream or sick joke.
> 
> Hope it won't escalate any further and stops ASAP.


Since the invasion Russians sofar didn't manage to occupy any major regional center and territories around them so they atm didn't manage to shutdown the communications but they have already tried that and now are simply bombing the outscirts randomly killing locals. 
But still I'd say that statement is partially correct becuase it seems like Putin himself though they will manage to occupy Ukrainian capital Kyiv within hours so I guess that the information he's got on the situation here was somewhat embellished by military in the process of their communication.


----------



## 4Eyes

oversteve said:


> Yup, I'm living in Ukraine and safe sofar


Слава Україні hope you'll stay safe and this will end soon, take care! in case you'll need it, you're welcome in SVK



oversteve said:


> so I guess that the information he's got on the situation here was somewhat embellished by military in the process of their communication.


seems that corrupt comrades didn't report exactly where all army money went


----------



## pick_d

oversteve said:


> Since the invasion Russians sofar didn't manage to occupy any major regional center and territories around them so they atm didn't manage to shutdown the communications but they have already tried that and now are simply bombing the outscirts randomly killing locals.
> But still I'd say that statement is partially correct becuase it seems like Putin himself though they will manage to occupy Ukrainian capital Kyiv within hours so I guess that the information he's got on the situation here was somewhat embellished by military in the process of their communication.


Can't comment on that, too many fakes on the internet, and not so much trustworthy info.

Just hope it ends ASAP, that would be better for everyone (well, maybe except for someone's ego, but they will have to deal with it).


----------



## oversteve

pick_d said:


> Can't comment on that, too many fakes on the internet, and not so much trustworthy info.
> 
> Just hope it ends ASAP, that would be better for everyone (well, maybe except for someone's ego, but they will have to deal with it).


There's plenty of info on channels like Rain or Echo Moskvy that at least try to show some info on what's going on here in Ukraine opposed to channels managed by your government, plenty of vids or captured russian military, destroyed military vehicles and dead bodies of Russian solders, I can help you find them if you need


----------



## oversteve

oh btw, completely forgot, there was this article mistakenly auto-published by ria.ru 2 days ago and then taken down but it was cached, it's about what this "operation" should've been and it's in Russian for local consumption but chrome translator does a pretty good job translating it in English









Наступление России и нового мира


Новый мир рождается на наших глазах. Военная операция России на Украине открыла новую эпоху — причем сразу в трех измерениях. И конечно, в четвертом,... РИА Новости, 26.02.2022




web.archive.org


----------



## nightflameauto

fantom said:


> I highly doubt Putin sent in the real military. From my understanding, it's a bunch of riot police and draftees. He literally threatened NATO. You don't send your real military if you are afraid of a legitimate counter attack.
> 
> 
> And anyone please explain to me why a chunk of the GOP is backing Putin?! Literally all that BS the last 5+ years about "freedom" and they are routing for an oppressive dictator to kill an elected leader of a democratic country to put in a puppet? Every single country in Europe and Asia is proudly displaying support for Ukraine and these counterculture asshats latch onto propaganda of a "peacekeeping" invasion threatening nuclear war like Jesus coming to save them. Wtf is wrong with Americans.


Because Trump is swinging from Putin's nuts and there's still a portion of the GOP that can't stop worshiping the half-alive orange troll doll.

I gotta wonder, with most of the Russian citizenry not at all interested in this war, to the point of open protest that they know they'll get beat down for? Maybe the military leadership is intentionally bungling the invasion in order to make Putin look inept? Though, even if that were the case, it could backfire of the little spazz manages to fire up the correct set of morons to actually follow through on his nuclear threats.

As a dude in the middle of nowhere US, I'm disappointed our country isn't and doesn't seem to be able to do more to help Ukraine without making this whole situation even uglier. What a mess.


----------



## Adieu

Louis Cypher said:


> BBC News website is reporting that Putins government and State TV are blaming comments made by NATO and have named the UK foreign secretary Liz Truss specifically for her comment's on Sunday about a Russia NATO war as being a reason for their Nuclear option escalation.... fcuking hell.....



Lolwhut?

Putin's government is 100% convinced the UK is a cross between Dubai for white people and Disneyland for the nouveau riche.

Nobody goes on full nuclear alert because the mall's administration was rude to you. Even if it IS your favorite posh mall.


----------



## pick_d

oversteve said:


> There's plenty of info on channels like Rain or Echo Moskvy that at least try to show some info on what's going on here in Ukraine opposed to channels managed by your government, plenty of vids or captured russian military, destroyed military vehicles and dead bodies of Russian solders, I can help you find them if you need



I know what they are and where they are. However, I saw too many fakes and misleading news already, literally spent a lot of time digging into this and rather avoid any biased media until it's over.
As I said earlier, hope the war ends ASAP. Good luck, everyone.


----------



## Randy

Putin going full Karen


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> oh btw, completely forgot, there was this article mistakenly auto-published by ria.ru 2 days ago and then taken down but it was cached, it's about what this "operation" should've been and it's in Russian for local consumption but chrome translator does a pretty good job translating it in English
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Наступление России и нового мира
> 
> 
> Новый мир рождается на наших глазах. Военная операция России на Украине открыла новую эпоху — причем сразу в трех измерениях. И конечно, в четвертом,... РИА Новости, 26.02.2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> web.archive.org



Oh so it's "a civil war to solve the Ukrainian question"?

Yeah, definitely count me on the NOT WITH PUTIN side. Because fuck that homicidal kleptomaniac. Or genocidal? Bit vague on what the historic "solution" for non-compliant Ukrainians might be.


----------



## 4Eyes




----------



## nightflameauto

4Eyes said:


> View attachment 103957


Since February 31st never happens, I guess we're good? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## Adieu

Oh well not at all surprising except in how brazen it was.

Asshole always did give off an "obsessive stalker who'll turn violently rapey if rejected" vibe.

PS that's about Putin and Ukraine.... although Kadyrov and anything else, too. Anybody ever check if he's just MAYBE the gnomish overlord's unrecognized bastard?


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

The offensive of Russia and the new world 

A new world is being born before our eyes. Russia's military operation in Ukraine has ushered in a new era - and in three dimensions at once. And of course, in the fourth, internal Russian. Here begins a new period both in ideology and in the very model of our socio-economic system - but this is worth talking about separately a little later. 

Russia is restoring its unity - the tragedy of 1991, this terrible catastrophe in our history, its unnatural dislocation, has been overcome. Yes, at a great cost, yes, through the tragic events of a virtual civil war, because now brothers, separated by belonging to the Russian and Ukrainian armies, are still shooting at each other, but there will be no more Ukraine as anti-Russia. Russia is restoring its historical fullness, gathering the Russian world, the Russian people together - in its entirety of Great Russians, Belarusians and Little Russians. If we had abandoned this, if we had allowed the temporary division to take hold for centuries, then we would not only betray the memory of our ancestors, but would also be cursed by our descendants for allowing the disintegration of the Russian land.

Vladimir Putin has assumed, without a drop of exaggeration, a historic responsibility by deciding not to leave the solution of the Ukrainian question to future generations. After all, the need to solve it would always remain the main problem for Russia - for two key reasons. And the issue of national security, that is, the creation of anti-Russia from Ukraine and an outpost for the West to put pressure on us, is only the second most important among them.

The first would always be the complex of a divided people, the complex of national humiliation - when the Russian house first lost part of its foundation (Kiev), and then was forced to come to terms with the existence of two states, not one, but two peoples. That is, either to abandon their history, agreeing with the insane versions that "only Ukraine is the real Russia," or to gnash one's teeth helplessly, remembering the times when "we lost Ukraine." Returning Ukraine, that is, turning it back to Russia, would be more and more difficult with every decade - recoding, de-Russification of Russians and inciting Ukrainian Little Russians against Russians would gain momentum. And in the event of the consolidation of the full geopolitical and military control of the West over Ukraine, its return to Russia would become completely impossible - it would have to fight for it with the Atlantic bloc. 

Now this problem is gone - Ukraine has returned to Russia. This does not mean that its statehood will be liquidated, but it will be reorganized, re-established and returned to its natural state of part of the Russian world. Within what boundaries, in what form will the alliance with Russia be consolidated (through the CSTO and the Eurasian Union or the Union State of Russia and Belarus)? This will be decided after the end is put in the history of Ukraine as anti-Russia. In any case, the period of the split of the Russian people is coming to an end. 

And here begins the second dimension of the coming new era - it concerns Russia's relations with the West. Not even Russia, but the Russian world, that is, three states, Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, acting in geopolitical terms as a single whole. These relations have entered a new stage - the West sees the return of Russia to its historical borders in Europe. And he is loudly indignant at this, although in the depths of his soul he must admit to himself that it could not be otherwise.

Did someone in the old European capitals, in Paris and Berlin, seriously believe that Moscow would give up Kyiv? That the Russians will forever be a divided people? And at the same time when Europe is uniting, when the German and French elites are trying to seize control of European integration from the Anglo-Saxons and assemble a united Europe? Forgetting that the unification of Europe became possible only thanks to the unification of Germany, which took place according to the good Russian (albeit not very smart) will. To swipe after that also on Russian lands is not even the height of ingratitude, but of geopolitical stupidity. The West as a whole, and even more so Europe in particular, did not have the strength to keep Ukraine in its sphere of influence, and even more so to take Ukraine for itself. In order not to understand this, one had to be just geopolitical fools. 

More precisely, there was only one option: to bet on the further collapse of Russia, that is, the Russian Federation. But the fact that it did not work should have been clear twenty years ago. And already fifteen years ago, after Putin's Munich speech, even the deaf could hear - Russia is returning.

Now the West is trying to punish Russia for the fact that it returned, for not justifying its plans to profit at its expense, for not allowing the expansion of the western space to the east. Seeking to punish us, the West thinks that relations with it are of vital importance to us. But this has not been the case for a long time - the world has changed, and this is well understood not only by Europeans, but also by the Anglo-Saxons who rule the West. No amount of Western pressure on Russia will lead to anything. There will be losses from the sublimation of confrontation on both sides, but Russia is ready for them morally and geopolitically. But for the West itself, an increase in the degree of confrontation incurs huge costs - and the main ones are not at all economic. 

Europe, as part of the West, wanted autonomy - the German project of European integration does not make strategic sense while maintaining the Anglo-Saxon ideological, military and geopolitical control over the Old World. Yes, and it cannot be successful, because the Anglo-Saxons need a controlled Europe. But Europe needs autonomy for another reason as well — in case the States go into self-isolation (as a result of growing internal conflicts and contradictions) or focus on the Pacific region, where the geopolitical center of gravity is moving.

But the confrontation with Russia, into which the Anglo-Saxons are dragging Europe, deprives the Europeans of even the chances of independence - not to mention the fact that in the same way Europe is trying to impose a break with China. If now the Atlanticists are happy that the "Russian threat" will unite the Western bloc, then in Berlin and Paris they cannot fail to understand that, having lost hope for autonomy, the European project will simply collapse in the medium term. That is why independent-minded Europeans are now completely uninterested in building a new iron curtain on their eastern borders - realizing that it will turn into a corral for Europe. Whose century (more precisely, half a millennium) of global leadership is over in any case - but various options for its future are still possible. 

Because the construction of a new world order - and this is the third dimension of current events - is accelerating, and its contours are more and more clearly visible through the spreading cover of Anglo-Saxon globalization. A multipolar world has finally become a reality - the operation in Ukraine is not capable of rallying anyone but the West against Russia. Because the rest of the world sees and understands perfectly well - this is a conflict between Russia and the West, this is a response to the geopolitical expansion of the Atlanticists, this is Russia's return of its historical space and its place in the world.

China and India, Latin America and Africa, the Islamic world and Southeast Asia - no one believes that the West leads the world order, much less sets the rules of the game. Russia has not only challenged the West, it has shown that the era of Western global domination can be considered completely and finally over. The new world will be built by all civilizations and centers of power, naturally, together with the West (united or not) - but not on its terms and not according to its rules. 

-------------------------------------------------------

Nothing says "victory" quite like pre-written "news" articles to a conflict Russia is apparently struggling with. Lmao


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

4Eyes said:


> View attachment 103957


February 31st. Lol


----------



## pick_d

4Eyes said:


> View attachment 103957


btw, it's a joke from here: 
As you can see, it is a fake account (with blue checkbox *on the* userpic). 

And if you googletranslate it, you will realize it's a total joke filled with thicccccest sarcasm:



> - Close the Chechen sky for the flights of their jets;
> - Freeze all of Johnson's ruble assets in Chechen banks;
> - Introduce an embargo on all assets of the British oligarchs in Achkhoy-Martan, and in case of deterioration - in Samashki;
> - Recognize left-hand traffic as a vile relic of the Middle Ages;
> - And to admit, finally, that there is no English tea!



Not that I defend this guy.


----------



## Xaios

In other news, Dewey defeats Truman.


----------



## Adieu

4Eyes said:


> View attachment 103957


Pretty sure that's a fake trolling him.

The attached document was PUUURRRFECTLY eloquent, while this guy is well-renowned for being unable to string 3 words together without:

1) messing up one word
2) adding Chechen grammar
3) mixing in 1 or 2 horrible verbal tics of "don", which is apparently, like, the Chechen version of valley girl "like"...in, like, Chechen don, not so much Russian. DON!


----------



## tedtan

I don’t think Putin would half ass the invasion unless he was acting on bad information because 1) he still looks bad, and 2) is suffering the loss of troops, equipment, money and respect.

Maybe he expected the Ukrainians to welcome him with open arms, but they clearly don’t want anything to do with him.


----------



## Adieu

Did having to steal so many elections before teach him NOTHING?


----------



## tedtan

oversteve said:


> oh btw, completely forgot, there was this article mistakenly auto-published by ria.ru 2 days ago and then taken down but it was cached, it's about what this "operation" should've been and it's in Russian for local consumption but chrome translator does a pretty good job translating it in English
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Наступление России и нового мира
> 
> 
> Новый мир рождается на наших глазах. Военная операция России на Украине открыла новую эпоху — причем сразу в трех измерениях. И конечно, в четвертом,... РИА Новости, 26.02.2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> web.archive.org



The author must be on Putin’s payroll.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

pick_d said:


> btw, it's a joke from here:
> As you can see, it is a fake account (with blue checkbox *on the* userpic).
> 
> And if you googletranslate it, you will realize it's a total joke filled with thicccccest sarcasm:
> 
> 
> 
> Not that I defend this guy.



I figured it was a joke. I just found that part hilarious.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

tedtan said:


> The author must be on Putin’s payroll.


Isn't all state run media in Russia?


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

tedtan said:


> I don’t think Putin would half ass the invasion unless he was acting on bad information because 1) he still looks bad, and 2) is suffering the loss of troops, equipment, money and respect.
> 
> Maybe he expected the Ukrainians to welcome him with open arms, but they clearly don’t want anything to do with him.


Russia: "We are doing this 'unification' because of anti-Russian and de-Russification!" 

Pretty sure that's going to further the Ukraine's dislike towards Russia.


----------



## Randy

Sounds like EU poised to fast track adding Ukraine, and requests to join NATO are spiking sharply. Putin seemingly getting the exact opposite of the desired outcome from this. Well, let me rephrase... with him it's always about power and attention but as far as shrinking opposition around his borders, it's increasing it exponentially. Putin essentially history's greatest NATO/EU recruiter.


----------



## nightflameauto

Just stumbled over some news from the weekend I missed. Apparently the Russian space agency is floating some bullshit about how sanctions against Russia will cause the ISS to plummet in an "uncontrolled fall" that will land in the US or western Europe. Yeah, right. "Uncontrolled."

Meantime, NASA has a Northrup/Gruman mission to push the station for it's next boost. And Musk has promise SpaceX resources to keep the ISS in orbit if all else fails.

Putin and his lackeys are starting to sound even more unhinged than most of us thought they were.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

I must say, I'm very unimpressed. Either Russia has coasted on hype for almost 80 years and their military is a complete joke, or this is some kind of attempt to lure the west into invading Russia. Perhaps Putin miscalculated and thought they'd basically roll over and play dead. I don't know. Either way, I was born towards the tail end of the USSR in America, and learned about the Cold War, etc., so I'm not impressed.


----------



## Randy

Spaced Out Ace said:


> I must say, I'm very unimpressed. Either Russia has coasted on hype for almost 80 years and their military is a complete joke, or this is some kind of attempt to lure the west into invading Russia. Perhaps Putin miscalculated and thought they'd basically roll over and play dead. I don't know. Either way, I was born towards the tail end of the USSR in America, and learned about the Cold War, etc., so I'm not impressed.



Grew up hearing the same thing. Most of it is probably true or was, but I'd imagine the sanctions on and off over the last few decades have been unexpectedly effective, mixed with a healthy share of the defense money being embezzled and invested elsewhere. 

I don't think there was a 3D chess thing trying to make the West think he was inept, but I do think he underestimated the resistance he'd get and he sent less than his A-squad in. I think he probably thought the initial invasion would be more effective, but then he'd have the secondary wave (like the 3 1/2 mile long convoy) that would encircle the capital in time for him to strongarm the negotiations and get 100% of what he wants. 

He may still get his wish on the Ukraine end, but the "scaling" approach was a failure yeah. He lost a lot of weaponry that would've been necessary after he overwhelmed the capital with the second wave, so now he's gotta stitch that part together. Should've been a full overwhelming force from day one, full blitz.


----------



## bostjan

Most of the shit the Russian military uses is held together with duct tape and when it doesn't work, I think people just tend to still report everything is okay to avoid problems. It's sort of always been like that, from what I gather. I'm sure vets from the US will point out that the same applied to the US military, but there's a difference between there being broken stuff to deal with and hardly anything working like it should.

That said, though, Russia is still scary as hell. It's a huuuge country with vast resources and very resourceful people. I have a gut feeling that a good portion of things not going so well in Ukraine boils down to the fact that the people in the Russian army aren't too committed to the cause. If the Russians were the ones being invaded, it would likely be a very different story.

If it's true that there is a push to get Ukraine into NATO post-haste, I'm not sure what will happen. It could be a big mess for everybody, but if Ukraine enters NATO, and Putin has threatened nuclear assault, it'd leave him with two options: make good on the threat and be annihilated in retaliation, leading to the end of the world as we know it, or back off his threat. Knowing what I know about Putin, I don't think it's favourable odds for humanity.


----------



## pondman

True or not, it made me laugh.








Ukrainian sailor sinks Russian boss’s $7.7 million luxury superyacht


The chief engineer – who had been working on the vessel for more than a decade – opened one valve in the engine room.




nypost.com


----------



## oversteve

Randy said:


> Grew up hearing the same thing. Most of it is probably true or was, but I'd imagine the sanctions on and off over the last few decades have been unexpectedly effective, mixed with a healthy share of the defense money being embezzled and invested elsewhere.
> 
> I don't think there was a 3D chess thing trying to make the West think he was inept, but I do think he underestimated the resistance he'd get and he sent less than his A-squad in. I think he probably thought the initial invasion would be more effective, but then he'd have the secondary wave (like the 3 1/2 mile long convoy) that would encircle the capital in time for him to strongarm the negotiations and get 100% of what he wants.
> 
> He may still get his wish on the Ukraine end, but the "scaling" approach was a failure yeah. He lost a lot of weaponry that would've been necessary after he overwhelmed the capital with the second wave, so now he's gotta stitch that part together. Should've been a full overwhelming force from day one, full blitz.


You can say they've sent their "A-teams" here, there is already a confirmed kill of the general from elite Kadyrov squad and probably other memebrs of the squad killed as well, some special task forces platoons eliminated while they were trying to occupy the airport near Kyiv, also there were some news about some members of Vagner squad eiliminated while doing covert operations in Kyiv but that one is not confirmed sofar.

Putin already sent a request for the troops of Kazakhstan to support him but it was turned down, now he's trying to make Belarus join him and it's likely they might join in few days.


----------



## Crungy

pondman said:


> True or not, it made me laugh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukrainian sailor sinks Russian boss’s $7.7 million luxury superyacht
> 
> 
> The chief engineer – who had been working on the vessel for more than a decade – opened one valve in the engine room.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


What a stud, he's quoted as saying:

”I am not going to lose my country. I am not a hero, I’m a middle-aged man, but I have a lot of experience as a mechanic.”

“I’ve never held a weapon but if necessary I will. Why not!”


----------



## oversteve

pondman said:


> True or not, it made me laugh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukrainian sailor sinks Russian boss’s $7.7 million luxury superyacht
> 
> 
> The chief engineer – who had been working on the vessel for more than a decade – opened one valve in the engine room.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


that one is true, got a friend in Spain who confirmed it and said that the guy was already released


----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> He may still get his wish on the Ukraine end, but the "scaling" approach was a failure yeah. He lost a lot of weaponry that would've been necessary after he overwhelmed the capital with the second wave, so now he's gotta stitch that part together. Should've been a full overwhelming force from day one, full blitz.



Too late.

Ukrainians were always culturally more defiant and far less prone to low morale. Now they've rallied, tasted blood, victories, and accumulated grievances.

No short win possible and Putin just doesn't have the time to play a long game.

Especially considering that the aborted manifesto-victory-speech masquerading as an article was clearly penned by the same team behind this harebrained plot and thus shows his hand.

No nukes or carpetbombing major targets indiscriminately possible, no toxic little gnome sh!t like chemical weapons or bacteriological either. He thinks of Kyiv as a crown jewel in his new fantasy empire and "the good ones" among the populace as a major foundation.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

Randy said:


> Grew up hearing the same thing. Most of it is probably true or was, but I'd imagine the sanctions on and off over the last few decades have been unexpectedly effective, mixed with a healthy share of the defense money being embezzled and invested elsewhere.
> 
> I don't think there was a 3D chess thing trying to make the West think he was inept, but I do think he underestimated the resistance he'd get and he sent less than his A-squad in. I think he probably thought the initial invasion would be more effective, but then he'd have the secondary wave (like the 3 1/2 mile long convoy) that would encircle the capital in time for him to strongarm the negotiations and get 100% of what he wants.
> 
> He may still get his wish on the Ukraine end, but the "scaling" approach was a failure yeah. He lost a lot of weaponry that would've been necessary after he overwhelmed the capital with the second wave, so now he's gotta stitch that part together. Should've been a full overwhelming force from day one, full blitz.


He did the equivalent of go up to a hot broad looking to "practice" procreation, and he's shooting blanks and requiring viagra. Pathetic, to be quite honest. If he really expected to do what you stated, he should've, I don't know, actually sent in proper forces, not guys thinking it was a training mission.


----------



## jaxadam

Xaios said:


> In other news, Dewey defeats Truman.



And that my friends is why we don’t have the Truman Decimal System.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

Adieu said:


> Too late.
> 
> Ukrainians were always culturally more defiant and far less prone to low morale. Now they've rallied, tasted blood, victories, and accumulated grievances.
> 
> No short win possible and Putin just doesn't have the time to play a long game.
> 
> Especially considering that the aborted manifesto-victory-speech masquerading as an article was clearly penned by the same team behind this harebrained plot and thus shows his hand.
> 
> No nukes or carpetbombing major targets indiscriminately possible, no toxic little gnome sh!t like chemical weapons or bacteriological either. He thinks of Kyiv as a crown jewel in his new fantasy empire and "the good ones" among the populace as a major foundation.


What was this all about anyways? Is he expecting an election cycle soon or something, and hoped this would increase his % numbers? The only result that happened, as far as I can see, is he went in expecting a 7 day war, and ended up looking like an inept buffoon.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

Switzerland is freezing assets not remaining neutral.


----------



## oversteve

Spaced Out Ace said:


> What was this all about anyways? Is he expecting an election cycle soon or something, and hoped this would increase his % numbers? The only result that happened, as far as I can see, is he went in expecting a 7 day war, and ended up looking like an inept buffoon.


Local politoligsts say that 
1) he has an ambition of partially recreating USSR and he think Ukraine and Belarus are essential parts of it
2) our capital Kyiv has a long standing history of being a cradle of slavic culture and he can't bear the fact that it's not the part of Russia and it's history, he even claimed some bullshit like Lenin creating Ukraine in the XX century


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> No nukes or carpetbombing major targets indiscriminately possible, no toxic little gnome sh!t like chemical weapons or bacteriological either. He thinks of Kyiv as a crown jewel in his new fantasy empire and "the good ones" among the populace as a major foundation.



Unfortunately I'm not so sure about that, that really depends on his sanity. For example today Russian troops were cluster bombing residential area in Kharkiv using Smerch launcher.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

oversteve said:


> Local politoligsts say that
> 1) he has an ambition of partially recreating USSR and he think Ukraine and Belarus are essential parts of it
> 2) our capital Kyiv has a long standing history of being a cradle of slavic culture and he can't bear the fact that it's not the part of Russia and it's history, he even claimed some bullshit like Lenin creating Ukraine in the XX century


I could just see some Ukrainian talking to some random news outlet asking random people about their tattoos, saying shit like, "I got Putin tattooed on my ass, so he can smell something similar to himself every time I use the toilet." Lol


----------



## Adieu

Spaced Out Ace said:


> What was this all about anyways? Is he expecting an election cycle soon or something, and hoped this would increase his % numbers? The only result that happened, as far as I can see, is he went in expecting a 7 day war, and ended up looking like an inept buffoon.



No

He was expecting a special op decapitation strike at Kyiv leadership immediately followed by rolling in all the fools currently looking like confused bums

Except in his mind those fools were there to prevent *NATO* from parachuting in. Not by force, but just by virtue of getting there first. Local resistance was somehow not expected. Like, at all.

Or maybe from some oddball paramilitarized pseudopolitical radical elements in Western Ukraine, but surely not in the East (oops)

...also, they screwed the pooch and didn't manage to assassinate or arrest anyone of any importance whatsoever. Maybe they got lost? Maybe there's some superprofessional counterintelligence meddling in the shadows and/or not reporting the odder news since it'd just get called fake? Who knows


----------



## nightflameauto

Dineley said:


> Switzerland is freezing assets not remaining neutral.


Considering their history, that's pretty telling.

I imagine some Russian upper-crusters are putting out feelers for hitmen about now.


----------



## Xaios

At this point you almost have to wonder if Putin really did believe everything he was saying, that he really thought that Ukraine had been taken over by neonazis and that he was liberating a repressed popul*BAHAHAHAHAAA... *oh God, I'm sorry, I couldn't get through it, it was just too hard...


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> Unfortunately I'm not so sure about that, that really depends on his sanity. For example today Russian troops were cluster bombing residential area in Kharkiv using Smerch launcher.



I know. That guy needs to die.

What I meant though is that his objective is "colonization" and it is a decades-long dream of his... he won't switch to total annihilation simply because that's just as much or more of a loss.

Hopefully.


But seriously let's just kill him already anyway.


----------



## 4Eyes

I just can't stop thinking about how Putler's army leaders felt when he ordered green light for invasion to Ukraine. Knowing that for years they've been stealing money aimed at modernizing army and increasing it's power, training soldiers, for which they've been buying properties in the so much hated west. And then seeing that what they've reported as combat ready, mighty and fearful army is bunch of drunk, confused youngsters riding soviet era vehicles that fall apart halfway to it's destination. priceless....

Czechoslovakian comedy film "The Black barons" describing CSSR army, comes to my mind and best part is that after 30years it may be pretty accurate at describing the current state of units ordered to invade Ukraine.



Adieu said:


> But seriously let's just kill him already anyway.



I think he knows that he is dead man already, he knew it from the moment it was clear that this "special op" won't be matter of couple of hours.


----------



## ItWillDo

From the media we've seen, most of the troops & material sent seem to be either border patrol or conscripts. Nothing shown here comes close to what they've been using in recent conflicts like Syria.

In all honesty, I'm rather glad about it as it implies they probably want to keep the country as intact as possible. And don't be naive, I'm convinced that if they really wanted to go all out and didn't care, Kiev would've been reduced to rubble by now.


----------



## bostjan

nightflameauto said:


> Considering their history, that's pretty telling.
> 
> I imagine some Russian upper-crusters are putting out feelers for hitmen about now.


There are tons of Swiss companies who moved their manufacturing to Ukraine. It's like the "Made in Mexico" of Europe in some ways.


----------



## Adieu

4Eyes said:


> I think he knows that he is dead man already, he knew it from the moment it was clear that this "special op" won't be matter of couple of hours.




Nah

The sheer magnitude of social media propaganda domination is something he still hasn't begun to understand

He doesn't even seem to know what that is


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> From the media we've seen, most of the troops & material sent seem to be either border patrol or conscripts. Nothing shown here comes close to what they've been using in recent conflicts like Syria.
> 
> In all honesty, I'm rather glad about it as it implies they probably want to keep the country as intact as possible. And don't be naive, I'm convinced that if they really wanted to go all out and didn't care, Kiev would've been reduced to rubble by now.


Yep, majority is russian scrap-metal. But still there's plenty of their elites and recent weapons already wasted here, some of them even captured alive/undamaged. After all it's a bit different from Syria here.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

I’ve not really had strong opinions of Putin one way or the other as a whole (perhaps on specific things), but this aggression from him, especially with the Russians claiming self defense, makes me dislike him greatly. Imagine claiming a fucking country less than half your size is being aggressive to you, when you invaded them. Fuck off with that nonsense!


----------



## 4Eyes

Adieu said:


> Nah
> 
> The sheer magnitude of social media propaganda domination is something he still hasn't begun to understand
> 
> He doesn't even seem to know what that is


I meant that through optics of sanctions, 90% of economy relevant parties do not want to have anything in common with Russia, now. I bet my balls there is someone from his inner circles thinking about taking mad man out, before he destroys everything.

social media means nothing when it comes to real life...


----------



## nightflameauto

Spaced Out Ace said:


> I’ve not really had strong opinions of Putin one way or the other as a whole (perhaps on specific things), but this aggression from him, especially with the Russians claiming self defense, makes me dislike him greatly. Imagine claiming a fucking country less than half your size is being aggressive to you, when you invaded them. Fuck off with that nonsense!


Since Putin's stated goal was to "free the people of Ukraine from the Neonazi takeover of the country," the fact the reaction was not universal love among the Ukrainian public has lead to this "they're being aggressive" bullshit.

It's a feedback loop of belief in self-created narratives.


----------



## oversteve

Spaced Out Ace said:


> I’ve not really had strong opinions of Putin one way or the other as a whole (perhaps on specific things), but this aggression from him, especially with the Russians claiming self defense, makes me dislike him greatly. Imagine claiming a fucking country less than half your size is being aggressive to you, when you invaded them. Fuck off with that nonsense!


it's way less then half ...


----------



## Randy

The thing I'm not totally getting is I thought Russia' strength was their air force. As of this morning I saw a total of like 30 planes downed, and 30 helicopters downed. Where are these waves and waves of fighter jets?


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

If I were in the inner circle of Russia’s political structure, theoretically speaking, and I wanted Putin removed, I would possibly befriend him, hype him up on restoring the USSR, then sit back and watch it blow up I need his face.

Theoretically speaking, that is.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

Randy said:


> The thing I'm not totally getting is I thought Russia' strength was their air force. As of this morning I saw a total of like 30 planes downed, and 30 helicopters downed. Where are these waves and waves of fighter jets?


I think Russia’s corruption has lead to its forces rotting.


----------



## oversteve

Randy said:


> The thing I'm not totally getting is I thought Russia' strength was their air force. As of this morning I saw a total of like 30 planes downed, and 30 helicopters downed. Where are these waves and waves of fighter jets?


Probably to lessen their casualties. We got plenty of buks and stingers. Also we've already got our own Erich Hartmann here who took down half of those planes


----------



## ItWillDo

Randy said:


> The thing I'm not totally getting is I thought Russia' strength was their air force. As of this morning I saw a total of like 30 planes downed, and 30 helicopters downed. Where are these waves and waves of fighter jets?


I think you might've been baited in regards to the numbers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_losses_during_the_war_in_Donbas

Aside from that, I think you might be confusing "American" warfare with what is going on here. The US' MO is usually swooping in in an area of conflict, destroying all infrastructure and lifelines and then rolling in the ground troops. Just look at any middle-eastern country that was in conflict with them the past several years. As priorly mentioned, Russia seemingly wants (or atleast _wanted_) to limit the number of casualties. What concerns me the most is that there are sightings of large Smerch & Tornado-G convoys. If these get deployed, the warfare is going to get a lot less urban really fast:


----------



## Randy

ItWillDo said:


> I think you might've been baited in regards to the numbers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_losses_during_the_war_in_Donbas



It's all bait. Ukrainian Defense Ministry put that number out there, they very well have reason to bulk the number up but even the wiki you sent says thing like "at least" so it's far from comprehensive. You actually make my point for me, the amount of assault from the air has been miniscule. And no I didn't mistake their approach for the US, I was thinking more about Russia's involvement in Syria.


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> I think you might've been baited in regards to the numbers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_losses_during_the_war_in_Donbas
> 
> Aside from that, I think you might be confusing "American" warfare with what is going on here. The US' MO is usually swooping in in an area of conflict, destroying all infrastructure and lifelines and then rolling in the ground troops. Just look at any middle-eastern country that was in conflict with them the past several years. As priorly mentioned, Russia seemingly wants (or atleast _wanted_) to limit the number of casualties. What concerns me the most is that there are sightings of large Smerch & Tornado-G convoys. If these get deployed, the warfare is going to get a lot less urban really fast:



This list seems to be missing some items so idk if it's properly updated atm.

Also they have already deployed both Grad and Smerch here. They have already fired over 100 long range rockets over these few days (Iskanders and Kalibr), luckily half of them were intercepted and part of them hit some empty warehouses

btw looks like that video is from few days ago and that's what left of them


----------



## Randy




----------



## Wc707




----------



## Shoeless_jose

This twitter thread has a very good break down from military guy 

Thread


----------



## ramses

Randy said:


> The thing I'm not totally getting is I thought Russia' strength was their air force. As of this morning I saw a total of like 30 planes downed, and 30 helicopters downed. Where are these waves and waves of fighter jets?



I was also asking the same.

This is a good analysis published today. The third and last point is very important:









The Mysterious Case of the Missing Russian Air Force


On the fifth day of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, one of many unanswered questions is why Russia has launched a military campaign at huge cost with maximalist objectives, and then declined to use the vast majority of its fixed wing combat aircraft.




rusi.org


----------



## littlebadboy

Wc707 said:


> As an American watching this from the States, I hope you and your family are well and can stay safe!





oversteve said:


> Yup, I'm living in Ukraine and safe sofar



Same as Wc707, I pray that you and family as well as friends are safe.

If this video is true, it seems that the intention and situation is complicated.


----------



## Randy




----------



## Flappydoodle

The sanctions are amounting to be pretty brutal now. Travel bans and asset freezes for lots of Putin's buddies. Even if you can't confiscate all of their money, you can stop them being able to enjoy it or keep it in the safe haven of London etc. That's going to put pressure on him, because most of those people likely don't give a shit about Ukraine, but do enjoy sending their kids to Eton, shopping at Harrods, skiing in the Alps etc.

Even Sony, Mastercard, VISA getting in on it now. That's going to really hurt for the average Russian, who now can't use credit cards, Apple Pay etc and they're stuck in Roubles because they have run out of dollars and euros because Putin has banned people from changing their money out of Roubles. Give it a couple weeks and there will be MASSIVE internal pressure on Putin to resolve this when people can't pay mortgages because the interest rate is 20% and their money is worthless.

The whole thing is just weird though. Ukraine reporting these massive (unbelievable?) numbers of Russians killed, surrendering, tanks destroyed etc. Russia reporting that Ukranians are surrendering en masse. It's like a parallel universe, and neither side is really very believable IMO. Then there's the seemingly absent Russian aircraft which they're barely using.

Combine that with the peace talks, where it seems Putin is basically asking for Crimea and a guarantee of Ukrainian independence, it still feels like some massive "bluff" in some way, right? Like Putin is going to accept Crimea as a prize, claim victory and then be done with it. I can't really see Russia weathering these sort of sanctions and almost unanimous condemnation for long. I'm not a military expert, but are they really going to occupy Ukraine while having an insurgency supplied by Western weaponry? Even if Russia starts indiscriminately bombing, that's very different to actually holding the country and getting what they want from it. Ukraine is handing out guns to everybody, women making Molotovs, and the UK, EU etc sending thousands and thousands of Stingers and other handheld anti-tank, anti-helicopter weapons. That's virtually impossible to stamp out, and makes holding the territory incredibly difficult and miserable. This isn't Afghanistan where it was small arms and IEDs by farmers (and still made it miserable for America). This is built up cities and proper road networks where people are shooting at you with lethal anti-tank missiles.

The scary part IMO is backing Putin into a corner with seemingly no way out. If we are arming Ukraine, putting internal pressure on Putin and essentially trying to overthrow him, there's a risk of pushing him to do something absolutely desperate like going out in a blaze of nuclear glory. The politicians need to make sure they always provide him a way out where he won't seem like a 100% loser and not to escalate anything too much to make him feel encircled.


----------



## Randy

> Like Putin is going to accept Crimea as a prize, claim victory and then be done with it.


You left out the part about him insisting they "denazify" and "demilitarize" themselves.

As far as improbable claims, so far most of the Ukrainian claims are backed up by cell phone videos walking down miles and miles of destroyed and abandoned Russian hardware. There's also the fact none of the major cities (as of now) have been seized. Those are two concrete things you can see with your own two eyes and aren't exactly easy to "fake" like a Facebook post with some numbers they dreamt up. So far there hasn't been a Russian equivalent to those pieces of evidence.


----------



## nickgray

Flappydoodle said:


> The whole thing is just weird though



It seems that Putin thought that the Russian army would be mostly met with open arms, that this would be a quick, relatively bloodless operation. The only thing that makes sense to me is that he genuinely is delusional, he really thought everything would go the way he thought it would, but in reality every single thing has backfired in a spectacular way.


----------



## ramses

Flappydoodle said:


> The scary part IMO is backing Putin into a corner with seemingly no way out. If we are arming Ukraine, putting internal pressure on Putin and essentially trying to overthrow him, there's a risk of pushing him to do something absolutely desperate like going out in a blaze of nuclear glory. The politicians need to make sure they always provide him a way out where he won't seem like a 100% loser and not to escalate anything too much to make him feel encircled.



Please keep in mind that Russians are human beings.

An unhinged Putin cannot do anything, nuclear-strike-wise. People won't follow, won't obey (blindly). Russians are human beings.

Russian Generals are not worried about NATO attacking Russia. They are just worried about Putin's stupid ideas, and Ukraine exposing all their weaknesses (and corruption and incompetence).

I strongly suspect that in less than a month, asshole-dictator-Putin will be found in his bedroom either poisoned or with a bullet inside his stupid asshole brain.


----------



## Xaios

ramses said:


> An unhinged Putin cannot do anything, nuclear-strike-wise. People won't follow, won't obey (blindly). Russians are human beings.


How much faith do you have that this would even matter? Putin may have lost the plot, but he's obviously been on the same path for a long, long time, and has had the opportunity to plan for every eventuality. While this war has exposed some pretty glaring issues with Russian logistics, who's to say that Putin hasn't had a system in place for long time now which would allow him to launch nuclear weapons without going through the chain of command? The guy is a paranoid dictator, which makes it likely that he doesn't fully trust anyone under him, and as such has quite possibly made preparations to take matters into his own hands.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

ramses said:


> Please keep in mind that Russians are human beings.
> 
> An unhinged Putin cannot do anything, nuclear-strike-wise. People won't follow, won't obey (blindly). Russians are human beings.
> 
> Russian Generals are not worried about NATO attacking Russia. They are just worried about Putin's stupid ideas, and Ukraine exposing all their weaknesses (and corruption and incompetence).
> 
> I strongly suspect that in less than a month, asshole-dictator-Putin will be found in his bedroom either poisoned or with a bullet inside his stupid asshole brain
> 
> 
> I hope this is the case as if seems like least awful way this can go


----------



## Adieu

nightflameauto said:


> Since Putin's stated goal was to "free the people of Ukraine from the Neonazi takeover of the country," the fact the reaction was not universal love among the Ukrainian public has lead to this "they're being aggressive" bullshit.
> 
> It's a feedback loop of belief in self-created narratives.



This whole delusional narrative can be summarized as:

Putin: "Stop the Nazi takeover of Ukraine"

World: "OK"

Putin: "...wait, what? Nooo! I wasn't talking about me!"

Putin: "Well, f.ck."


----------



## Flappydoodle

Randy said:


> You left out the part about him insisting they "denazify" and "demilitarize" themselves.
> 
> As far as improbable claims, so far most of the Ukrainian claims are backed up by cell phone videos walking down miles and miles of destroyed and abandoned Russian hardware. There's also the fact none of the major cities (as of now) have been seized. Those are two concrete things you can see with your own two eyes and aren't exactly easy to "fake" like a Facebook post with some numbers they dreamt up. So far there hasn't been a Russian equivalent to those pieces of evidence.



That's true. But from the sounds of the peace talks in Belarus, his main concern is Ukraine becoming an extension of NATO. And in 100% fairness, that's a legitimate and fairly rational concern from his point of view. I think the Nazi stuff is a pretty obvious diversion. I think he'd be happy with a different government which is at least neutral, if not pro-Russian.



nickgray said:


> It seems that Putin thought that the Russian army would be mostly met with open arms, that this would be a quick, relatively bloodless operation. The only thing that makes sense to me is that he genuinely is delusional, he really thought everything would go the way he thought it would, but in reality every single thing has backfired in a spectacular way.



I honestly find it really hard to believe that he would TRULY believe that. Could he honestly be that self-delusional? I do agree that seems like it's backfiring, but he has a reputation as a smart, savvy leader with good instincts. Russia has spies all over Ukraine and elsewhere. They'll be monitoring the communications of Zelensky and EU leaders. He'll know polling results. He'll know how real the Ukrainian election results were. It seems improbable to me that he was so incredibly ill-informed about this.

One plausible theory I've read is that the Covid pandemic has massively taken its toll on him. As you might have heard, he was seriously isolating, forcing people to get tested before meeting him, doing daily tests etc. Seems like it was almost a severe paranoia. So perhaps his mental health has taken a hit.

He might also be ill. For all we know he has stage 4 pancreatic cancer and this is an attempt to make a mark before he dies. That's pure speculation, of course.



ramses said:


> Please keep in mind that Russians are human beings.
> 
> An unhinged Putin cannot do anything, nuclear-strike-wise. People won't follow, won't obey (blindly). Russians are human beings.
> 
> Russian Generals are not worried about NATO attacking Russia. They are just worried about Putin's stupid ideas, and Ukraine exposing all their weaknesses (and corruption and incompetence).
> 
> I strongly suspect that in less than a month, asshole-dictator-Putin will be found in his bedroom either poisoned or with a bullet inside his stupid asshole brain.



I agree that Russians are human beings, and I absolutely HOPE that his generals, chiefs of staff (or whatever equivalents) would refuse to obey some unjustified pre-emptive strike. However, I just don't know enough about the people he surrounds himself with. If Trump had ordered a nuclear attack, I think the overwhelming majority of US military would have disobeyed - but all you need is one absolute ally with a ton of blind faith. Does Russia have Michael Flynn types in high leadership positions? I would imagine they have at least a few.

I'm also not convinced that some sort of assassination would be the way to go. If it fails (and most do, to my knowledge), it makes him EVEN more paranoid and unhinged.


----------



## nickgray

Flappydoodle said:


> but he has a reputation as a smart, savvy leader with good instincts



People are giving him WAY too much credit. He's a smart leader in the sense that he managed to consolidate power and become a dictator. You also have to consider the state and the history of the country - the USSR is gone, but the people and the USSR mentality definitely were not. Russia is notorious for all kind of ridiculous and grandiose government investments and claims that never end up bearing any fruit, it all goes into the pockets of corrupt officials. The economical state of Russia, the infrastructure, the healthcare system, the... well, everything is kinda shit really. About half of Russia's economy is centered around natural resources, and not much has been done to stop the reliance on the natural resources.

In other words, Putin is good at being a small dick dictator. Putin is shit at actually being useful and ruling the country in a sensible way.



Flappydoodle said:


> One plausible theory I've read is that the Covid pandemic has massively taken its toll on him.



The events of 2014 in and of themselves alone were absolutely insane. The war in Ukraine is not a new thing. It's the logical conclusion of everything that followed before (older than 2014 as well). Putin has always been a crazy tiny dick dictator. People did warn about him, for years.

I can see how this might be unexpected for westerners, but being Russian myself (not from Russia, thankfully...), nothing is surprising about this. I mean, it kind of is surprising, you know, being a rational person you generally hope that gigantic shitstorm of such magnitude is unlikely, but it did happen, and like I've said, the writing has been on the wall for years and years.


----------



## Flappydoodle

nickgray said:


> People are giving him WAY too much credit. He's a smart leader in the sense that he managed to consolidate power and become a dictator. You also have to consider the state and the history of the country - the USSR is gone, but the people and the USSR mentality definitely were not. Russia is notorious for all kind of ridiculous and grandiose government investments and claims that never end up bearing any fruit, it all goes into the pockets of corrupt officials. The economical state of Russia, the infrastructure, the healthcare system, the... well, everything is kinda shit really. About half of Russia's economy is centered around natural resources, and not much has been done to stop the reliance on the natural resources.
> 
> In other words, Putin is good at being a small dick dictator. Putin is shit at actually being useful and ruling the country in a sensible way.
> 
> 
> 
> The events of 2014 in and of themselves alone were absolutely insane. The war in Ukraine is not a new thing. It's the logical conclusion of everything that followed before (older than 2014 as well). Putin has always been a crazy tiny dick dictator. People did warn about him, for years.
> 
> I can see how this might be unexpected for westerners, but being Russian myself (not from Russia, thankfully...), nothing is surprising about this. I mean, it kind of is surprising, you know, being a rational person you generally hope that gigantic shitstorm of such magnitude is unlikely, but it did happen, and like I've said, the writing has been on the wall for years and years.


I appreciate your response. 

I don’t think Putin is any sort of genius. But we’re talking about being so misguided that you must be absolutely ignoring things you can see with your very eyes. He has spies, intelligence, advisors etc. He speaks to western leaders. So he either was aware and didn’t care, or he really was THAT bad at judging. The latter is more scary IMO because it means we can’t count on him to be rational. 

As for the state of things IN Russia - do you think Putin actually ever tried to make things better? I think making his buddies rich probably was his goal, rather than improving healthcare etc. If he can’t be voted out, there isn’t much incentive for a guy like him to really try to improve things. 

And yeah, unfortunately the writing was on the wall since at least mid-January. Military exercises and moving tanks is one thing. But they set up all the boring logistical things, field medical centres, brought in cold storage of blood bags etc. You likely wouldn’t do that unless planning an invasion for real. 

I still can’t guess long term strategic goals though. Even when they eventually park tanks in Kyiv and throw out Zelensky, then what?


----------



## Adieu

Yeah right.

Putin's throne is a lot shakier than Zelensky's presidency right now.

And he can't even assassinate Zelensky, since that would give a lot of people the one idea he really, really doesn't want them to get. Especially since Putin's regime is a lot more of a one-man show.

At some point, even rabid supporters of Russian Imperialism might start to wonder if the Overlord's head presented on a platter (or pike) might just make sanctions go away.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Yeah right.
> 
> Putin's throne is a lot shakier than Zelensky's presidency right now.
> 
> And he can't even assassinate Zelensky, since that would give a lot of people the one idea he really, really doesn't want them to get. Especially since Putin's regime is a lot more of a one-man show.
> 
> At some point, even rabid supporters of Russian Imperialism might start to wonder if the Overlord's head presented on a platter (or pike) might just make sanctions go away.



Yup yup, and it seems that the sanctions have bitten faster and harder than we could have hoped. Seeing Putin allies on TV complaining that their villa was seized gives an idea how close to the edge Putin is. 

If you are someone who's wealth and power depend on Putin, you mostly keep your mouth shut in these difficult times. That anyone is even saying this stuff outloud makes me think that these allies feel that Putin is lacking authoirty.


----------



## nickgray

Flappydoodle said:


> I still can’t guess long term strategic goals though. Even when they eventually park tanks in Kyiv and throw out Zelensky, then what?



Yep. This is what pretty much everyone is talking about - there is no possible victory here, Lukashenko 2.0 is just not going to happen.

It's anyone's guess as to what happens next. One of the biggest pro-Putin arguments is that at least he provides stability and it's not like it was in the 90s when the economy was utterly fucked. Well, Russia in not on its way to the 90s, it's on it's way to fucking Iran. There's also the Russian catchphrase "just not war" (WW2-related collective memory), and Putin had managed to rack quite a body count (even if Ukranian estimates are hyped, it's still almost certainly in 4 figures now). The goverment is not releasing any info, but there's really no way to hide this, they're just postponing the inevitable. My guess is that if Putin's regime survives, they'll try to hide the real numbers and to silence the families as hard as they possibly can. But there's no way this would not affect politics in some way.

Fucking hell, the whole thing still feels surreal, I just can't imagine what it's like being in Russia right now, let alone Ukraine. What a colossal fucking cunt, he's literally a traitor to his own country, a fascist, what he's done is irreversible, I hope to god someone finds the courage to kill the crazy motherfucker, and do it asap because the clock is ticking.


----------



## LostTheTone

nickgray said:


> Yep. This is what pretty much everyone is talking about - there is no possible victory here, Lukashenko 2.0 is just not going to happen.
> 
> It's anyone's guess as to what happens next. One of the biggest pro-Putin arguments is that at least he provides stability and it's not like it was in the 90s when the economy was utterly fucked. Well, Russia in not on its way to the 90s, it's on it's way to fucking Iran. There's also the Russian catchphrase "just not war" (WW2-related collective memory), and Putin had managed to rack quite a body count (even if Ukranian estimates are hyped, it's still almost certainly in 4 figures now). The goverment is not releasing any info, but there's really no way to hide this, they're just postponing the inevitable. My guess is that if Putin's regime survives, they'll try to hide the real numbers and to silence the families as hard as they possibly can. But there's no way this would not affect politics in some way.
> 
> Fucking hell, the whole thing still feels surreal, I just can't imagine what it's like being in Russia right now, let alone Ukraine. What a colossal fucking cunt, he's literally a traitor to his own country, a fascist, what he's done is irreversible, I hope to god someone finds the courage to kill the crazy motherfucker, and do it asap because the clock is ticking.



Indeed. A win for Russia would have been sending in their supposed peacekeepers, then just sitting still and defending their supposed new friends in Donbas. But now?

Even if they had very quickly gotten their goal of regime change in Ukraine, it's really not clear what that achieves for Russia. And today, now that its clear the Ukrainian public will stand and fight, it seems impossible to actually enforce a pro-Kremlin president. 

It is one thing to prop up an existing dictator, it is quite another to enforce one then prop him up. Somewhere there are retired CIA operatives saying "Yeah, that's not going to work". 

And notably, even when the CIA was doing some of this stuff, it was ideological. They were undermining communists by any means necessary, but whats the point of regime change in Ukraine?


----------



## possumkiller

I don't think there will be a future for putin. He isn't going to nuke the world. He is a blowhard schoolyard bully threatening everyone with violence if they don't give up their lunch money. Only now he has threatened the whole schoolyard iand they are all (including his own people) sick of his bullshit. This motherfucker managed to de-neutralize Switzerland which is something even Hitler couldn't fucking do. Not to mention going on three years of a fucking pandemic, dumbass rightwing extremist bullshit trying to take over everywhere, and the wealthy classes giving two fucks about what happens to the rest of us has really got the people of the world with a lot of pent up rage that is now being focused on putin.

You can put him on the list with hussein and bin laden. He's going to be hiding out while everyone is hunting for him.


----------



## ItWillDo

LostTheTone said:


> And notably, even when the CIA was doing some of this stuff, it was ideological. They were undermining communists by any means necessary, but whats the point of regime change in Ukraine?


Obviously the same thing that triggered the conflict in the first place and what Putin has been asking since 2000, keep the NATO out of his backyard. He would've been completely fine with the Zelensky-regime if they would have remained neutral but the recent conversations to join NATO were honestly a pretty obvious intimidation. I really don't understand why the latter was even necessary, Ukraine was doing fine, was granted pretty much full autonomy and the presence of NATO wasn't going to improve their situation more than it could've been made worse by this conflict.

You can hate on Putin all you want, but NATO lured the bear out of the cave here and left Ukraine out to dry.


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> Yup yup, and it seems that the sanctions have bitten faster and harder than we could have hoped. Seeing Putin allies on TV complaining that their villa was seized gives an idea how close to the edge Putin is.
> 
> If you are someone who's wealth and power depend on Putin, you mostly keep your mouth shut in these difficult times. That anyone is even saying this stuff outloud makes me think that these allies feel that Putin is lacking authoirty.



This reminds me of how easily Belarus suddenly flipped on Lukashenko.

True, he endured, but... Belarus wasn't being sanctioned back to the stone age or involved in an idiotic war of aggression with no victories to report and a media blackout on reports of casualties and defeats. Which is absolutely ridiculous since he hasn't blocked social media (...yet) and a whopping 100% of Ukraine can communicate in either perfect written Russian or at the very least something close enough to it that anyone in Russia can figure out the gist. Literally *most* people either have cross-border connections themselves or an immediate family member or close friend who does.

It really, really feels like he doesn't know what the internet is and that most everyone, even alcoholic retirees and schoolchildren, are on it.


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> Obviously the same thing that triggered the conflict in the first place and what Putin has been asking since 2000, keep the NATO out of his backyard. He would've been completely fine with the Zelensky-regime if they would have remained neutral but the recent conversations to join NATO were honestly a pretty obvious intimidation. I really don't understand why the latter was even necessary, Ukraine was doing fine, was granted pretty much full autonomy and the presence of NATO wasn't going to improve their situation more than it could've been made worse by this conflict.
> 
> You can hate on Putin all you want, but NATO lured the bear out of the cave here and left Ukraine out to dry.


All that stuff has started because we didn't try our best to join NATO when we could. Putin's ambition towards Ukraine started to show up in 2004 when we had our presidential elections when Yanukovich he was supporting wasn't elected but majority of people didn't believe it would lead to what happened in 2014.


----------



## LostTheTone

ItWillDo said:


> Obviously the same thing that triggered the conflict in the first place and what Putin has been asking since 2000, keep the NATO out of his backyard. He would've been completely fine with the Zelensky-regime if they would have remained neutral but the recent conversations to join NATO were honestly a pretty obvious intimidation. I really don't understand why the latter was even necessary, Ukraine was doing fine, was granted pretty much full autonomy and the presence of NATO wasn't going to improve their situation more than it could've been made worse by this conflict.
> 
> You can hate on Putin all you want, but NATO lured the bear out of the cave here and left Ukraine out to dry.



NATO is already in Russia's back yard, and in more ways than one. Between the Baltics, Norway, Bulgaria and Turkey there is already NATO right on the Russian border. 

And putting Ukraine squarely into the Russian sphere would eat up all of the remaining buffer between NATO and Russia anyway. Russia most certainly would not demilitarize Ukraine, no matter what they say. Just look at Belarus; the other "buffer" state. 

The invasion happening today is exactly why Ukraine wanted to join NATO, and the EU. Because as long as they were non-aligned Russia could simply invade them any time and force them to do whatever they like. So, as long as Ukraine was quietly independent, they were a vassal state to Russia that would be required to not have an independent foreign policy. 

What makes this even more laughable is that NATO weren't even especially interested in having Ukraine join them. NATO were very cagey about Russian perceptions, and it was generally accepted that if Ukraine were to join, it would be in 5 or 10 years. 

So in fact Russia invaded because Ukraine dared to say that they wanted to join NATO. Not to stop them joining. To stop them saying they were worried that Russia might invade them. That's beyond cynical, and beyond outrageous. 

A war waged to stop a neutral country who is no thread to you becoming less neutral, so that in the event of a real war you would have that buffer in place. Well done, you played yourself.


----------



## 4Eyes

Flappydoodle said:


> And yeah, unfortunately the writing was on the wall since at least mid-January.


that's just actual invasion to Ukraine, signs that he is tiny dick dictator with only one goal - rebuilding the empire, were written in the skies since early 2000s. Probably not for the modern west, but for post soviet era countries it was pretty obvious



ItWillDo said:


> I really don't understand why the latter was even necessary, Ukraine was doing fine, was granted pretty much full autonomy and the presence of NATO wasn't going to improve their situation more than it could've been made worse by this conflict


because it's the only guarantee how to keep comrades out of your country


----------



## ItWillDo

LostTheTone said:


> NATO is already in Russia's back yard, and in more ways than one. Between the Baltics, Norway, Bulgaria and Turkey there is already NATO right on the Russian border.
> 
> And putting Ukraine squarely into the Russian sphere would eat up all of the remaining buffer between NATO and Russia anyway. Russia most certainly would not demilitarize Ukraine, no matter what they say. Just look at Belarus; the other "buffer" state.
> 
> The invasion happening today is exactly why Ukraine wanted to join NATO, and the EU. Because as long as they were non-aligned Russia could simply invade them any time and force them to do whatever they like. So, as long as Ukraine was quietly independent, they were a vassal state to Russia that would be required to not have an independent foreign policy.
> 
> What makes this even more laughable is that NATO weren't even especially interested in having Ukraine join them. NATO were very cagey about Russian perceptions, and it was generally accepted that if Ukraine were to join, it would be in 5 or 10 years.
> 
> So in fact Russia invaded because Ukraine dared to say that they wanted to join NATO. Not to stop them joining. To stop them saying they were worried that Russia might invade them. That's beyond cynical, and beyond outrageous.
> 
> A war waged to stop a neutral country who is no thread to you becoming less neutral, so that in the event of a real war you would have that buffer in place. Well done, you played yourself.


Which reiterates my point, how is the current situation better than remaining a vassal state? Foreign policy aside, economic relations with the west were completely open and foreign aid was both allowed & applied. Neither Ukraine nor Russia had anything to gain from the current conflict.


----------



## LostTheTone

4Eyes said:


> that's just actual invasion to Ukraine, signs that he is tiny dick dictator with only one goal - rebuilding the empire, were written in the skies since early 2000s. Probably not for the modern west, but for post soviet era countries it was pretty obvious



What I still find mystifying is why rebuilding an empire is even something that Putin (or anyone, honestly) cares about. 

The only profitable empires were the ones where cart loads of gold and boat loads of slaves could be taken. But in the modern era neither of those are relevant. The "value" of a country today is in its existing economy. Sure, Russia would like to have the pre-existing Ukraine joining it as a federal state. But welding the broken remnants to Russia gets them nothing. Russia doesn't need people, it need investment. 

And I know that people talk about Putin's ego and pride and all that. But Putin has historically been a pretty smooth operator. He's been the king of taking what if there to be taken. So this overt aggression that doesn't even seem to have a possible positive outcome is just... It's worrying.


----------



## LostTheTone

ItWillDo said:


> Which reiterates my point, how is the current situation better than remaining a vassal state? Foreign policy aside, economic relations with the west were completely open and foreign aid was both allowed & applied. Neither Ukraine nor Russia had anything to gain from the current conflict.



...Yes, Ukraine has nothing to gain from a war with Russia.

That's why they wanted to have allies to help deter a Russian invasion. 

"Neutral" has to go both ways. Ukraine cannot say that they are neutral towards Russia, when Russia is taking Ukrainian land by force. 

Remember, Russia does not recognize the present government, or even the present republic, as being legitimate. That means that there is no possible way for the present leadership to be "neutral". Their only option is to demolish everything and write a new constitution then refound the whole nation again.

Ukraine says "We don't want to fight Russia". Russia says "We do not recognize this statement, so we are invading". And you say "Well, those Ukrainians really shouldn't have forced the issue."


----------



## Adieu

He dreams of a legacy.

He's already stolen everything that wasn't bolted down and really wouldn't know what to do with any more money (sharing with the Russian public = perish the thought, what are you, ill?)

Now, he wants to Do Something Grand... to avoid being remembered as the penultimate jumped-up klepto official, who built the world's largest palace but never used it because the opposition caught on and shamed him to the point where he was too shy and self-conscious to say "haha so what?" and ended up washing his hands of it.


----------



## 4Eyes

LostTheTone said:


> What I still find mystifying is why rebuilding an empire is even something that Putin (or anyone, honestly) cares about.


you don't have to try to find logical base behind that - there is none. it's result of years and years of propaganda and brainwashing, so deep that even Putin lost track what's real and what is not.


----------



## LostTheTone

4Eyes said:


> you don't have to try to find logical base behind that - there is none. it's result of years and years of propaganda and brainwashing, so deep that even Putin lost track what's real and what is not.



That's the thing though - Putin has historically been a realist, in international relations terms. He tended to succeed at things; he had clear goals and then made them happen. 



Adieu said:


> He dreams of a legacy.
> 
> He's already stolen everything that wasn't bolted down and really wouldn't know what to do with any more money (sharing with the Russian public = perish the thought, what are you, ill?)
> 
> Now, he wants to Do Something Grand... to avoid being remembered as the penultimate jumped-up klepto official, who built the world's largest palace but never used it because the opposition caught on and shamed him to the point where he was too shy and self-conscious to say "haha so what?" and ended up washing his hands of it.



Maybe I just can't see it from his side, but it seems like a sordid little war in Ukraine isn't the kind of legacy anyone would want. 

If we look back at post-war conflicts, the thing that made them all (theoretically) legacy defining was ideology. When the Russians rolled in, it was to "liberate" people, and to put down the fascist imperialists who were resisting the party. If this was 1954, and Ukraine was independent, then invading and conquering them would be totally in line with communist achievements. 

You can hear echoes of this in how Putin talks about Ukraine being a Nazi regime, but Putin isn't a communist and he deals with plenty of much worse people than Zalensky, so why the fuck would Putin even care if Ukraine is literally run by Nazis?


----------



## Adieu

He doesn't

He just dreams of having Great Expander of Borders of Motherland written on his mausoleum. He's under the impression that all can and will be overlooked in the name of imperial expansion.


----------



## narad

4Eyes said:


> View attachment 103957



Never trust a guy who signs off with name + ", PhD"


----------



## 4Eyes

LostTheTone said:


> Maybe I just can't see it from his side, but it seems like a sordid little war in Ukraine isn't the kind of legacy anyone would want.
> 
> If we look back at post-war conflicts, the thing that made them all (theoretically) legacy defining was ideology. When the Russians rolled in, it was to "liberate" people, and to put down the fascist imperialists who were resisting the party. If this was 1954, and Ukraine was independent, then invading and conquering them would be totally in line with communist achievements.
> 
> You can hear echoes of this in how Putin talks about Ukraine being a Nazi regime, but Putin isn't a communist and he deals with plenty of much worse people than Zalensky, so why the fuck would Putin even care if Ukraine is literally run by Nazis?


the thing is - we, those who are not hit hard by propaganda, see the other side of the coin. People in Russia, who watch state driven media see how heroic soldiers went to liberate their people, terrorized by Zelenskyy's regime in DNR and LNR. They don't event mentioned they invaded whole UKR, because well, you can't tell people - they wanted to prosper and enjoy free life in the west, so we decided to massacre them and shell civilians for that. That's where this "nazi" story comes useful to justify that. hell, they even report that people are cheering their soldiers with flowers. 

on the flip side, I think that Putler had two possible outcomes in mind - they end up in "peace", taking Crimea and DNR+LHR as a price for not continuing war. Propaganda would end up with some story how their liberated their people...or he'll force UKR to surrender and he would either join UKR to Russia or sent puppet government there in which case - Emperor Voloda would be prised for centuries. it seems that his ego didn't allow him to think rationally and he went full on for jackpot, but he didn't count with the third option, that UKR will resist and that world wouldn't just sit and watch.


----------



## pondman

Looks like Russia is ramping things up. The Ukrainians have permission to fly fighters from Poland.









Huge Russian military convoy heads to Kyiv as West fears ‘barbaric’ assault


Boris Johnson is visiting Poland and Estonia in a show of support for Nato’s eastern members.




www.aol.co.uk


----------



## Adieu

What a shitshow, just observed Kremlin loyalist mods with Russian names on a certain professional *English-language* forum (clearly NOT this one, thankfully) I'm on delete the hell out of relevant discussions of banking and sanctions issues... NOT "inflammatory" stuff like calls to arms or anything, not muahahaha gloating, not even a hint of ethnic tensions, no profanity, nothing.

Just business issues related to banking and industry sanctions.

Lol. And here I wondered why certain places LOOK like nobody even noticed at first glance. Frikkin Kremlin infiltrators everywhere mopping up any discussion before it starts is why...


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> He doesn't
> 
> He just dreams of having Great Expander of Borders of Motherland written on his mausoleum. He's under the impression that all can and will be overlooked in the name of imperial expansion.



Again, maybe its just me being a non-Russian, but the two "greats" in Russia are Peter and Catherine and they both were moderinizers and liberalizers. Even the "great" achievements of the communist era were the moves to modernize industry and arrive at something approaching a Great Power type of nation.

Expansionism is like 600 years out of date for getting him "Vlad The Great"


----------



## LostTheTone

pondman said:


> Looks like Russia is ramping things up. The Ukrainians have permission to fly fighters from Poland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Huge Russian military convoy heads to Kyiv as West fears ‘barbaric’ assault
> 
> 
> Boris Johnson is visiting Poland and Estonia in a show of support for Nato’s eastern members.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.aol.co.uk



I was wondering this morning if that would happen - Poland is giving Ukraine fighters, Britain might well be doing so too.

That then asks where those fighters are going to be based, and the answer is "somewhere the Russians can't reach" and that leads you to Poland. 

This is something like a Cambodian gambit from Ukraine and Poland, and I think it's super smart. It puts the ball in Russia's court and forces them to either just live with Ukrainian air support or invade Poland. It means that if this war does go really hot, the Russians will have to be the ones who cross the line. 

I genuinely don't think Russia has the capacity to invade Poland right now anyway, so that probably means the Ukranians can fly fighters and drones for the rest of the war, and keep slowing the Russians and hurting their supplies.


----------



## possumkiller

Adieu said:


> What a shitshow, just observed Kremlin loyalist mods with Russian names on a certain professional *English-language* forum I'm on delete the hell out of relevant discussions of banking and sanctions issues... NOT "inflammatory" stuff like calls to arms or anything, not muahahaha gloating, not even a hint of ethnic tensions, no profanity, nothing.
> 
> Just business issues related to banking and industry sanctions.
> 
> Lol. And here I wondered why certain places LOOK like nobody even noticed at first glance. Frikkin Kremlin infiltrators everywhere mopping up any discussion before it starts is why...


I just quit a good flight sim that had a really decent community. The game is developed by an international team of mostly Russians (the original game from 2002 was designed completely by a Russian) and produced by an American producer. The forum does not have a political section and will delete any political posts. There is an EU ban on swastikas so they use a modified placeholder for German (and Finnish) markings. However, people have their own flags and such as their avatars including soviet flags and symbols with no problems. I changed mine to a Ukrainian flag and it was deleted within hours. I changed it back the next day and got a PM from a mod saying they were asked to have me remove it. The American producer made a big statement about how they are an international team and they will not tolerate anything political on the forum. So I told them they were spineless and left.


----------



## LostTheTone

possumkiller said:


> I just quit a good flight sim that had a really decent community. The game is developed by an international team of mostly Russians (the original game from 2002 was designed completely by a Russian) and produced by an American producer. The forum does not have a political section and will delete any political posts. There is an EU ban on swastikas so they use a modified placeholder for German (and Finnish) markings. However, people have their own flags and such as their avatars including soviet flags and symbols with no problems. I changed mine to a Ukrainian flag and it was deleted within hours. I changed it back the next day and got a PM from a mod saying they were asked to have me remove it. The American producer made a big statement about how they are an international team and they will not tolerate anything political on the forum. So I told them they were spineless and left.



Oh shit... Wonder what is happening with World Of Tanks?


----------



## destroyerdogs

Former Russian President Medvedev now threatening France on Twitter. 
Things are being brought to a boil.


----------



## LostTheTone

destroyerdogs said:


> Former Russian President Medvedev now threatening France on Twitter.
> Things are being brought to a boil.




"How dare you say that your crippling sanctions aim to defeat us without resorting to all out war! This means all out war!" - A real Russian person who claims to be of sound mind.


----------



## narad

destroyerdogs said:


> Former Russian President Medvedev now threatening France on Twitter.
> Things are being brought to a boil.




Maybe he can get together with former soldiers and gather up former military equipment and wage one.


----------



## Adieu

narad said:


> Maybe he can get together with former soldiers and gather up former military equipment and wage one.



You're too learned

I don't think many people realize he's the Former President of Russia (...sort of)

Oh never mind clicking expand solved that.

Oh well, somebody tell twitter to add the (...sort of) part for historical accuracy


----------



## Randy

Dunno if it's been posted here yet but per TGP, the guy that owns AMT is full believed Ukraine is run by Nazis


----------



## Adieu

...and now Belarus is deploying troops against Ukraine.

Goddamit these dictator fools just won't rest until they start WW3 or die trying, will they?


----------



## 4Eyes

Randy said:


> Dunno if it's been posted here yet but per TGP, the guy that owns AMT is full believed Ukraine is run by Nazis


I'm glad I sold AMT reactive load I had some time ago...


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> Expansionism is like 600 years out of date for getting him "Vlad The Great"


Vlad is usually short for Vladislav. Not sure what Putin prefers to be called, but I guess I don't care, since I will never be on a first-name basis with the second most infamous Vovochka.


----------



## Andromalia

If Russians want Bruno Le Maire we'll give him to them, he'll destroy their economy way quicker than a war would.
I guess he got a major bollocking as his portfolio has nothing making him involved in the crisis. As much as I don't wanna get nuked, I especially don't wanna get nuked because an idiot spoke out of turn. 
EU politicians should leave Twitter and social media alone and work on destroying Russia's economy but without saying so... /facepalm


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

Randy said:


> Dunno if it's been posted here yet but per TGP, the guy that owns AMT is full believed Ukraine is run by Nazis


I was contemplating an AMT Preamp (M1 perhaps). I’ll pass.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

Andromalia said:


> If Russians want Bruno Le Maire we'll give him to them, he'll destroy their economy way quicker than a war would.
> I guess he got a major bollocking as his portfolio has nothing making him involved in the crisis. As much as I don't wanna get nuked, I especially don't wanna get nuked because an idiot spoke out of turn.
> EU politicians should leave Twitter and social media alone and work on destroying Russia's economy but without saying so... /facepalm


Did he attempt to cut a wrestling promo on Twitter?


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Vlad is usually short for Vladislav. Not sure what Putin prefers to be called, but I guess I don't care, since I will never be on a first-name basis with the second most infamous Vovochka.



Vlad is often used a shortcut translation of Vova, which English speakers wouldn't realize is a derivative from Vladimir


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Vlad is usually short for Vladislav. Not sure what Putin prefers to be called, but I guess I don't care, since I will never be on a first-name basis with the second most infamous Vovochka.



Don't be so pessimistic! There's still time to make a new friend  You know, before the nuclear war 



Adieu said:


> Vlad is often used a shortcut translation of Vova, which English speakers wouldn't realize is a derivative from Vladimir



Yeah, one of those weird things about anglicizing names really. To our ears, there's no way that Sasha would be a diminutive of Alexander, but it is. It doesn't help that we never see these names written in their native script, so we assume they are pretty close in terms of linguistic evolution, but the truth is that the common ancestors are much further back, so there is a lot more growth apart.


----------



## 4Eyes

this is godly (click on picture for source)


----------



## narad

4Eyes said:


> this is godly (click on picture for source)
> 
> 
> View attachment 103981



Cool if they accomplished this, but man is it cringy.


----------



## Adieu

4Eyes said:


> this is godly (click on picture for source)
> 
> 
> View attachment 103981



Can someone translate geek to English? What happened here?


----------



## Shoeless_jose

Sorry to ask this here instead of Google feel I will get better answer here though.

With Belarus jumping in are they "Russia" for all intents and purposes? Or treaty bound or what? I'm aware its pro Russian puppet government but is there anyway to stand them down without causing direct escalation with Russia?

Also the whole "peace talks'" while simultaneously moving more forces into position completely brazenly is unreal.


----------



## bostjan

Is it specific to Russian names, though? I never understood how a lady people call Peggy would have the proper name Margaret. Even Jack/John, Billy/William, Dick/Richard, or Chuck/Charles seem weird.

But when, like 20% of the Russian dudes are named either Alexander or some form (for example Alesandr), it gets really confusing _unless_ you use nicknames and have variations of those nicknames.

----

A bunch of big corporations have pulled out of Russia now. Yesterday was Shell. Today is Mastercard and Visa. I guess there are some things money can't buy, and for everything else, there is ... Mir Pay? (maybe irony here, IDK)


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Is it specific to Russian names, though? I never understood how a lady people call Peggy would have the proper name Margaret. Even Jack/John, Billy/William, Dick/Richard, or Chuck/Charles seem weird.
> 
> But when, like 20% of the Russian dudes are named either Alexander or some form (for example Alesandr), it gets really confusing _unless_ you use nicknames and have variations of those nicknames.
> 
> ----
> 
> A bunch of big corporations have pulled out of Russia now. Yesterday was Shell. Today is Mastercard and Visa. I guess there are some things money can't buy, and for everything else, there is ... Mir Pay? (maybe irony here, IDK)



Pet names in Russian aren't typically used to distinguish people of the same name, more like to color your tone (informal, disrespectful, taunting, superior, friendly, flirty, etc.)

For example, to ridicule Putin, you would call him "Tsar Vovka" (Vladimir > pet name Vova > haughty or superior or downtalk +ka = Vovka, which is how one might address a grade schooler or a serf)

You also have patronymics and pet versions of patronymics for a fuller palette. A slurred version of the patronym to distinguish between too many people of the same name informally is more common (ie, Aleksandr Ivanovich => Ivanych)


----------



## bostjan

Dineley said:


> Sorry to ask this here instead of Google feel I will get better answer here though.
> 
> With Belarus jumping in are they "Russia" for all intents and purposes? Or treaty bound or what? I'm aware its pro Russian puppet government but is there anyway to stand them down without causing direct escalation with Russia?
> 
> Also the whole "peace talks'" while simultaneously moving more forces into position completely brazenly is unreal.


Belarus is a country with strong ties to Russian identity, which wanted to not be Russia, but Hitler and the Pringles man had a baby, who was installed into power, probably, by Putin, who seems to have a lot of popular support, but that lot of popular support seems to be fake.


----------



## Adieu

Coming somewhat back to the topic, though, a curious Russian tradition is using Ukrainian without realizing it, especially for pet names.

Konstantin (RU) > Kostiantyn (UKR) > Kostian (Russian again)

Also
Vladimir (RU, like Putin) > Volodymyr (UKR, like Zelensky) > Volodia (back to Russian, sometimes used for Putin too)

I guarantee you that people who don't know Ukrainian use it daily and havd NO CLUE that it's just the Ukrainian version. There'll be hundreds of thousands of Russians talking shit about Ukraine on forums and streets who go by Volodia and Kostian exclusively and see 0% irony in this.


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> Pet names in Russian aren't typically used to distinguish people of the same name, more like to color your tone (informal, disrespectful, taunting, superior, friendly, flirty, etc.)
> 
> You also have patronymics and pet versions of patronymics for a fuller palette. A slurred version of the patronym to distinguish between too many people of the same name informally is more common (ie, Aleksandr Ivanovich => Ivanych)


Yeah, but I know two guys with the same first and patronymic names (no relation to each other) who also work with each other. I'm sure that's not super uncommon.


----------



## 4Eyes

Adieu said:


> Can someone translate geek to English? What happened here?


seems they hacked Putler's satellite systems (and more if you check their posts)


----------



## nightflameauto

bostjan said:


> Is it specific to Russian names, though? I never understood how a lady people call Peggy would have the proper name Margaret. Even Jack/John, Billy/William, Dick/Richard, or Chuck/Charles seem weird.


Richard and Dick always confused the crap out of me.

We've had two dogs and a cat with variants on Margaret.
Maggie
Rita
Greta

There's also Margarita (Rita), Marge, Peggy, and several others that all stem from Margaret. Even more if you start stemming into other languages that use the common root name.

I have to say how much I admire the Ukrainian public during this seemingly escalating conflict. Not only are we hearing and reading stories of them standing up to the Russians, we're getting actual video evidence of it. Even non-soldiers are defiant and standing up to them. It's fantastic to see. Especially as someone living in a part of the country where everybody talks big talk but the second trouble breaks out everybody runs scared.

Here's to hoping the oligarchs surrounding Putin decide sooner rather than later that their money is more important than the muppet hunching down in front of the microphone.


----------



## ArtDecade

bostjan said:


> Is it specific to Russian names, though? I never understood how a lady people call Peggy would have the proper name Margaret. Even Jack/John, Billy/William, Dick/Richard, or Chuck/Charles seem weird.



That has to do with the French colliding with Old English. A name like Richard was hard to pronounce in England because of the R. It was often spoken closer to Dickard - and that is why you often see it shortened to Dick. Take a name like Dorothy. It was often pronounced closer to Dodody - and ended up shorted to Dot.


----------



## possumkiller

So far these guys are intentionally targeting women, children, old people and taking civilians as hostages. It's not war this is some terrorist shit. Like, I don't get it. Why wouldn't this fall under GWoT? Because it's not brown people? We fought two wars in Iraq over some terrorist dictator shit. Why the fuck the world doesn't call this asshole's bluff and kill him already is beyond me.


----------



## bostjan

One of the few things I really liked about growing up in Detroit was the diversity. We got people from all over the world who came to the USA because of the politics of their governments of where they previously lived. Ultimately learning that we are all human beings putting up with the different ends of the same bullshit really puts a perspective on things. Chaldeans and Arabs, Bosnians and Serbs, Hmong and Vietnamese, etc. all tossed in to a big old melting pot and forced to work together at the same shitty jobs, eventually becoming friends, and knitting together a community.

I really hope that this doesn't affect the way people see Russian people, particularly those who left Russia to get away from these bullshit wars.



ArtDecade said:


> That has to do with the French colliding with Old English. A name like Richard was hard to pronounce in England because of the R. It was often spoken closer to Dickard - and that is why you often see it shortened to Dick. Take a name like Dorothy. It was often pronounced closer to Dodody - and ended up shorted to Dot.



Isn't Richard originally a French name, though?!


----------



## bostjan

possumkiller said:


> So far these guys are intentionally targeting women, children, old people and taking civilians as hostages. It's not war this is some terrorist shit. Like, I don't get it. Why wouldn't this fall under GWoT? Because it's not brown people? We fought two wars in Iraq over some terrorist dictator shit. Why the fuck the world doesn't call this asshole's bluff and kill him already is beyond me.


Yes.

I saw that video, maybe it went viral, of the Russian tank running over the old lady in her car as she was trying to swerve away and avoid it. I don't know what kind of person sees an old lady trying to get away from you and thinks it's necessary to do something like that.

But countries who have nukes seem to generally get away with this sort of stuff.


----------



## Adieu

I'm not waiting to find out.

My Soviet birth certificate gives me the legal right to identify Ukrainian (Soviets could choose either mother's or father's ethnicity, both listed in the birth certificate) and I'm just going to go with that.


----------



## possumkiller

bostjan said:


> Yes.
> 
> I saw that video, maybe it went viral, of the Russian tank running over the old lady in her car as she was trying to swerve away and avoid it. I don't know what kind of person sees an old lady trying to get away from you and thinks it's necessary to do something like that.
> 
> But countries who have nukes seem to generally get away with this sort of stuff.


Don't get me wrong. There are shitheads like this in every army. Some of our guys were guilty of this shit as well and I think they should be shot as well. It just seems like in the Russian military it's some sort of unofficial official policy instead of just a few cold blooded murdering asswipes like in the US military.


----------



## LostTheTone

ArtDecade said:


> That has to do with the French colliding with Old English. A name like Richard was hard to pronounce in England because of the R. It was often spoken closer to Dickard - and that is why you often see it shortened to Dick. Take a name like Dorothy. It was often pronounced closer to Dodody - and ended up shorted to Dot.



Indeed - English as we know it is the collision between Anglo-Saxon (the language of the people who were the dominant group in England once the Romans left), Norse (the language of the vikings who ran the fiefdom of Jorvik in the North of England) and Norman French (the language of William the Conqueror and his bros). And because practically nothing is written down in this era, and there is no real standard way to spell things, you see a lot of weird mutations slipping in. Biblical names have (somewhat) survived alright, because they were recorded in Latin and all the priests were trained by the same people. But everything else is up for grabs.


----------



## Adieu

possumkiller said:


> Don't get me wrong. There are shitheads like this in every army. Some of our guys were guilty of this shit as well and I think they should be shot as well. It just seems like in the Russian military it's some sort of unofficial official policy instead of just a few cold blooded murdering asswipes like in the US military.



The creepy part is that this DEFINITELY their version of "showing much restraint", since the Putinist plan was to jump in, suppress anyone who had a problem with that, and then play Friendly Rescuer.

Although with the armored vehicle case, it seems like it was hauling azz in a panic while alone in hostile territory... not sure how it got there and suspect it didn't know either


----------



## LostTheTone

possumkiller said:


> Don't get me wrong. There are shitheads like this in every army. Some of our guys were guilty of this shit as well and I think they should be shot as well. It just seems like in the Russian military it's some sort of unofficial official policy instead of just a few cold blooded murdering asswipes like in the US military.



It doesn't help that the Russian soldiers have (apparently) been told that the Ukrainians are literally the Nazis and so anyone who opposes the Russian "liberation" is the moral equivalent of the Waffen SS. Even if the Russian army were properly professional, if you tell them that the enemy and even civilians are just utterly evil then there is no reason not to exercise your worst impulses. Especially since the Russians definitely will not punish them.


----------



## ArtDecade

bostjan said:


> Isn't Richard originally a French name, though?!



It is. The Norman invasions into England and the fact that French became the high language while Old English was used by the people resulted in strange pronunciations over the centuries.


----------



## Randy

Putin is a major league Richard.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

Adieu said:


> Pet names in Russian aren't typically used to distinguish people of the same name, more like to color your tone (informal, disrespectful, taunting, superior, friendly, flirty, etc.)
> 
> For example, to ridicule Putin, you would call him "Tsar Vovka" (Vladimir > pet name Vova > haughty or superior or downtalk +ka = Vovka, which is how one might address a grade schooler or a serf)
> 
> You also have patronymics and pet versions of patronymics for a fuller palette. A slurred version of the patronym to distinguish between too many people of the same name informally is more common (ie, Aleksandr Ivanovich => Ivanych)


Vova is pretty close to Vulva. I shall, henceforth, refer to him as Vulva Putin.


----------



## Adieu

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Vova is pretty close to Vulva. I shall, henceforth, refer to him as Vulva Putin.



Use Russian name order

Putin Vulva Vladimirovich

PS just Putin Vulva is fine too


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> Indeed - English as we know it is the collision between Anglo-Saxon (the language of the people who were the dominant group in England once the Romans left), Norse (the language of the vikings who ran the fiefdom of Jorvik in the North of England) and Norman French (the language of William the Conqueror and his bros). And because practically nothing is written down in this era, and there is no real standard way to spell things, you see a lot of weird mutations slipping in. Biblical names have (somewhat) survived alright, because they were recorded in Latin and all the priests were trained by the same people. But everything else is up for grabs.


Interestingly, "Norman" is derived from Northman, the Frankish word used to describe the Norsemen. So, even though we think of the Normans as speaking French, a romance language, their identity is doubly tied to Germanic language. It's all very messy, though, if you get down to the details.

Saxon is another good one. Sachsen is part of Germany. The word for Germany in Finnish and Estonian is based on that identity as Saxons. Angeln has a somewhat similar origin within Denmark.

Coming full circle to Russia and Ukraine, the Slavic peoples are believed to have split off from prehistoric vikings who established a kingdom in Novgorod and eventually moved their capital to Kiev. Those people were harassed for hundreds of years by people from eastern Russia, and spread out to become all of the various flavours of slavic peoples. The ones who stayed put eventually made peace with their invaders and established a new capital in Moscow. It's way more complicated than that cliff's notes version of history, but that's the gist of it. I'm not sure if there is much accuracy to Putin's own version of this where Russia created Ukraine, but I guess dictators have to dictate things.



ArtDecade said:


> It is. The Norman invasions into England and the fact that French became the high language while Old English was used by the people resulted in strange pronunciations over the centuries.



Thus why beef>cow pork>pig mansion>house etc.

Also why I can read Chaucer in the original text and understand a fair portion of it, but anything written pre-Norman looks like gibberish.



Chaucer said:


> *Whan that Aprill with his shoures soote the droghte of March hath perced to the roote, and bathed every veyne in swich licour...*






Beowulf said:


> *Hwæt. We Gardena in geardagum, þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon, hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon.*


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

possumkiller said:


> So far these guys are intentionally targeting women, children, old people and taking civilians as hostages. It's not war this is some terrorist shit. Like, I don't get it. Why wouldn't this fall under GWoT? Because it's not brown people? We fought two wars in Iraq over some terrorist dictator shit. Why the fuck the world doesn't call this asshole's bluff and kill him already is beyond me.


Comparatively speaking, what were Iraq and Afghanistan's nuclear weapons armaments like compared to Russia's? That might have a lot to do with it.


----------



## Adieu

Btw, В ПИЗДУ (= literally "Put in Vulva") just so happens to be Russian for "f that sh!t"


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

Adieu said:


> Use Russian name order
> 
> Putin Vulva Vladimirovich
> 
> PS just Putin Vulva is fine too


Putin Vulva smell like Medvedev's dogs. Time for a chemical shower.


----------



## LostTheTone

ArtDecade said:


> It is. The Norman invasions into England and the fact that French became the high language while Old English was used by the people resulted in strange pronunciations over the centuries.



Also worth noting that Norman French is kinda it's own thing too - Normandy was settled by Vikings; "Norman" coming from "Norseman" or "North Men" depending who you believe. So the existing pre-French got tumbled by Norse, and somewhat came back closer to the early old French, and then crossed the channel after. 

So when we say things are "French" names... It's complicated. France was once part of West Francia, in the Carolingian empire. The Franks, where we obviously get the word France from were Germans who invaded the Roman empire way back when, but the people migrated and moved around. Oh and half of what is now France used to be Burgundy, and the south used to be Aquitaine. Fun times!


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Btw, В ПИЗДУ (= literally "Put in Vulva") just so happens to be Russian for "f that sh!t"



This is by far the most important thing in this thread.


----------



## possumkiller

There was a video put out with an Indian student being kicked by a Ukrainian border guard and the Indian students not allowed to leave. Apparently the beginning of that story is that there are special express trains running from Ukraine to Poland evacuating women and children. Supposedly these Indian guys were caught pulling women out of the train and trying to get in.


----------



## Adieu

Btw, mods, about time to rename this will they into THEY DID


----------



## ArtDecade

LostTheTone said:


> Also worth noting that Norman French is kinda it's own thing too - Normandy was settled by Vikings; "Norman" coming from "Norseman" or "North Men" depending who you believe. So the existing pre-French got tumbled by Norse, and somewhat came back closer to the early old French, and then crossed the channel after.
> 
> So when we say things are "French" names... It's complicated. France was once part of West Francia, in the Carolingian empire. The Franks, where we obviously get the word France from were Germans who invaded the Roman empire way back when, but the people migrated and moved around. Oh and half of what is now France used to be Burgundy, and the south used to be Aquitaine. Fun times!



Yup. Trying to simply centuries worth of linguistics into a sentence or two is always gonna be a tall order. LOL.


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Coming full circle to Russia and Ukraine, the Slavic peoples are believed to have split off from prehistoric vikings who established a kingdom in Novgorod and eventually moved their capital to Kiev. Those people were harassed for hundreds of years by people from eastern Russia, and spread out to become all of the various flavours of slavic peoples. The ones who stayed put eventually made peace with their invaders and established a new capital in Moscow. It's way more complicated than that cliff's notes version of history, but that's the gist of it. I'm not sure if there is much accuracy to Putin's own version of this where Russia created Ukraine, but I guess dictators have to dictate things.



Oh man Russian early history is kinda nuts.

The short version of "Novgorod and Muscovy and the Kievan Rus, then suddenly Mongols and Teutons and Aleksandr Nevsky, and then Russia!" still has a combination of baffling things that most of Europe doesn't think about all that much. That combination of being caught between various Asian empires on one side, the Holy Roman Empire on the other, and then a wildcard of Magyars, Poles and Lithuanians makes it hard to understand if you got taught that medieval history happened in France.


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> Oh man Russian early history is kinda nuts.
> 
> The short version of "Novgorod and Muscovy and the Kievan Rus, then suddenly Mongols and Teutons and Aleksandr Nevsky, and then Russia!" still has a combination of baffling things that most of Europe doesn't think about all that much. That combination of being caught between various Asian empires on one side, the Holy Roman Empire on the other, and then a wildcard of Magyars, Poles and Lithuanians makes it hard to understand if you got taught that medieval history happened in France.



Isn't that pretty much identical to UK history though?

Vikings from elsewhere landed, bounced around the region for a few centuries, conquered stuff, and eventually one city built an empire, eventually lose a huge chunk, and be left with some areas fully assimilated and others STILL unhappy or splitting off or trying to in the 20th-21st centuries?

Vikings, check
Ireland, check
Scotland and Northern Ireland, check
Empire, check
No more empire, check


----------



## Flappydoodle

possumkiller said:


> So far these guys are intentionally targeting women, children, old people and taking civilians as hostages. It's not war this is some terrorist shit. Like, I don't get it. Why wouldn't this fall under GWoT? Because it's not brown people? We fought two wars in Iraq over some terrorist dictator shit. Why the fuck the world doesn't call this asshole's bluff and kill him already is beyond me.


Call what bluff?

End of the day, he has 4,000+ deployed nuclear weapons under his command. Enough to wreck every major city that you could name. Nobody moved on North Korea because they might have a few nukes that they could lob over the southern border. Putin DOES have submarines, ICBMs and bombers. 

NONE of us wants to directly fight Russia because it only ends in mass catastrophe. As much as we hate Putin and sympathise with Ukraine, Ukraine is not worth the end of life as we know it and setting humanity back by a century or more. The line is being clearly drawn. We will help Ukraine but we can’t fight for them. 

The aim is to make the cost greater than the reward. You back him into a corner with no way out, he’s liable to try and take us all out with him. Any attempt to kill him, overthrow him etc is likely to make him lash out.


----------



## Randy

Flappydoodle said:


> NONE of us wants to directly fight Russia because it only ends in mass catastrophe. As much as we hate Putin and sympathise with Ukraine, Ukraine is not worth the end of life as we know it and setting humanity back by a century or more. The line is being clearly drawn. We will help Ukraine but we can’t fight for them.
> 
> The aim is to make the cost greater than the reward. You back him into a corner with no way out, he’s liable to try and take us all out with him. Any attempt to kill him, overthrow him etc is likely to make him lash out.


You're describing a no-win situation. And I'm not blaming you for that characterization, because it pretty much is but I'd stop short of making any recommendation one way or the other on this because I doubt him taking Ukraine with NO intervention from the West (to avoid "backing him into a corner") means he stops there. 

What's the line in the sand where we stop giving Putin what he wants because we're afraid making him mad? A historically corrupt country that historically has deep ties to Russia and is NOT a member of NATO or the EU (as of now) might not be the tripwire, but what is it exactly?


----------



## possumkiller

Flappydoodle said:


> Call what bluff?
> 
> End of the day, he has 4,000+ deployed nuclear weapons under his command. Enough to wreck every major city that you could name. Nobody moved on North Korea because they might have a few nukes that they could lob over the southern border. Putin DOES have submarines, ICBMs and bombers.
> 
> NONE of us wants to directly fight Russia because it only ends in mass catastrophe. As much as we hate Putin and sympathise with Ukraine, Ukraine is not worth the end of life as we know it and setting humanity back by a century or more. The line is being clearly drawn. We will help Ukraine but we can’t fight for them.
> 
> The aim is to make the cost greater than the reward. You back him into a corner with no way out, he’s liable to try and take us all out with him. Any attempt to kill him, overthrow him etc is likely to make him lash out.


Motherfucker is already backed into a corner. The world has been interfering in every way apart from declaring war on Russia and sending in our own militaries. He's not going to nuke anything. His people wouldn't go through with it because they know it's suicide. They can let him hide in his bunker and give him a red button to push and feed him a video of the world evaporating. Let him think he nuked whatever he wants. Something like the Fletcher Memorial Home for Incurable Tyrants and Kings.


----------



## 4Eyes

Flappydoodle said:


> The aim is to make the cost greater than the reward. You back him into a corner with no way out, he’s liable to try and take us all out with him. Any attempt to kill him, overthrow him etc is likely to make him lash out.


I think he was heard to say in one of the interviews when asked on his view of world - "if there is no Russia, there is no need for planet Earth. What would be Earth without Russia?"


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Isn't that pretty much identical to UK history though?
> 
> Vikings from elsewhere landed, bounced around the region for a few centuries, conquered stuff, and eventually one city built an empire, eventually lose a huge chunk, and be left with some areas fully assimilated and others STILL unhappy or splitting off or trying to in the 20th-21st centuries?
> 
> Vikings, check
> Ireland, check
> Scotland and Northern Ireland, check
> Empire, check
> No more empire, check



Technically true, I guess I really mean that Russia feels so much further away from what we get taught as being medieval history. The normal narrative of Europe is something like Romans -> Barnarians -> Charlemange -> Vikings -> Franks/Normans/Plantaginates -> Crusades -> 100 years war -> War of the roses -> Hapsburgs -> Reformation/Enlightenment -> Age of exploration. Russia doesn't really show up until way later, so that Freddy The Great can beat them and Napoleon can lose to them. 

The world of Ghengis Khan feels a loooong way away, almost like the Mongol hordes happened in 1000BC or something. People mostly don't even know that the Ottoman invasions got as far west as Vienna, and have no idea Poland used to be a real power. 

I guess it is to be somewhat expected that the history we teach to kids is rather parochial but man there have been a lot of wars in the modern era stemming from Balkan/Slavic issues and yet we don't bother to teach about them at all.


----------



## LostTheTone

possumkiller said:


> Motherfucker is already backed into a corner. The world has been interfering in every way apart from declaring war on Russia and sending in our own militaries. He's not going to nuke anything. His people wouldn't go through with it because they know it's suicide. They can let him hide in his bunker and give him a red button to push and feed him a video of the world evaporating. Let him think he nuked whatever he wants. Something like the Fletcher Memorial Home for Incurable Tyrants and Kings.



Oh man I super hope that happens and that somewhere in Russia there will be a Fallout style Vault where they pretend Putin triggered a nuclear war.

I so desperately want that to be a TV show. "Live from Putin's bunker".


----------



## nightflameauto

Randy said:


> You're describing a no-win situation. And I'm not blaming you for that characterization, because it pretty much is but I'd stop short of making any recommendation one way or the other on this because I doubt him taking Ukraine with NO intervention from the West (to avoid "backing him into a corner") means he stops there.
> 
> What's the line in the sand where we stop giving Putin what he wants because we're afraid making him mad? A historically corrupt country that historically has deep ties to Russia and is NOT a member of NATO or the EU (as of now) might not be the tripwire, but what is it exactly?


That's the question I keep asking myself. How far do we let him play out his world domination fantasy without real interference? There's zero chance it stops with Ukraine if he does manage to completely take it over. It will only feed his ego. I get not wanting to send him into a rage, but we can't just sit on our thumbs while he walks over Ukraine and expect him to sit there happy and satisfied after. He will do what all tyrants do and believe this one win makes him invincible and continue to press on.

I too am curious what the world leaders with the power TO do something will consider a line too far. Clearly, it's not Ukraine. Not yet at any rate.


----------



## Crungy

If Putin does get taken out who is next in line? Or is it a mad dash of pos's like him to claim power? 

I saw some mention of him having pancreatic cancer but apparently that was debunked or its hushed so who knows the truth. Thought maybe nature would help us out with that.


----------



## Crungy

Also fuck yeah to Fletcher Memorial. I fucking love that song lol


----------



## LostTheTone

Crungy said:


> If Putin does get taken out who is next in line? Or is it a mad dash of pos's like him to claim power?
> 
> I saw some mention of him having pancreatic cancer but apparently that was debunked or its hushed so who knows the truth. Thought maybe nature would help us out with that.



It'll be a full on gangster diadochi situation, where one guy launches an ambush to capture Putin's corpse and so declare himself Tzar.

Fortunately Russia is federal, so in theory not having a strong man for a while won't necessarily matter. In the end, whoever the army backs will win.


----------



## Randy

nightflameauto said:


> here's zero chance it stops with Ukraine if he does manage to completely take it over. It will only feed his ego.


There's also the issue of giving him a staging area closer to the West to park these nuclear weapons we're so afraid of.


----------



## oversteve

LostTheTone said:


> Fortunately Russia is federal, so in theory not having a strong man for a while won't necessarily matter. In the end, whoever the army backs will win.


It's federal in name only, it's basically an autocrathy with one man standing at the top and there's a possibility it will split up into few small states after he's no more

btw few hours ago russian rocket has landed at the territory of Babyn Yar Holocaust Memorial, so much for claming war against Nazis ...


----------



## LostTheTone

oversteve said:


> It's federal in name only, it's basically an autocrathy with one man standing at the top and there's a possibility it will split up into few small states after he's no more



That's what I mean though - However Putin actually manages the nation, the law is written so that there are individual federal states and that makes it a lot easier to adapt to whatever happens afterwards.


----------



## bostjan

Randy said:


> There's also the issue of giving him a staging area closer to the West to park these nuclear weapons we're so afraid of.



All that does, essentially, is that it shaves off one minute of response time. Maybe that's really what he's after, though. Remember a couple years ago, how Putin was bragging that his hypersonic missiles could hit the USA before anyone knew that they were coming? And then, shortly after this brag, there was a nuclear explosion in Siberia - and it turned out that the Russian military was trying to develop a rocket engine that was powered by a nuclear explosion, and they didn't know what they were doing? Perhaps it's all related - maybe all Putin wants is to retroactively turn his fib into something truthyish. Normal people wouldn't consider annexing a sovereign nation of 45 million people in order to retcon a blunder, but this is not a normal person we are talking about.

And if anything happens to Putin, Lukashenko might be the next Pringles man:


----------



## BMFan30

Zelenski is out on the street showing people every day where he is so they don't eat up Russian propaganda while Putin is too much a pussy to meet with leaders and sit closer than a mile to them for he knows they might kill him in his own meeting. That cunt.

He maintains his lie that Ukraine is bombing itself, killing kids, the elderly and sick people while Russia isn't to blame for that. But why would Ukraine do that it's own people?!

If Ukraine was doing that then Zelenski would be too ashamed to step out onto the street with Ukrainian civilians. While all the shame falls onto Putin, Russia and now Belarus.

Putin will pay for all of the bloodshed there! Slava Ukraini!


----------



## nightflameauto

oversteve said:


> It's federal in name only, it's basically an autocrathy with one man standing at the top and there's a possibility it will split up into few small states after he's no more
> 
> btw few hours ago russian rocket has landed at the territory of Babyn Yar Holocaust Memorial, so much for claming war against Nazis ...



That's some next-level shit behavior. It's like, taking shit behavior and cubing it. Holy fuck.


----------



## Randy

bostjan said:


> All that does, essentially, is that it shaves off one minute of response time.


Less about speed, more about range and delivery options. Even if we're not talking about nuclear weapons, just having a place to house his weapons right over the border from his biggest enemies (the EU, NATO) is probably too much to resist.

If he just gets his way 100%, we'll see where he takes things. The pessimistic view is that he's power hungry and intent on taking over the entire world, the optimistic view is that he's got a mini Slavic Empire in mind and he just wants to ensure Ukraine and Belarus remain the buffer between him and the rest of the world.


----------



## BMFan30

^Putin sends members of the Wagner Group to "denazify" Ukrainians. You just can't make this shit up...

This is all that Putin has done for his own people, that's why he seds kids born in 2000 to become minced meat in a war:


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

Randy said:


> You're describing a no-win situation. And I'm not blaming you for that characterization, because it pretty much is but I'd stop short of making any recommendation one way or the other on this because I doubt him taking Ukraine with NO intervention from the West (to avoid "backing him into a corner") means he stops there.
> 
> What's the line in the sand where we stop giving Putin what he wants because we're afraid making him mad? A historically corrupt country that historically has deep ties to Russia and is NOT a member of NATO or the EU (as of now) might not be the tripwire, but what is it exactly?


This Germany 2.0 if we give him Ukraine. He won't stop there, just like Germany.


----------



## BMFan30

Spaced Out Ace said:


> This Germany 2.0 if we give him Ukraine. He won't stop there, just like Germany.


No he won't good point, he will get greedy which will topple Moldovia, then Poland and every other surrounding nation.

Russia is about to become one of the poorest countries because the ruble is nosediving harder than any other currency right now while many Russians suffer pointlessly as he eats black caviar in his office without a fuck to give about his own people. He has absolutely no loyalty to his own nation.

Russia VS Ukraine is like David VS Goliath but we all know how that ended and it's going to end the same way here. Ukraine will rebuild because they know how to suck in their gut and get to work rebuilding their nation but Russia depends to much on other nations which cut him off already.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

BMFan30 said:


> No he won't good point, he will get greedy which will topple Moldovia, then Poland and every other surrounding nation.
> 
> Russia is about to become one of the poorest countries because the ruble is nosediving harder than any other currency right now while many Russians suffer pointlessly as he eats black caviar in his office without a fuck to give about his own people. He has absolutely no loyalty to his own nation.


Which, essentially, means he is a selfish traitor.


----------



## ItWillDo

possumkiller said:


> So far these guys are intentionally targeting women, children, old people and taking civilians as hostages. It's not war this is some terrorist shit. Like, I don't get it. Why wouldn't this fall under GWoT? Because it's not brown people? We fought two wars in Iraq over some terrorist dictator shit. Why the fuck the world doesn't call this asshole's bluff and kill him already is beyond me.


I don't know where you got this, but it's probably because it's a straight up lie. Russia has shown great restraint when it comes to civilian collateral.


----------



## BMFan30

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Which, essentially, means he is a selfish traitor.


Exactly, Russians are looting stores and bank safes in war ridden Ukraine which shows that's the only way they know how to make their living. They don't know how to work.

So after they are indefinitely cut off from the world they won't know how to work together to build up their nation like Ukraine is doing right now since stealing is all Russians know. Putin became one of the richest men through illegitimate needs instead of honest hard work.


----------



## Xaios

Took a translated screencap of the tweet:


----------



## profwoot

Yeah the ruble is worth less than a US penny today, 2/3 its value just before the invasion, half of its worth 4 years ago, 1/3 of its value prior to the 2014 invasion, and about 1/5 of its value from 2008, its max this century.


----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> You're describing a no-win situation. And I'm not blaming you for that characterization, because it pretty much is but I'd stop short of making any recommendation one way or the other on this because I doubt him taking Ukraine with NO intervention from the West (to avoid "backing him into a corner") means he stops there.
> 
> What's the line in the sand where we stop giving Putin what he wants because we're afraid making him mad? A historically corrupt country that historically has deep ties to Russia and is NOT a member of NATO or the EU (as of now) might not be the tripwire, but what is it exactly?



If he starts trying to flood Ukraine with millions of fresh conscripts, the West is more likely to arm and fund an endless stream of actual volunteers, "volunteers" (rebadged special forces), and mercenaries.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

Xaios said:


> Took a translated screencap of the tweet:
> 
> View attachment 103998


Good luck if this ever goes to a tribunal or UN hearing where they have to explain themselves. "We invaded for the Neo-Nazi elements in Ukraine!" "What about bombing of the Holocaust Memorial?" "WE INVADED FOR THE NEO-NAZI ELEMENTS IN UKRAI... oh shit."


----------



## bostjan

If Putin gets away with this, think of the message that sends to all of the other nuke-armed bullies worldwide. If I lived in South Korea or Taiwan, I might try to figure out an exit plan just in case.



profwoot said:


> Yeah the ruble is worth less than a US penny today, 2/3 its value just before the invasion, half of its worth 4 years ago, 1/3 of its value prior to the 2014 invasion, and about 1/5 of its value from 2008, its max this century.



That's pretty brutal. When I was there, I could get about 30 rubles for a USD, and I know the US dollar is definitely less strong than it was back then.


----------



## possumkiller

ItWillDo said:


> I don't know where you got this, but it's probably because it's a straight up lie. Russia has shown great restraint when it comes to civilian collateral.


Are you joking or trolling or getting your news from Russian media?


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

bostjan said:


> If Putin gets away with this, think of the message that sends to all of the other nuke-armed bullies worldwide. If I lived in South Korea or Taiwan, I might try to figure out an exit plan just in case.


Yeah, good point. Taiwan has been threatened numerous times recently, and I think China just talked with North Korea recently to reaffirm their ties or some shit. Bunch of petty, tin pot dictators trying to bully the planet into obedience.


----------



## BMFan30

profwoot said:


> Yeah the ruble is worth less than a US penny today, 2/3 its value just before the invasion, half of its worth 4 years ago, 1/3 of its value prior to the 2014 invasion, and about 1/5 of its value from 2008, its max this century.


Yes, a pound of rubles is worth a dollar today.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

BMFan30 said:


> Yes, a pound of rubles is worth a dollar today.


I'm sure the people worth more than anyone else in Russia are real happy with their pile of gold turning into a puddle of piss beneath them over an invasion they couldn't give a shit about.


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> I don't know where you got this, but it's probably because it's a straight up lie. Russia has shown great restraint when it comes to civilian collateral.



100+ confirmed kills of civilians within 5 days is a great restraint? 


https://edition.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ukraine-russia-news-02-28-22/h_694dfdfbc869aec51259f0468e0c86a1


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> That's what I mean though - However Putin actually manages the nation, the law is written so that there are individual federal states and that makes it a lot easier to adapt to whatever happens afterwards.



We're way past giving much thought to written laws, especially if/when the crazy dictatorship that spawned them tumbles


----------



## BMFan30

oversteve said:


> 100+ confirmed kills of civilians within 5 days is a great restraint?
> 
> 
> https://edition.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ukraine-russia-news-02-28-22/h_694dfdfbc869aec51259f0468e0c86a1


Even CNN has more journalistic credibility than Russian news network today which is saying a whole lot. Putin has put so much money into propaganda spanning generations into his lies so of course the bulk of Russia thinks Ukraine is bombing it's own kids.

Watch these 2 channels if you want real news and compilations of Ukrainian footage straight from their phones in their homes.

*A B Stand with Ukraine* (Ukrainian civilian phone footage):
*


https://www.youtube.com/c/ABalanceDramaNewsLive/videos



Channel 4 News* (UK news straight from the grounds of Ukraine):


https://www.youtube.com/c/Channel4News/videos



Please add more credible news sources with me if you have them.


----------



## Adieu

possumkiller said:


> Are you joking or trolling or getting your news from Russian media?



He's half-serious.

They clearly WERE ordered to avoid civillians at first. They're azzholes working for an evil dictator and I do wish any who don't desert or surrender a swift transformation into chernozem fertilizer, but still... the fact that this was a (crappy) attempt at state capture/colonization with minimal damage, not ethnic cleansing to empty the land is pretty clear.

They were EXPECTING to win hearts and minds.

PS stupid delusional f*ckers that they are


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> He's half-serious.
> 
> They clearly WERE ordered to avoid civillians at first. They're azzholes working for an evil dictator and I do wish any who don't desert or surrender a swift transformation into chernozem fertilizer, but still... the fact that this was a (crappy) attempt at state capture/colonization with minimal damage, not ethnic cleansing to empty the land is pretty clear.
> 
> They were EXPECTING to win hearts and minds.
> 
> PS stupid delusional f*ckers that they are


I'm so glad there are Russians like you who have a level head intact that stand with Ukraine instead of the lies of Putin. It sucks he's betraying your own people. 

I consider you the same Ukrainian that I am for standing with my country. I even have some relatives I hung up on that are eating up Putins lies who live in Russia which is the opposite of my relatives are saying in Ukraine.


----------



## ItWillDo

possumkiller said:


> Are you joking or trolling or getting your news from Russian media?


I'm serious though, accusing them of intentionally targeting civilians is blowing things way out of proportions. E.g.:

- The armored vehicle intenionally driving over a car was a Ukranian Strela-10 which ran over a car in a freak accident, days before there was even mention of Russian armor near the capital:
 (neutral reporter)

- The cruiser hit Kharkov this morning was a direct hit on a recruitment station in front of the administration building, at 08:00 AM when the station was going to open at 10:00:  (Pro-Russian biased but well documented).

Aside from that, there is a plethora of videos circulating of civilians stopping convoys, throwing molotovs, climbing military vehicles all without any combat engagement. To assume that Russia has entered this conflict with the intent of causing civilian harm is ignorant at best.



oversteve said:


> 100+ confirmed kills of civilians within 5 days is a great restraint?
> 
> 
> https://edition.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ukraine-russia-news-02-28-22/h_694dfdfbc869aec51259f0468e0c86a1


Any casualty in this conflict whether it's civilian or military is tragic. And it's very sad to say, but if you're going to state that Russia is intentionally harming civilians, the numbers don't align.


----------



## nightflameauto

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Good luck if this ever goes to a tribunal or UN hearing where they have to explain themselves. "We invaded for the Neo-Nazi elements in Ukraine!" "What about bombing of the Holocaust Memorial?" "WE INVADED FOR THE NEO-NAZI ELEMENTS IN UKRAI... oh shit."


I'm sure Putin will stick to his narrative that this is exactly the reason he was trying to liberate the people from the Neonazis in charge, and that Ukraine themselves did this.


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> I'm serious though, accusing them of intentionally targeting civilians is blowing things way out of proportions. E.g.:
> 
> - The armored vehicle intenionally driving over a car was a Ukranian Strela-10 which ran over a car in a freak accident, days before there was even mention of Russian armor near the capital:
> (neutral reporter)
> 
> - The cruiser hit Kharkov this morning was a direct hit on a recruitment station in front of the administration building, at 08:00 AM when the station was going to open at 10:00:  (Pro-Russian biased but well documented).
> 
> Aside from that, there is a plethora of videos circulating of civilians stopping convoys, throwing molotovs, climbing military vehicles all without any combat engagement. To assume that Russia has entered this conflict with the intent of causing civilian harm is ignorant at best.
> 
> 
> Any casualty in this conflict whether it's civilian or military is tragic. And it's very sad to say, but if you're going to state that Russia is intentionally harming civilians, the numbers don't align.



Get out of here! Putin has airstrikes hitting apartments and tanks blowing up homes. He says one thing in the media but does something else entirely. The only correct response to terrorism is more terrorism.

While Ukraine isn't even killing these soldiers that are still boys, they are simply filming them saying that Putin send them to a military exercise then they find themselves in the middle of a war shitting themselves saying they don't want to kill their own relatives.

You ate up too much of Putins propaganda. Ukraine is taking these kids that barely had any Russian military training to fight fight alongside them. Ukrainians are too tolerant and peaceful which is the whole of the problem.

There is a full scale war happening there, with the bulk of casualities being innocent civilians and even Russians shooting up refugees in train stations leaving many unable to escape.

It's all for bloodshed and Putins own crooked ambitions to stand next to Stalin, Lenin and Hitler in the history books. The only thing we need now to fulfill Putin's shitty ambitions is to bring his corpse to a halt then print his shitty photo next to other war crimes in history books.


----------



## ItWillDo

BMFan30 said:


> Get out of here! He has airstrikes hitting apartments and tanks blowing up homes. He says one think in the media but does something else entirely. The only correct response to terrorism is more terrorism.
> 
> While Ukraine isn't even killing these soldiers that are still boys, they are simply filming them saying that Putin send them to a military exercise then they find themselves in the middle of a war shitting themselves saying they don't want to kill their own relatives.
> 
> You ate up too much of Putins propaganda. Ukraine is taking these kids that barely had any Russian military training to fight fight alongside them. They are too tolerant and peaceful which is the whole of the problem.
> 
> There is a full scale war happening there, with the bulk of casualities being innocent civilians and even Russians shooting up refugees in train stations leaving many unable to escape.
> 
> It's all for bloodshed and Putins own crooked ambitions to stand next to Stalin, Lenin and Hitler in the history books.


You're emotionally biased, I get that. But it's clouding your judgement as well. If requested, I can provide more than enough NSFL media to prove that UKR soldiers aren't the angels you take them to be neither. 

Aside from that, please provide footage, sources, anything to show me tanks blowing up homes or them shooting up refugees in train stations which could change my perception.


----------



## Demiurge

ItWillDo said:


> Aside from that, there is a plethora of videos circulating of civilians stopping convoys, throwing molotovs, climbing military vehicles all without any combat engagement.


I'm curious to know how invading another fucking country is not at least technically "combat engagement".


----------



## ItWillDo

Demiurge said:


> I'm curious to know how invading another fucking country is not at least technically "combat engagement".


Being from the states, I'd expect you to have a pretty damn good understanding of the technicalities.


----------



## nikt

possumkiller said:


> Are you joking or trolling or getting your news from Russian media?



IMO that's true. It's not even close to war actions that could've be done, or were done in past (like WW2) on civils.

You can clearly see that in first 2 days they've attacked almost only military bases, airports and roads. Some videos from smallers cities proof that they are not attacking directly on civils, only on buildinds. Compare that to what Germans did. 


Far we go with time the more russians will fight with fear on civils and there will be more and more of them dead. EU/NATO are bleeding Ukraine down.


----------



## bostjan

ItWillDo said:


> I'm serious though, accusing them of intentionally targeting civilians is blowing things way out of proportions. E.g.:
> 
> - The armored vehicle intenionally driving over a car was a Ukranian Strela-10 which ran over a car in a freak accident, days before there was even mention of Russian armor near the capital:
> (neutral reporter)
> 
> - The cruiser hit Kharkov this morning was a direct hit on a recruitment station in front of the administration building, at 08:00 AM when the station was going to open at 10:00:  (Pro-Russian biased but well documented).
> 
> Aside from that, there is a plethora of videos circulating of civilians stopping convoys, throwing molotovs, climbing military vehicles all without any combat engagement. To assume that Russia has entered this conflict with the intent of causing civilian harm is ignorant at best.
> 
> 
> Any casualty in this conflict whether it's civilian or military is tragic. And it's very sad to say, but if you're going to state that Russia is intentionally harming civilians, the numbers don't align.



Google Elijah J. Magnier. That journalist also wrote articles about how this is not a war between Ukraine and Russia, but a proxy war for the USA, tweeted about anyone who stands with Ukraine is a hypocrite, posted 5 days ago:


Elijah J Magnier said:


> #Ukraine President Zelenskyy said he is still in #Kyiv but I expect him to leave sooner rather than later and war will stop.


also prior to that:


Elijah J Magnier said:


> I believe Putin is wrong if he believes the #US will negotiate. On the contrary, warmongers will be pushing the west for aggressive behaviour. Thus, @JoeBiden has cornered himself, thinking he is embarrassing Putin. Biden can't go to war and will look weaker. Europe is the hope.



There is quite a bit of documentation about the video. It was taken from multiple angles. Are you saying that the tank wasn't Russian? Or what?


----------



## Adieu

BMFan30 said:


> I'm so glad there are Russians like you who have a level head intact that stand with Ukraine instead of the lies of Putin. It sucks he's betraying your own people.
> 
> I consider you the same Ukrainian that I am for standing with my country. I even have some relatives I hung up on that are eating up Putins lies who live in Russia which is the opposite of my relatives are saying in Ukraine.



I can't quite lay claim to such morality, though. This is PERSONAL.

I've been hoping somebody kills the bastard and quietly egging people on to rise up for years. As to my firm stand in favor of Ukraine, this has much to do with having BEEN to some of those places showing up on screen. With tanks rolling through or defiant locals mixing Bandera Smoothies (aka Ukraine-themed Molotovs) and welding tank barriers out of fences and playgrounds.

I don't want some random Putinist azzhole killing the parents or children of some girl I unsuccessfully hit on half a lifetime ago or some dude I drank beer with. I see this sh!t and I wonder if they're blowing up the house of someone I once knew.

Also, I'm technically Ukrainian on my mother's side and have some long-lost relatives somewhere in Odessa last I heard. And 47% of my income comes from translating from Ukrainian (which I accidentally learned on a whim as an adult).

On the other side of the coin, I have zero Putinist azzholes I give a damn about. I literally don't know that I know any, and if I do and just don't realize it, well, f them and their Nazi collaborator Vlasov's ugly flag too.


----------



## 4Eyes

ItWillDo said:


> You're emotionally biased, I get that. But it's clouding your judgement as well. If requested, I can provide more than enough NSFL media to prove that UKR soldiers aren't the angels you take them to be neither.
> 
> Aside from that, please provide footage, sources, anything to show me tanks blowing up homes or them shooting up refugees in train stations which could change my perception.


please send an evidence of Russian heros liberating poor people in UKR who welcome them with flowers.


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> You're emotionally biased, I get that. But it's clouding your judgement as well. If requested, I can provide more than enough NSFL media to prove that UKR soldiers aren't the angels you take them to be neither.
> 
> Aside from that, please provide footage, sources, anything to show me tanks blowing up homes or them shooting up refugees in train stations which could change my perception.


You take that statement and tell the mothers that have lost their 6 year old kids and say it to their face and tell them how emotionally charged they are...

Here are some sources: (Almost 7 days worth of sources for you straight from the phones of actual Ukrainians and not the propagande you were fed.)


https://www.youtube.com/c/ABalanceDramaNewsLive/videos



*Man whose tank was crushed by a Russian tank as he's peacefully leaving a supermarket with Ukrainians left to dig him out because he miraculously survived:*



*Russian Soldiers captured telling their story:*




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NBU3PS_fHQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRPwotHsvac
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xWrTc-t8Uo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYN9ZjgGQ8o

*Airstrikes and missile attacks:*




__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com





*Aftermath of the ruins Russians leave in their trail:*




__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com





*Bombs, Missiles & Explosions:*




__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com





*Combat footage:*




__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com






*Russian Looters in Ukraine:*




__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com








__





- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com





I brought you the sources so embed them into your browser yourself, now your turn with the *ahem* sources. I want real footage from the ground and not some fuckwit talking on the news. I want to see what lies you come up with. 

*GO. YOUR TURN @ItWillDo !!!! 
Otherwise shut right the fuck up and byd lasko and leave this fucking thread.*


----------



## ItWillDo

bostjan said:


> Google Elijah J. Magnier. That journalist also wrote articles about how this is not a war between Ukraine and Russia, but a proxy war for the USA


As mentioned before, I have absolutely no clue what gain Russia or Ukraine could possibly have from this conflict. So I don't know whether it's a proxy war or not, but I can imagine involvement from NATO could have definitely played a role here. Interesting observation (or not), but the Democrats are in charge again and somehow war ignites somewhere in the world.



> I believe Putin is wrong if he believes the #US will negotiate. On the contrary, warmongers will be pushing the west for aggressive behaviour. Thus, @JoeBiden has cornered himself, thinking he is embarrassing Putin. Biden can't go to war and will look weaker. Europe is the hope.


He was right here though, the willingness to negotiate (from both sides) is absolutely childish and shameful:


Aside from that, the display at the EU council was nothing short of embarrassing neither and not very comforting knowing these people are tasked with creating peace.




> There is quite a bit of documentation about the video. It was taken from multiple angles. Are you saying that the tank wasn't Russian? Or what?


It's definitely Russian manufactured, but it belongs to the Ukranian forces. Of course I can't give you 100% guarantee, but I would be immensely surprised to see Russian armored forces driving around in the capital city center on the 25th of February when they main forces were barely at the borders.


----------



## Adieu

Just let him have his half-truth.

There are several videos of unarmed crowds trying to intimidate anything from lone 4x4's to tanks to whole convoys that manage to either retreat or push through pretty gently without using weapons, and one of a platoon that deploys some kind of anti-riot smoke/teargas grenades but nothing else.

The fact that SOME Russian troops are showing restraint, especially strong for a Russian considering that they're being far gentler than Russian police treat their own citizens, is pretty undeniable.

....but then there are others that shell or shoot random people, too.


----------



## nikt




----------



## Adieu

As to the armored vehicle in Kiev, wasn't that either snuck in or stolen by a forward recon/saboteur group?

Presumably they were trying to hide to spy or masking to take out a high-value target, while that crap was them trying to run away in a panic upon discovery


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> Just let him have his half-truth.
> 
> There are several videos of unarmed crowds trying to intimidate anything from lone 4x4's to tanks to whole convoys that manage to either retreat or push through pretty gently without using weapons, and one of a platoon that deploys some kind of anti-riot smoke/teargas grenades but nothing else.
> 
> The fact that SOME Russian troops are showing restraint, especially strong for a Russian considering that they're being far gentler than Russian police treat their own citizens, is pretty undeniable.
> 
> ....but then there are others that shell or shoot random people, too.


That doesn't take away from the fact that there is a full scale war happening and my people are dying right now, just because there are a couple of Russian soldiers showing restraint is nothing to the little bit of sources I brought in my earlier post. There is so much more than the sources I gave him which he asked for.

A few Russian soldiers showing restraint vs so many more Russians bombing the fuck out of my country cannot even be compared. It's ridiculous to even attempt a comparison.

Just like it's ridiculous to compare the justification of Russians in Moscow right now saying "but what about muh Americans VS Iraq war?" then using that as means to spill blood on my soil.


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> You're emotionally biased, I get that. But it's clouding your judgement as well. If requested, I can provide more than enough NSFL media to prove that UKR soldiers aren't the angels you take them to be neither.
> 
> Aside from that, please provide footage, sources, anything to show me tanks blowing up homes or them shooting up refugees in train stations which could change my perception.


Good luck looking for footage showing Ukrainian forces randomly bombing Russian cities.
Sofar there were 2 precise shots both aimed at Russian military airports

Regarding the tank riding over the car - it's the Northern outskirts of Kyiv and it's where some fights took place that day and even the day before


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> As to the armored vehicle in Kiev, wasn't that either snuck in or stolen by a forward recon/saboteur group?
> 
> Presumably they were trying to hide to spy or masking to take out a high-value target, while that crap was them trying to run away in a panic upon discovery


It's very easy for a neighboring country like Russia is to Ukraine to take over a Ukrainian tank or wear their uniform then say it's the Ukrainians because they looks like them, they speak like them and they eat like them.

Demilitarization is harder if it was Indians VS Americans because they are far too different but it's much easier if Canada tried to put on American military uniforms then bomb America because they are neighbors that are too much alike. Then use Canadian media to say that Americans are killing their own kind.


----------



## Randy

I don't think he's entirely wrong but he's clearly as biased as he's accusing anyone else of being.

This recalls the stories about US service members and contractors killing civilians for fun or other reasons in Iraq during the war. That was not the mission or not what they were explicitly told to do, but they brought in groups of shitty dudes with no oversight and did everything to dehumanize the people in the area they invade to get their bloodlust going then let them loose. If they shoot the "right ones" they're heroes and if they shot the "wrong ones" it was collateral damage and forgiven. I'm sure there was also the occasional "let psycho Johnny handle that detail" knowing something like that might happen and knowing it would be an advantageous hit to local morale.

I think it's true, there's a million and one opportunities to just indiscriminately execute scores of civilians if that was their orders. Most of the civilian causalities I've seen look like accidents, bad intel, bad training, with the occasional shithead and "put the scare in 'em" order sprinkled in.


----------



## ItWillDo

4Eyes said:


> please send an evidence of Russian heros liberating poor people in UKR who welcome them with flowers.


Thanks for your contribution.



BMFan30 said:


> You take that statement and tell the mothers that have lost their 6 year old kids and say it to their face and tell them how emotionally charged they are...
> 
> Here are some sources: (Almost 7 days worth of sources for you straight from the phones of actual Ukrainians and not the propagande you were fed.)
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/c/ABalanceDramaNewsLive/videos
> 
> 
> 
> *Man whose tank was crushed by a Russian tank as he's peacefully leaving a supermarket with Ukrainians left to dig him out because he miraculously survived:*
> 
> 
> 
> *Russian Soldiers captured telling their story:*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NBU3PS_fHQ
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRPwotHsvac
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xWrTc-t8Uo
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYN9ZjgGQ8o
> 
> *Airstrikes and missile attacks:*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Aftermath of the ruins Russians leave in their trail:*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Bombs, Missiles & Explosions:*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Combat footage:*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Russian Looters in Ukraine:*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - YouTube
> 
> 
> Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I brought you the sources so embed them into your browser yourself, now your turn with the *ahem* sources. I want real footage from the ground and not some fuckwit talking on the news. I want to see what lies you come up with.
> 
> *GO. YOUR TURN @ItWillDo !!!!
> Otherwise shut right the fuck up and byd lasko and leave this fucking thread.*



As priorly mentioned, what's happening is an absolute tragedy and any and all casualties in this conflict are completely senseless. My only intention is to counter statements which are treating the occupation as a genocide. Out of all the sources you have provided, only the burning house could be interpreted as an example of my request, but given the obvious bias of the channel (pandering with "dead russians", "young Russian being bullied") & absolute lack of context, I would feel bad judging from it.


----------



## Jeffrey Bain

Can't imagine not empathizing with the Ukrainian people here...


----------



## Adieu

BMFan30 said:


> That doesn't take away from the fact that there is a full scale war happening and my people are dying right now, just because there are a couple of Russian soldiers showing restraint is nothing to the little bit of sources I brought in my earlier post. There is so much more than the sources I gave him which he asked for.
> 
> A few Russian soldiers showing restraint vs so many more Russians bombing the fuck out of my country cannot even be compared. It's ridiculous to even attempt a comparison.
> 
> Just like it's ridiculous to compare the justification of Russians in Moscow right now saying "but what about muh Americans VS Iraq war then using that as means to spill blood on my soil.



Agreed.

Some of the Putinists trying to live up to the "Polite People" propaganda image from the Crimea takeover as instructed doesn't take away from the fact that they shouldn't be there at all and shouldn't ever have signed up to serve a damn dictator in the first place.

No justification. Just glad they're not going for scroched earth everywhere.


----------



## BMFan30

oversteve said:


> Good luck looking for footage showing Ukrainian forces randomly bombing Russian cities.
> Sofar there were 2 precise shots both aimed at Russian military airports
> 
> Regarding the tank riding over the car - it's the Northern outskirts of Kyiv and it's where some fights took place that day and even the day before



Exactly, if you provoke Ukraine then they are defending on their own soil unlike Russians that are on Ukrainian soil demanding identification, pasports and other documents at roadblock like they own their country or have authority there.

There is no footage of Ukrainians on Russian soil doing the same thing, provoking them or killin them unlike the millions of sources showing Russians doing that. The lowest scum of the earth, they are. Those god damn russians. 

@ItWillDo I'm still waiting on sources of that happening btw. Match my resources, you wont...


----------



## Randy

Adieu said:


> Just glad they're not going for scroched earth everywhere.


Well yeah, the thing that's unsaid (especially by the pro-Russian folks I've been following as they pop up) is all the examples of Russia's "restraint" is literally applauding them for not committing war crimes by the tens of thousands. Which, okay fine, but if you want to know what's going to send NATO in there to end this whole thing in a couple hours of bombardments.... yeah that's why you don't do that.


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> Thanks for your contribution.
> 
> 
> As priorly mentioned, what's happening is an absolute tragedy and any and all casualties in this conflict are completely senseless. My only intention is to counter statements which are treating the occupation as a genocide. Out of all the sources you have provided, only the burning house could be interpreted as an example of my request, but given the obvious bias of the channel (pandering with "dead russians", "young Russian being bullied") & absolute lack of context, I would feel bad judging from it.


You're a lost cause feeding on propaganda. I've shown you real sources of footage happening on the grounds of Ukraine. Where are yours?!?!!? You asked for sources, I gave them. Now match mine, right now!

@ItWillDo you're also telling me as long as it took me to compile my sources, it took you a quarter of the time to view them all and come to the conclusion that only 2 have been credible!?

Who in the fuck are you trying to fool other than yourself?! Slide your pretty little finger out of your ass and face reality...


----------



## ItWillDo

Adieu said:


> As to the armored vehicle in Kiev, wasn't that either snuck in or stolen by a forward recon/saboteur group?
> 
> Presumably they were trying to hide to spy or masking to take out a high-value target, while that crap was them trying to run away in a panic upon discovery


I mean, sure. But out of all options do you really want to go through the mental gymnastics to convince yourself that a spy was trying to hide inside armor, to take out a (presumable ground) target using an anti-aircraft vehicle only to then opt for fleeing in said armor instead of a normal car (which were still plentifully present then as obvious from the video).



oversteve said:


> Good luck looking for footage showing Ukrainian forces randomly bombing Russian cities.
> Sofar there were 2 precise shots both aimed at Russian military airports
> 
> Regarding the tank riding over the car - it's the Northern outskirts of Kyiv and it's where some fights took place that day and even the day before



I never accused Ukraine of doing anything as such. As for the car, I'd really like to know more so if you have some sources on those fights, I'd appreciate it.


----------



## Jeffrey Bain

ItWillDo said:


> I mean, sure. But out of all options do you really want to go through the mental gymnastics to convince yourself that a spy was trying to hide inside armor, to take out a (presumable ground) target using an anti-aircraft vehicle only to then opt for fleeing in said armor instead of a normal car (which were still plentifully present then as obvious from the video).
> 
> 
> I never accused Ukraine of doing anything as such. As for the car, I'd really like to know more so if you have some sources on those fights, I'd appreciate it.


Hate to say it but I don't think you're really going to garner any sort of conversation with the stance you're taking. It's pretty abrasive lmao


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> Thanks for your contribution.
> 
> 
> As priorly mentioned, what's happening is an absolute tragedy and any and all casualties in this conflict are completely senseless. My only intention is to counter statements which are treating the occupation as a genocide. Out of all the sources you have provided, only the burning house could be interpreted as an example of my request, but given the obvious bias of the channel (pandering with "dead russians", "young Russian being bullied") & absolute lack of context, I would feel bad judging from it.


No one claims it's a genocide, right now it's an occupation of Ukraine by Russia using underhanded methods.
Also it has a potential to turn into genocide in the near future since one of the objectives is "denazification" and accroding to Putin's interpretation millions of people here fall under it. And it's not something new for Russia, there's plenty of examples in Soviet history


----------



## LostTheTone

Jeffrey Bain said:


> Can't imagine not empathizing with the Ukrainian people here...



Yeah, me either. 

I can understand people who say that they don't want the west to get too involved; thats a different issue; but I can't see how anyone can not sympathize with the Ukrainians.

I've seen people who I normally would have a good deal of time for who are dismissive of the situation. I understand that they instinctively want to own the libs, and so feel obliged to be the opposite of whatever the mainstream media are saying, but on this topic I think it's obvious that Ukraine deserves our sympathies, if not our direct support.

It's fine to say that the west should be cautious, or even that the west shouldn't be involved at all. It's another to say that it's not a big deal that Russia just invades it's neighbours.


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> I mean, sure. But out of all options do you really want to go through the mental gymnastics to convince yourself that a spy was trying to hide inside armor, to take out a (presumable ground) target using an anti-aircraft vehicle only to then opt for fleeing in said armor instead of a normal car (which were still plentifully present then as obvious from the video).
> 
> 
> I never accused Ukraine of doing anything as such. As for the car, I'd really like to know more so if you have some sources on those fights, I'd appreciate it.


I will repeat again because you're hard of reading.

It's easier for Canada to demilitarize America because they are neighbors that are too much alike. So they can throw on American military uniforms and act like those Canadians are Americans who are killing their own.

Just like the situation in Ukraine provoked by Russians.

But if India tried that with America then it wouldn't fly because they are too different to fool. Get it? Get it?! I doubt that you do. 

I'm still waiting on your shitsources btw. I doubt you will provide.


----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> Well yeah, the thing that's unsaid (especially by the pro-Russian folks I've been following as they pop up) is all the examples of Russia's "restraint" is literally applauding them for not committing war crimes by the tens of thousands. Which, okay fine, but if you want to know what's going to send NATO in there to end this whole thing in a couple hours of bombardments.... yeah that's why you don't do that.



It's even more complicated though.

Some of it comes from the Putinist propaganda take on Ukraine ( = "friendlies with a few Nazi bad apples"), some from the unreliability of his troops. If they start competing at out-war-criming each other, some will desert, some will turn coat and start shooting at their old comrades.

Ukrainian villagers and especially Eastern Ukrainian villagers aren't an alien people of a different color and unfathomable faith to those soldiers. They're... familiar. Different in some things, but very recognizable as regular people.

And Putin's lack of ideology means there's very little room to dehumanize. The "scary Ukrainian nazis" myth doesn't in any way shape or form work to describe a Russian-speaking rural grandma yelling at them to go back home.


----------



## Adieu

Btw, that's also why the Russians used the arrival of Kadyrov squads to try to scare everyone shitless and why Ukraine hunted them down relentlessly immediately.

It's because the unspoken obvious truth was that THOSE goons would have no such moral conundrums or sympathies and would war-crime a bloody swathe of destruction.

They were LITERALLY sent there with the INTENT to war crime.

Oh, well. Now they're fertilizer.


----------



## ItWillDo

BMFan30 said:


> You're a lost cause feeding on propaganda. I've shown you real sources of footage happening on the grounds of Ukraine. Where are yours?!?!!? You asked for sources, I gave them. Now match mine, right now!
> 
> @ItWillDo you're also telling me as long as it took me to compile my sources, it took you a quarter of the time to view them all and come to the conclusion that only 2 have been credible!?
> 
> Who in the fuck are you trying to fool other than yourself?! Slide your pretty little finger out of your ass and face reality...


Reiterating, I'm not accusing Ukraine of anything, I'm merely defending the notion that Russia is not invading with the intention of causing direct civilian harm. I never said they are not invading, I never said I support the conflict, in contrary.



Jeffrey Bain said:


> Hate to say it but I don't think you're really going to garner any sort of conversation with the stance you're taking. It's pretty abrasive lmao


Sad to hear, I merely try to convey an alternative point of view but it's pointless if even the idea of looking at thing from another perspective/source is conceived as abrasive.



oversteve said:


> No one claims it's a genocide, right now it's an occupation of Ukraine by Russia using underhanded methods.
> Also it has a potential to turn into genocide in the near future since one of the objectives is "denazification" and accroding to Putin's interpretation millions of people here fall under it. And it's not something new for Russia, there's plenty of examples in Soviet history


I don't really think you even believe that yourself. The Nazi thing was obviously just a psyop referring to the Azov Batallion, who are in all honesty pretty open about it: 









LostTheTone said:


> Yeah, me either.
> 
> I can understand people who say that they don't want the west to get too involved; thats a different issue; but I can't see how anyone can not sympathize with the Ukrainians.
> 
> I've seen people who I normally would have a good deal of time for who are dismissive of the situation. I understand that they instinctively want to own the libs, and so feel obliged to be the opposite of whatever the mainstream media are saying, but on this topic I think it's obvious that Ukraine deserves our sympathies, if not our direct support.
> 
> It's fine to say that the west should be cautious, or even that the west shouldn't be involved at all. It's another to say that it's not a big deal that Russia just invades it's neighbours.


I never said I don't sympathize with the Ukranians and that this is not a big deal, I don't understand why this is such a hard thing for you to grasp. It's just really ironic to see so many accusations of genocide, civilian targeting and propaganda being flung around whilst most of it is just plain wrong, questionable and/or malevolent.


----------



## Randy

Adieu said:


> Btw, that's also why the Russians used the arrival of Kadyrov squads to try to scare everyone shitless and why Ukraine hunted them down relentlessly immediately.
> 
> It's because the unspoken obvious truth was that THOSE goons would have no such moral conundrums or sympathies and would war-crime a bloody swathe of destruction.
> 
> They were LITERALLY sent there with the INTENT to war crime.
> 
> Oh, well. Now they're fertilizer.



It doesn't come as much surprise that they look a lot like Jan 6th "freedom fighters" btw


----------



## bostjan

@ItWillDo I mean, you literally came in here suggesting, without evidence, that a Russian tank that crushed a car wasn't driven by Russians.

If you are saying that maybe it wasn't Russians, and you have some sort of other explanation other than, "well, one can never know for certain, therefore you are certainly wrong," then let's hear it.


----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> It doesn't come as much surprise that they look a lot like Jan 6th "freedom fighters" btw



Waiiiit... why is that fool wearing a Star of David?

Don't tell me ol' Marjorie was on to something with that space lazer crap?


----------



## 4Eyes

ItWillDo said:


> It's just really ironic to see so many accusations of genocide, civilian targeting and propaganda being flung around whilst most of it is just plain wrong, questionable and/or malevolent.











New military strike in Kharkiv hits apartment complex near hospital, videos show


Russia has ramped up war efforts, and President Putin ordered his country's deterrence forces — including nuclear arms — be placed on high alert. Follow here for live news updates from the ground in Ukraine.




edition.cnn.com


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> Reiterating, I'm not accusing Ukraine of anything, I'm merely defending the notion that Russia is not invading with the intention of causing direct civilian harm. I never said they are not invading, I never said I support the conflict, in contrary.
> 
> 
> Sad to hear, I merely try to convey an alternative point of view but it's pointless if even the idea of looking at thing from another perspective/source is conceived as abrasive.
> 
> 
> I don't really think you even believe that yourself. The Nazi thing was obviously just a psyop referring to the Azov Batallion, who are in all honesty pretty open about it:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I never said I don't sympathize with the Ukrainians and that this is not a big deal, I don't understand why this is such a hard thing for you to grasp. It's just really ironic to see so many accusations of genocide, civilian targeting and propaganda being flung around whilst most of it is just plain wrong, questionable and/or malevolent.


I have shown you an ass-load of sources intending to kill Ukrainian civilians because it's happened and is still happening there right as we speak but you are blinded by propaganda and using the Azov battalion to prove your point. Nazi's are in every country voiding out your whole argument.

You are in Amsterdam? You know there are Nazi's there too right? You know how minuscule it would be for me to use that to excuse Germany attacking The Netherlands in an unprovoked full scale war against your civilians right now if it were to happen? Jesus fucking Christ you're thicker than cottage cheese.

If that did happen, you know what I would do? Stand with your fucking people unlike you right now! You eat putins shit straight from his ass then ask for a second helping.

You're hopeless like my Russian relatives I spoke with earlier that ate up Putin's propaganda but my Ukrainian relatives are there in Ukraine right now saying something entirely different.

You're talking to someone that's lost family there to these Russian pigs that have no loyalty even to their own relatives. So your bullshit isn't going to fly no matter how much you try to will it into existence.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

ItWillDo said:


> Aside from that, the display at the EU council was nothing short of embarrassing neither and not very comforting knowing these people are tasked with creating peace.


What display are you referring to?


----------



## ItWillDo

bostjan said:


> @ItWillDo I mean, you literally came in here suggesting, without evidence, that a Russian tank that crushed a car wasn't driven by Russians.
> 
> If you are saying that maybe it wasn't Russians, and you have some sort of other explanation other than, "well, one can never know for certain, therefore you are certainly wrong," then let's hear it.


Read again, I never said anyone they are wrong. The general consensus on what happened is just really plausible. On one hand the media mentions that Ukraine is "valiantly defending against the invaders", but on the other hand we have to assume there is a light armoured anti-aircraft vehicle roaming around in the capital center crushing civilian automobiles.


----------



## nickgray

ItWillDo said:


> I'm merely defending the notion that Russia is not invading with the intention of causing direct civilian harm



They're not intending to cause direct civilian harm in the sense that they're not willing to turn the whole thing into Chechnya. Yet. At the same time it's abundantly clear that they're fine with some collateral damage, and many fuck ups are taking place (it's Russia, of course there will be fuck ups).


----------



## bostjan

ItWillDo said:


> Read again, *I never said anyone they are wrong*. The general consensus on what happened is just really plausible. On one hand the media mentions that Ukraine is "valiantly defending against the invaders", but on the other hand we have to assume there is a light armoured anti-aircraft vehicle roaming around in the capital center crushing civilian automobiles.







ItWillDo said:


> I don't know where you got this, but it's probably because *it's a straight up lie*. Russia has shown great restraint when it comes to civilian collateral.


----------



## BMFan30

bostjan said:


> @ItWillDo I mean, you literally came in here suggesting, without evidence, that a Russian tank that crushed a car wasn't driven by Russians.
> 
> If you are saying that maybe it wasn't Russians, and you have some sort of other explanation other than, "well, one can never know for certain, therefore you are certainly wrong," then let's hear it.


@ItWillDo might say that the Ukrainians tried to demilitarize the Russians the same way I've already mentioned by killing their own kind which they won't do since they have 8 years worth of a war to prove they didn't.

But the god damn question still stands; how did those Russian tanks end up on Ukrainian soil in the first place? There aren't any Ukrainian tanks on Russian soil. No sources of that happening because Ukrainians are too peaceful and wholesome for their own fucking good.

That's why Zelenski isn't afraid to upload footage of him in Kiev everday while Putin has his tail stuck between his asshole putting a mile's worth of a table in meetings because he's scared for his supply of black caviar.

Putin isn't confident to be out in the open street like Zelenski because he knows what a shameful piece of shit he is. But Zelenski has nothing to be ashamed of because he's loyal to his people unlike Putin who sends kids to become minced meat in a war they don't understand or were even aware of.


----------



## Adieu

Yeah, Azov looks a hell of a lot like half-Kadyrovites, half wacky Trumpist militia.

So what? That's pretty much what they are to some extent. But they also seem to be behaving for the moment.

We're not shelling the trailer park because there MIGHT be Trumpists in there SOMEWHERE who MIGHT further radicalize and become a problem in the future, are we?


----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


> It doesn't come as much surprise that they look a lot like Jan 6th "freedom fighters" btw



Well, to be fair, most men throughout most of human history have had beards. It's not that damning of a similarity is it.

Show me a Q Shaman from Chechnya and you might be on to something though...


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> Well, to be fair, most men throughout most of human history have had beards. It's not that damning of a similarity is it.
> 
> Show me a Q Shaman from Chechnya and you might be on to something though...



They've all fled or died.

No such thing as freedom of religion in that Caliphate. And THAT'S on Putin too.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

LostTheTone said:


> Yeah, me either.
> 
> I can understand people who say that they don't want the west to get too involved; thats a different issue; but I can't see how anyone can not sympathize with the Ukrainians.
> 
> I've seen people who I normally would have a good deal of time for who are dismissive of the situation. I understand that they instinctively want to own the libs, and so feel obliged to be the opposite of whatever the mainstream media are saying, but on this topic I think it's obvious that Ukraine deserves our sympathies, if not our direct support.
> 
> It's fine to say that the west should be cautious, or even that the west shouldn't be involved at all. It's another to say that it's not a big deal that Russia just invades it's neighbours.


I’m not a liberal, nor do I want to have this turn into a full scale occupation/war with western involvement, as it will only make Ukrainian life worse. That said, I think Putin really overstepped his welcome here, and needs to have his inner circle remove him. Preferably by stripping him of his power and pulling the proverbial rug out from under him. Unlike Adieu, I don’t necessarily want him offed, though I understand their stance. I empathize with Ukraine, and would love to see Putin deal with another twenty years or so getting mocked and ridiculed as an everyday person.


----------



## Adieu

I'd take Inmate Putin V. V., but that ain't happening imho


----------



## ItWillDo

Spaced Out Ace said:


> What display are you referring to?











Diplomats walk out of Lavrov’s speech at the U.N. in Geneva.


Sergey Lavrov accused Ukraine of seeking to acquire nuclear weapons, an unsubstantiated claim that Moscow has used as justification for its invasion.




www.nytimes.com







bostjan said:


>


You're referring to 2 completely different issues. The tank<>car thing is one thing, but I still stand behind this statement being an absolute, blatant lie: 



> So far these guys are intentionally targeting women, children, old people and taking civilians as hostages. It's not war this is some terrorist shit. Like, I don't get it. Why wouldn't this fall under GWoT? Because it's not brown people? We fought two wars in Iraq over some terrorist dictator shit. Why the fuck the world doesn't call this asshole's bluff and kill him already is beyond me.





Adieu said:


> Yeah, Azov looks a hell of a lot like half-Kadyrovites, half wacky Trumpist militia.
> 
> So what? That's pretty much what they are to some extent. But they also seem to be behaving for the moment.
> 
> We're not shelling the trailer park because there MIGHT be Trumpists in there SOMEWHERE who MIGHT further radicalize and become a problem in the future, are we?


Slippery slide friend, might want to turn back a bit on the Overton window there. I think we both know that if the picture was a Russian batallion, you'd be having a field day right now.


----------



## nightflameauto

I like the idea someone had of locking Putin in a bunker, handing him a big red button, then televising his reaction to watching special effects shots of the world outside being obliterated. Hell, make it PPV and Russia could jump-start their economy while dealing with their perception problem all in one fell swoop.


----------



## LostTheTone

Spaced Out Ace said:


> would love to see Putin deal with another twenty years or so getting mocked and ridiculed as an everyday person.



I think at some point we forgot that those pictures of Putin riding a horse shirtless were genuinely hilarious and we started liking them ironically. Somewhere down the line some people forgot that, and started to say that actually Putin was awesome. 

But the joke has been on him for a long time. Just we kinda let our guard down becuase "lolrussia".


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

LostTheTone said:


> I think at some point we forgot that those pictures of Putin riding a horse shirtless were genuinely hilarious and we started liking them ironically. Somewhere down the line some people forgot that, and started to say that actually Putin was awesome.
> 
> But the joke has been on him for a long time. Just we kinda let our guard down becuase "lolrussia".


Don’t forget that dude, uh... FPSRussia? He also made Russia seem cool.


----------



## Adieu

ItWillDo said:


> Slippery slide friend, might want to turn back a bit on the Overton window there. I think we both know that if the picture was a Russian batallion, you'd be having a field day right now.



Nope. I've met plenty of Nazis, Naz-Bols, and other assorted shitheads in Moscow. Even those half-hippie, half-fascist LARPer wingnuts with their 8-point "Slavic Swastikas" and Thor's hammer amulets too. What would I need pictures of more morons for?

I don't wanna carpet bomb them. F*ck, I technically even still own property there. Probably? Maybe not.

I'm also pretty sure I *MAY* be looking at several counts of 12 to 20 w/ confiscation if I ever step foot there again. *IF* their cybergoons are doing a halfdecent job, so... who knows? Lol.


----------



## BMFan30

"Denazification of Ukraine"

Right as they bomb a Television station and a Holocaust memorial. Now, how the fuck is that "Denazification?"




Furthermore, they send fucks like this one ^ from "Wagner Group" to denazify Ukraine? You cannot make this shit up even if you tried.


----------



## bostjan

ItWillDo said:


> You're referring to 2 completely different issues. The tank<>car thing is one thing, but I still stand behind this statement being an absolute, blatant lie:


And then proceeded to argue about the car being crushed, since it's an example of two of those statements (old and woman).

I mean, we might be in the wrong. Maybe this whole thing is a carefully constructed false flag. Maybe the media is making all of this stuff up to get people to click on ads. Maybe this is all a 4D chess strategy by geriatric old Biden to make Putin look like the next Hitler and instead, he just wants to save Ukrainians from the evil capitalist and consumerist west but the evil corporations are manipulating everyone. Maybe we are all like living in a simulation, man.

Who knows.

On the other hand, I can say that your approach is just wrong. You can't make up some weird conspiracy shit and say that it has to be so because we just can't be certain of anything. By your own logical method, how can _you_ be certain? It just doesn't work. If you want to come in here and say "Gee, IDK, this all looks kind of sus," then do that and leave it there instead of trying to argue tiny gaps in uncertainty as proof against actual observations.


----------



## BMFan30

Ukrainians just found food that Putin sent Russian soldiers off into Ukraine with and all the food has been expired since 2015. They could have just stayed in Russia and died from botulism right on their own soil...

Lmfao, Russian loyalty right there. No wonder Putin needs a miles worth of a paranoid table to meet with other leaders.

I actually want Putin alive, cut his balls off and make him view every video of every mother from Ukraine, Russia and soon Belarus to see all the damage he has done. Death is too good for him...

Edit: changed to "food from 2015" instead of "15 year old food" because I misheard my source initially.


----------



## Randy

LostTheTone said:


> Well, to be fair, most men throughout most of human history have had beards. It's not that damning of a similarity is it.
> 
> Show me a Q Shaman from Chechnya and you might be on to something though...


I'm referring to the drab green ball cap beard combo


----------



## Adieu

BMFan30 said:


> Ukrainians just found food that Putin sent Russian soldiers off into Ukraine with and all the food has been expired for 15 years. They could have just stayed in Russia and died from botulism right on their own soil...
> 
> Lmfao, Russian loyalty right there. No wonder Putin needs a miles worth of a paranoid table to meet with other leaders.



15? Damn, Channel 5 only had Russian rations that expired *in* 2015

Although one of my buddies (btw also a bit of a nazi shithead) born in '86 or so once received some corned beef in cans stamped 55th Anniversary of the Proletarian Revolution (so made back when his mom was in grade school) in the Russian army. Back in the normal days of the early 2000's.


----------



## LostTheTone

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Don’t forget that dude, uh... FPSRussia? He also made Russia seem cool.



And Ivan Drago


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> 15? Damn, Channel 5 only had Russian rations that expired *in* 2015
> 
> Although one of my buddies (btw also a bit of a nazi shithead) born in '86 or so once received some corned beef in cans stamped 55th Anniversary of the Proletarian Revolution (so made back when his mom was in grade school) in the Russian army.


You're right, sorry. It's not 15 year old food but food from 2015. My apologies for hearing the source wrong. Not that makes things that much better.

No surprises there though, they are worse off eating that food than being in Ukraine.

You would think if there was any reason or any real justification for this unprovoked war against Ukraine, that he would... You know... Send some edible fucking food so they can survive this ordeal they've been forced into.

But the writing is on the wall, Putin sent those Russian teenagers there to die or at the very least be used as shields for old rich men that use poor young men to justify their pointless war.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

LostTheTone said:


> And Ivan Drago


You mean ol Dolph Loungepants?


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> I don't really think you even believe that yourself. The Nazi thing was obviously just a psyop referring to the Azov Batallion, who are in all honesty pretty open about it:


Well, there's a recent example of Chechen war right before our eyes with around 30k civilian cassualties with it's total population somewhere around 1.5 millions. Try to find some info on Holodomor and millions of it's victims and deportation of Crimean Tatars. 

Also how about him taking care about neo-nazies in Russia first, there's plenty of them there and they even took part in the gov demonstartions on a ww2 victory day.


----------



## ItWillDo

bostjan said:


> And then proceeded to argue about the car being crushed, since it's an example of two of those statements (old and woman).
> 
> I mean, we might be in the wrong. Maybe this whole thing is a carefully constructed false flag. Maybe the media is making all of this stuff up to get people to click on ads. Maybe this is all a 4D chess strategy by geriatric old Biden to make Putin look like the next Hitler and instead, he just wants to save Ukrainians from the evil capitalist and consumerist west but the evil corporations are manipulating everyone. Maybe we are all like living in a simulation, man.
> 
> Who knows.
> 
> On the other hand, I can say that your approach is just wrong. You can't make up some weird conspiracy shit and say that it has to be so because we just can't be certain of anything. By your own logical method, how can _you_ be certain? It just doesn't work. If you want to come in here and say "Gee, IDK, this all looks kind of sus," then do that and leave it there instead of trying to argue tiny gaps in uncertainty as proof against actual observations.


I didn't even consider the correlation with the car as the scenario is so far fetched in my opinion but sure, I'll accept it's a Russian spy fleeing the scene who really, absolutely just needed to crush that old lady to fill that deep black hole in his heart even if it meant jeopardizing his escape. The Moscow Crusher I'd call him.

And the last paragraph paints my intentions. What you see as observations (Moscow Crusher) could maybe use a little bit of a different angle.

Anyhow, thank you all for the discourse but I'll leave you to your observations of Genocide, war crimes and the vile nature of Russians in general.

EDIT: /s before a mod takes the last part out of context


----------



## LostTheTone

Spaced Out Ace said:


> You mean ol Dolph Loungepants?



If you need an actor to deliver full penetration, followed by crime fighting, then full penetration, then crime, then more penetration over and over until the movie just sort of ends... Dolph is your man.

You know he legitimately almost killed Sylvester Stalone when they were filming Rocky?


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> Anyhow, thank you all for the discourse but I'll leave you to your observations of Genocide, war crimes and the vile nature of Russians in general.








Okay... Not that anyone was saying that all Russians are Vile.

I'm from Donesk, Ukraine and @Adieu is from Russia and we have shown each other nothing but respect because we are against Putin and his boot lickers. Which is the problem, not Russian civilians or for that matter Ukrainian ones.

But don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

LostTheTone said:


> If you need an actor to deliver full penetration, followed by crime fighting, then full penetration, then crime, then more penetration over and over until the movie just sort of ends... Dolph is your man.
> 
> You know he legitimately almost killed Sylvester Stalone when they were filming Rocky?


I’m well aware. He ended up in the hospital for a few days as a result, five maybe. Sly is a damn trooper and has a lot more to offer than Arnold Swastikanegger. I enjoy both actors, but being Austrian and owning Nazi paraphernalia seems a bit suspicious.


----------



## ArtDecade

ItWillDo said:


> I didn't even consider the correlation with the car as the scenario is so far fetched in my opinion but sure, I'll accept it's a Russian spy fleeing the scene who really, absolutely just needed to crush that old lady to fill that deep black hole in his heart even if it meant jeopardizing his escape. The Moscow Crusher I'd call him.
> 
> And the last paragraph paints my intentions. What you see as observations (Moscow Crusher) could maybe use a little bit of a different angle.
> 
> Anyhow, thank you all for the discourse but I'll leave you to your observations of Genocide, war crimes and the vile nature of Russians in general.
> 
> EDIT: /s before a mod takes the last part out of context



How does Putin taste?


----------



## Adieu

ArtDecade said:


> How does Putin taste?



Salty? Or maybe like chicken?


----------



## BMFan30

ArtDecade said:


> How does Putin taste?


Like ass sweat mixed in with bootlicked dirt & Stolichnaya Vodka.


----------



## LostTheTone

Spaced Out Ace said:


> I’m well aware. He ended up in the hospital for a few days as a result, five maybe. Sly is a damn trooper and has a lot more to offer than Arnold Swastikanegger. I enjoy both actors, but being Austrian and owning Nazi paraphernalia seems a bit suspicious.



The way I heard it, Sly's doctors thought he had been in a car crash and impacted the steering wheel. Not bad for a swedish chemistry nerd.


----------



## Adieu

BMFan30 said:


> Like ass mixed in with bootlicked dirt & Stolichnaya Vodka.



Unlikely.

No self-respecting Russian, much less a posh narcissist klepto, would ever ever touch cheap vodka.

Salty and/or chicken for sure!


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> Unlikely.
> 
> No self-respecting Russian, much less a posh narcissist klepto, would ever ever touch cheap vodka.
> 
> Salty and/or chicken for sure!


Lmao! Either way that's all that Putin will soon taste.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

BMFan30 said:


> Like ass sweat mixed in with bootlicked dirt & Stolichnaya Vodka.


He tastes like he smells: Medvedev’s dogs.


----------



## Andromalia

ArtDecade said:


> A name like Richard was hard to pronounce in England because of the R. It was often spoken closer to Dickard


That's an h close to a catastrophe.


----------



## Jeffrey Bain

Andromalia said:


> That's an h close to a catastrophe.


Might have come _up _in conversation


----------



## IbanezDaemon

ArtDecade said:


> How does Putin taste?



Uranium-235


----------



## IbanezDaemon

If Nato's hands are tied on boots on the ground and Putin is gonna take advantage of this and invade ex USSR territories at will regardless of sanctions do the West at risk of WWIII consider at some point sending in special forces..ala US Navy Seals and British SAS etc to take him out? Surely at this point the Russian hierarchy/military can see the folly of of this invasion...maybe it will be them that swing the axe or are they living in fear as well?


----------



## Adieu

Navy Seals or British SAS is an unnecessary risk

Anybody in their right mind would use ethnically ex-Soviet special forces or mercs... or dudes from somewhere random like Uganda.

Why give the guy ideas in case of failure?


----------



## IbanezDaemon

Adieu said:


> Navy Seals or British SAS is an unnecessary risk
> 
> Anybody in their right mind would use ethnically ex-Soviet special forces or mercs... or dudes from somewhere random like Uganda.
> 
> Why give the guy ideas in case of failure?



Not unnecessary if no other option and better trained than ex Soviet or Ugandan special forces.....are you completely off your fucking rocker????


----------



## Adieu

IbanezDaemon said:


> Not unnecessary if no other option and better trained than ex Soviet or Ugandan special forces.....are you completely off your fucking rocker????



Dunno about the UK, but US military can certainly scrape together more than enough black ops guys from Eastern Euro or random ethnicities within their ranks... prolly ex-Soviets maybe several Middle Easterners or Asians mixed in, easier to infiltrate Russia that way

And they'll never admit it if they do it (unless Putin deploys NBC wmds first)

They'd definitely send people who would die rather than be captured and nothing that could trace back to them


----------



## BMFan30

IbanezDaemon said:


> Not unnecessary if no other option and better trained than ex Soviet or Ugandan special forces.....are you completely off your fucking rocker????


It's either the help of Nato or more Ukrainian bloodshed. Ukrainians won't back down because if they lose Ukraine then neighboring countries are next. Russia has hundreds of attack helicopters and a 40 miles worth convoy of military trucks and tanks ready to go unless NATO sends in an airstrike to destroy them.

Putin has lost his mind and won't stop only at Ukraine. He's Hitler and has similar 1940's propaganda poisoning the minds of Russians for generations.

No matter what happens now there is no decent outcome in the end, shit has hit the fan. Either WWIII starts or Ukraine gets turned to sand with following countries which will start WWIII regardless of Ukraine being wiped out or not.

At least Brits have moved in to help with boots on the ground, while Biden drags his wrinkly balls on the ground below him saying he doesn't believe that Putin will fulfill his nuclear threat like he has fulfilled his war against Ukraine already.

From 24 mins into the video below you will see Putin using a 3M-54E1 KALIBR MISSILE (holds TONS of explosive power) which Russia has used extensively in Syria. All western nations have signed a treaty to ban the use of those particular missiles, except Russia which is using them against Ukraine as we speak.


----------



## IbanezDaemon

Adieu said:


> Dunno about the UK, but US military can certainly scrape together more than enough black ops guys from Eastern Euro or random ethnicities within their ranks... prolly ex-Soviets maybe several Middle Easterners or Asians mixed in, easier to infiltrate Russia that way
> 
> And they'll never admit it if they do it (unless Putin deploys NBC wmds first)
> 
> They'd definitely send people who would die rather than be captured and nothing that could trace back to them



Post a legitimate source for your claim below. 100% nailed on....no if's, but's or maybes? Probably/maybe doesn't count btw.


----------



## Adieu

IbanezDaemon said:


> Post a legitimate source for your claim below. 100% nailed on....no if's, but's or maybes:



Huuh?

I don't need any freaking source to tell me that there's plenty of ex-Soviet people serving in the United States military. I've met a few and I hardly know any military people at all.

As to why they'd want untraceability.... seriously? Who wants nuclear war in case sh!t goes sideways? And who wants to broadcast that regime change by assassination is now state sanctioned?

Also, how the hell do you infiltrate Russia with the usual mix of ripped big WASPs and a few black and Hispanic dudes?

Answer: YOU DON'T. You bring assorted slavs, a few Middle Easterners and Asians, because nobody would look twice at them. Just put constructions overalls on and they're invisible.

It's not some african palace where you fly a chopper and rappel down in black ops gear. It's Russia, you SNEAK in.


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> Navy Seals or British SAS is an unnecessary risk
> 
> Anybody in their right mind would use ethnically ex-Soviet special forces or mercs... or dudes from somewhere random like Uganda.
> 
> Why give the guy ideas in case of failure?


I think it's very fucking necessary 3 days ago. You think WWIII won't start and Putin's greed will stop at the destruction of Ukraine?! You think he won't take Moldovia, Poland and whoever else next like Hitler did?

There is no good outcome no matter what we think. If he destroys Ukraine, WWIII will start either way. Why wait until that happens? I think NATO should stop dragging it's heavy nuts against the ground...


----------



## IbanezDaemon

BMFan30 said:


> It's either the help of Nato or more Ukrainian bloodshed. Ukrainians won't back down because if they lose Ukraine then neighboring countries are next. Russia has hundreds of attack helicopters and a 40 miles worth convoy of military trucks and tanks ready to go unless NATO sends in an airstrike to destroy them.
> 
> Putin has lost his mind and won't stop only at Ukraine. He's Hitler and has similar 1940's propaganda poisoning the minds of Russians for generations.
> 
> No matter what happens now there is no decent outcome in the end, shit has hit the fan. Either WWIII starts or Ukraine gets turned to sand with following countries which will start WWIII regardless of Ukraine being wiped out or not.
> 
> At least Brits have moved in to help with boots on the ground, while Biden drags his wrinkly balls on the ground below him saying he doesn't believe that Putin will fulfill his nuclear threat like he has fulfilled his war against Ukraine already.
> 
> From 24 mins into the video below you will see Putin using a 3M-54E1 KALIBR MISSILE (holds TONS of explosive power) which Russia has used extensively in Syria. All western nations have signed a treaty to ban the use of those particular missiles, except Russia which is using them against Ukraine as we speak.



True! I saw on the news today that they were using firearms in direct convention of of that treaty. Shocking!


----------



## Adieu

BMFan30 said:


> I think it's very fucking necessary 3 days ago. You think WWIII won't start and Putin's greed will stop at the destruction of Ukraine?! You think he won't take Moldovia, Poland and whoever else next like Hitler did?
> 
> There is no good outcome no matter what we think. If he destroys Ukraine, WWIII will start either way. Why wait until that happens?



No, I'm saying whoever does him probably won't advertise it. Not even if it's Ukraine, and certainly not if it is America.

He'll be killed by a team of people who look like a bunch of rando locals, dressed in some kind construction worker kit or maybe Russian police uniforms.

Then they'll vanish and we'll never know. And if they fail, we'll never know either, because he'll assume it was a local hit and cover it up to avoid giving anyone ideas.


----------



## Adieu

In short: he'll prolly die, but there won't be any Osama video.


----------



## IbanezDaemon

Adieu said:


> Huuh?
> 
> I don't need any freaking source to tell me that there's plenty of ex-Soviet people serving in the United States military. I've met a few and I hardly know any military people at all.
> 
> As to why they'd want untraceability.... seriously? Who wants nuclear war in case sh!t goes sideways? And who wants to broadcast that regime change by assassination is now state sanctioned?
> 
> Also, how the hell do you infiltrate Russia with the usual mix of ripped big WASPs and a few black and Hispanic dudes?
> 
> Answer: YOU DON'T. You bring assorted slavs, a few Middle Easterners and Asians, because nobody would look twice at them. Just put constructions overalls on and they're invisible.
> 
> It's not some african palace where you fly a chopper and rappel down in black ops gear. It's Russia, you SNEAK in.


Huuh??? Until you have a source that's hearsay. Case...fucking...closed!!!


----------



## IbanezDaemon

Adieu said:


> No, I'm saying whoever does him probably won't advertise it. Not even if it's Ukraine, and certainly not if it is America.
> 
> He'll be killed by a team of people who look like a bunch of rando locals, dressed in some kind construction worker kit or maybe Russian police uniforms.
> 
> Then they'll vanish and we'll never know. And if they fail, we'll never know either, because he'll assume it was a local hit and cover it up to avoid giving anyone ideas.



Like those Ugandan Special Forces you mentioned......sure....they'll blend right in!!! Log off you fucking howler!!!


----------



## Adieu

IbanezDaemon said:


> Huuh??? Until you have a source that's hearsay. Case...fucking...closed!!!



I wasn't aware we were collecting admissible evidence for Putin's murder trial, but ok?

You just don''t get it. The ONLY way somebody with some USMC or SAS tattoo ends up seen trying to kill Putin is if it's a false flag. By Putin.

Nobody identifiably American or British will ever be used. The story will be "unidentfied" hitmen, mercs, or rebels. And no one will ever take responsibility, succeed or fail.


----------



## IbanezDaemon

Adieu said:


> I wasn't aware we were collecting admissible evidence for Putin's murder trial, but ok?
> 
> You just don''t get it. The ONLY way somebody with some USMC or SAS tattoo ends up seen trying to kill Putin is if it's a false flag. By Putin.
> 
> Nobody identifiably American or British will ever be used.


Jesus wept! See my previous post!


----------



## Adieu

Because. Nobody. Wants. To. Get. Nuked.

Christ.


----------



## IbanezDaemon

I wasn't aware we were collecting admissible evidence for Putin's murder trial, but ok?

You just don''t get it. The ONLY way somebody with some USMC or SAS tattoo ends up seen trying to kill Putin is if it's a false flag. By Putin.

Nobody identifiably American or British will ever be used.

Y


Adieu said:


> Because. Nobody. Wants. To. Get. Nuked.
> 
> Christ.



Of course! But at what point do we let him take diabolical liberties and threaten nukes on the West before we stand up to him and be a bit more bullish? Imho...China ...the only country who could reign him in a bit are abstaining at the mo. It's a Catch 22 situation for the Chinese.


----------



## Necris

I feel like with the current temperature of things any assassination attempt that wasn't successful, even a homegrown assasination plot carried out by Russian nationals, would be either declared by Putin to be an act of war carried out by NATO, or used as a pretext to make Kyiv (and potentially every major Ukrainian city) look like Grozny circa '95.


----------



## Randy

BMFan30 said:


> It's either the help of Nato or more Ukrainian bloodshed. Ukrainians won't back down because if they lose Ukraine then neighboring countries are next. Russia has hundreds of attack helicopters and a 40 miles worth convoy of military trucks and tanks ready to go unless NATO sends in an airstrike to destroy them.


Pro-Ukraine media has been claiming Ukrainian Air Force destroyed an 800(!) vehicle column in the south a few hours ago. I'm going to guess some part of that is BS to boost morale but if it's at least partially true, then the UAF have a shot.


----------



## IbanezDaemon

@Necris Good point! I think there were a few Assassination on Hitler even before WWII. The failed ones would have been spun as propaganda by the powers that be.
​


----------



## IbanezDaemon

Randy said:


> Pro-Ukraine media has been claiming Ukrainian Air Force destroyed an 800(!) vehicle column in the south a few hours ago. I'm going to guess some part of that is BS to boost morale but if it's at least partially true, then the UAF have a shot.


Lets's hope so. It's not like the Russians haven't been exaggerating their claims either on State TV.


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> No, I'm saying whoever does him probably won't advertise it. Not even if it's Ukraine, and certainly not if it is America.
> 
> He'll be killed by a team of people who look like a bunch of rando locals, dressed in some kind construction worker kit or maybe Russian police uniforms.
> 
> Then they'll vanish and we'll never know. And if they fail, we'll never know either, because he'll assume it was a local hit and cover it up to avoid giving anyone ideas.





Adieu said:


> In short: he'll prolly die, but there won't be any Osama video.


That may be so, I'm for it no matter how it goes. So long as he's destroyed but I truly want to see him tried for his war crimes against humanity.

I saw some news today that says he gets printed out transcripts because he's not very keen on social media and computers which may in some part explain why he's moving about like this is the 1940's. 

He seems out of touch with how far the world has come since the Soviet Union era, he's stuck in those times and it shows.


----------



## BMFan30

Randy said:


> Pro-Ukraine media has been claiming Ukrainian Air Force destroyed an 800(!) vehicle column in the south a few hours ago. I'm going to guess some part of that is BS to boost morale but if it's at least partially true, then the UAF have a shot.


I believe that, I wouldn't give Putin the benefit of the doubt either.


----------



## Randy

I'm not sure on the validity of the 40 mile long convoy either. Every still I've seen of it has been the same couple shots of a mile long section. Also, the pics are usually with two rows of vehicles you assume 40 miles of vehicles x 2 but I saw it alternatively reported by BBC as actually two rows of vehicles 17 miles long. So the reporting on what this convoy is exactly is inconsistent and I still have no idea why there's not better footage and why there's been no significant attacks on it.


----------



## tedtan

^ That plus the reports that its been closing in on Kiev for over 24 hours now, but its still not there? How slow can it be moving? Stallled?

We're not getting the full story.


----------



## Adieu

tedtan said:


> ^ That plus the reports that its been closing in on Kiev for over 24 hours now, but its still not there? How slow can it be moving? Stallled?
> 
> We're not getting the full story.



Expired rations, two months camped in isolated tents in the snow on the border, the general consensus that most Russian forces now look "like homeless dressed in camo", stress of losing...

Then they get together in a huge convoy and roll through some cities. With their newly shot immune systems. In 2022.

...Omicron? It would be a surprise if they didn't all get it.


----------



## Adieu

Alternatively, that convoy could be the hostage in some backroom negotiation.

Putin's threatening to level Kiev with it if Ukraine doesn't capitulate, while the West is threatening to jump in and flatten it if it moves or if HE doesn't capitulate, perhaps?

Or he's just too afraid to lose the whole thing because of its humongous value to decide to move.

Or... maybe someone hinted Ukraine might have kept a couple nukes from the 90s?

It's such a high value target that it could be the hostage moreso than the threat.


----------



## SpaceDock

Just check Lukashenko’s map that this doesn’t end at Ukraine, it seldom ever ends with madmen. The only limits they respect are ones imposed by force.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Randy said:


> You're describing a no-win situation. And I'm not blaming you for that characterization, because it pretty much is but I'd stop short of making any recommendation one way or the other on this because I doubt him taking Ukraine with NO intervention from the West (to avoid "backing him into a corner") means he stops there.
> 
> What's the line in the sand where we stop giving Putin what he wants because we're afraid making him mad? A historically corrupt country that historically has deep ties to Russia and is NOT a member of NATO or the EU (as of now) might not be the tripwire, but what is it exactly?



The line in the sand is a very good question. Ukraine definitely isn't it, obviously. 

I assume NATO is the red line, but unfortunately that still technically leaves more places in Europe open for attack.

But honestly, there's no reason not to be afraid of making him mad. I'm not saying we shouldn't help Ukraine. We're pouring in very effective weapons right now. But we have to also be clear that the west is not waging this war, not sending our own fighters etc. Otherwise - we're at war with Russia, oops.

Might still makes right unfortunately. We can be as upset, angry and indignant as we like. Doesn't take away Putin's 4,000+ nuclear weapons.

Even Boris Johnson getting on TV and saying he hopes this will bring down Putin was an absolutely stupid comment. Trying to enact regime change IS an act of war in itself...



possumkiller said:


> Motherfucker is already backed into a corner. The world has been interfering in every way apart from declaring war on Russia and sending in our own militaries. He's not going to nuke anything. His people wouldn't go through with it because they know it's suicide. They can let him hide in his bunker and give him a red button to push and feed him a video of the world evaporating. Let him think he nuked whatever he wants. Something like the Fletcher Memorial Home for Incurable Tyrants and Kings.



I'm not trying to be a dick here, but is there ANY evidence for any of this? People are liking the comment, but it seems like wishful thinking IMO.

As I said before, you gotta assume there are at least some true believers in power in Russia. It's not just Putin absolutely alone at the top. He's had 20 years to consolidate power and appoint people around him who are in agreement with him. Anybody he appointed to be in charge of weapons is going to be a loyalist. Even American had the likes of General Flynn as a four star general who went full Qanon crazy. 

IMO, if Putin gave the nuke order, and even if some ignored it, at least SOME are going to follow through - whether bomber squadron commanders, submarine captains etc.



nightflameauto said:


> That's the question I keep asking myself. How far do we let him play out his world domination fantasy without real interference? There's zero chance it stops with Ukraine if he does manage to completely take it over. It will only feed his ego. I get not wanting to send him into a rage, but we can't just sit on our thumbs while he walks over Ukraine and expect him to sit there happy and satisfied after. He will do what all tyrants do and believe this one win makes him invincible and continue to press on.
> 
> I too am curious what the world leaders with the power TO do something will consider a line too far. Clearly, it's not Ukraine. Not yet at any rate.



Well, I think we aren't sitting on our thumbs. These sanctions are far worse than he would have expected. I'm shocked by how hard and sudden and universal they are. And so many western companies pulling out now - no Nike, Disney, Netflix, Pornhub for Russians. He's going to have to deal with MASSIVE public anger quite soon, including the average plebs enforcing his laws, like police officers who can't pay their mortgages. They're more likely to stop arresting protesters and join them if things get bad enough. There's also his powerful billionaire buddies. They probably tolerate Putin because he's making/keeping them rich. If Putin's behaviour is causing them to lose all their stuff, they're going to furious at him.

I just don't see what anybody outside of Ukraine is reasonably expect to do on top of this? I don't want World War 3.



Randy said:


> I don't think he's entirely wrong but he's clearly as biased as he's accusing anyone else of being.
> 
> This recalls the stories about US service members and contractors killing civilians for fun or other reasons in Iraq during the war. That was not the mission or not what they were explicitly told to do, but they brought in groups of shitty dudes with no oversight and did everything to dehumanize the people in the area they invade to get their bloodlust going then let them loose. If they shoot the "right ones" they're heroes and if they shot the "wrong ones" it was collateral damage and forgiven. I'm sure there was also the occasional "let psycho Johnny handle that detail" knowing something like that might happen and knowing it would be an advantageous hit to local morale.
> 
> I think it's true, there's a million and one opportunities to just indiscriminately execute scores of civilians if that was their orders. Most of the civilian causalities I've seen look like accidents, bad intel, bad training, with the occasional shithead and "put the scare in 'em" order sprinkled in.



I agree. I don't think Russia is exactly being super careful, but they're definitely not *trying* to hit civilians at this point. Hits to apartment blocks seems like accidents or near misses. For example, the missile in freedom square was like 20 meters away from a government building which was obviously the target and was hit by other attacks at the same time. Same for the holocaust memorial - it is right next to the TV tower which was the obvious target. They're just not very accurate. If you think they deliberately targeted the holocaust memorial, you're also buying into propaganda.



Randy said:


> I'm not sure on the validity of the 40 mile long convoy either. Every still I've seen of it has been the same couple shots of a mile long section. Also, the pics are usually with two rows of vehicles you assume 40 miles of vehicles x 2 but I saw it alternatively reported by BBC as actually two rows of vehicles 17 miles long. So the reporting on what this convoy is exactly is inconsistent and I still have no idea why there's not better footage and why there's been no significant attacks on it.



BBC saying it's not 40 miles, but it's clusters of several smaller convoys. Mostly kinda boring logistical stuff too, not as many tanks as first thought. It's also badly stalled and has barely moved in the last 24 hours. Things are breaking down and running out of fuel and soldiers running out of food.

The images we're getting are from commercial sources. I suspect the US, UK intelligence agencies know exactly what's happening, but the public aren't being totally informed and the information released is being carefully calibrated.

I'm also kinda surprised that nobody is attacking the stationary targets while they're just sitting there. Shame that Ukraine doesn't have the A-10 Warthog!


----------



## tedtan

Flappydoodle said:


> Shame that Ukraine doesn't have the A-10 Warthog!



BRRRTTT!!!!


----------



## Xaios

Flappydoodle said:


> A-10 Warthog!





tedtan said:


> BRRRTTT!!!!


Alas, the sad fact is that the A-10's BRRRTTT doesn't quite have the power to get through most Russian tank armor. It'll wreck just about anything else in that convoy though, and if none of those tanks have gas, they're not going anywhere.


----------



## tedtan

Maybe the 30mm Gatling gun won’t take out a tank, but the A10 can be loaded with various rockets and missiles, and while they may not penetrate the tank armor, a direct hit could potentially melt the tank’s electronics (and cook the occupants) from the burning rocket fuel.


EDIT: Looks like they can be loaded with Hellfire and Maverick missiles, which will kill the tanks.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Xaios said:


> Alas, the sad fact is that the A-10's BRRRTTT doesn't quite have the power to get through most Russian tank armor. It'll wreck just about anything else in that convoy though, and if none of those tanks have gas, they're not going anywhere.



That's sad, kinda. Even then, imagine all that heavy stuff just blocking the roads. It would cause even more massive delays.


----------



## 4Eyes

Randy said:


> I'm not sure on the validity of the 40 mile long convoy either. Every still I've seen of it has been the same couple shots of a mile long section. Also, the pics are usually with two rows of vehicles you assume 40 miles of vehicles x 2 but I saw it alternatively reported by BBC as actually two rows of vehicles 17 miles long. So the reporting on what this convoy is exactly is inconsistent and I still have no idea why there's not better footage and why there's been no significant attacks on it.


Seems it was stretched and is mostly falling apart like other russian tech.

Also it seems that BLR wants to join the party and help Putler to get Kyiv. I hope this would be red line for NATO and would end it quick


----------



## LostTheTone

tedtan said:


> Maybe the 30mm Gatling gun won’t take out a tank, but the A10 can be loaded with various rockets and missiles, and while they may not penetrate the tank armor, a direct hit could potentially melt the tank’s electronics (and cook the occupants) from the burning rocket fuel.
> 
> 
> EDIT: Looks like they can be loaded with Hellfire and Maverick missiles, which will kill the tanks.



Yeah, you've got the right idea - The big cannon is for killing basically anything that isn't a tank, but for tanks they have missiles and bombs. Thing is that while tanks are a big deal on the battlefield, most things you might want to kill aren't a tank. It's overkill to shoot a Maverick at an APC or a radar vehicle or whatever. 

A10s can't kill loads and loads of tanks, and actually more modern ground attack are better because they carry more big boy ordinance. But if A10s find your convoy then 80% of that convoy is gunna die. And then the tanks that are left over will be unsupported and run out of fuel anyway.


----------



## Adieu

Guys, that dang thing from your fantasies was built in 1977. Stop following Putler down the rabbit hole of the delusion that roughly Vietnam-era solutions are gonna do well in 2022.

His whole problem right now is because he's throwing 1970s tech at 21st century countermeasures.

An A10 would be a joke with an exepected survival window of under a minute. Which, considering its ancientness and obviousness, would see it die a couple miles out from wherever it launched from, long before sighting any convoy.

Besides...Ukraine has a bunch of Su-25's, which are a similar role aircraft from the same generation

They prefer modern Turkish drones. For good reason.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

Adieu said:


> Guys, that dang thing from your fantasies was built in 1977. Stop following Putler down the rabbit hole of the delusion that roughly Vietnam-era solutions are gonna do well in 2022.
> 
> His whole problem right now is because he's throwing 1970s tech at 21st century countermeasures.
> 
> An A10 would be a joke with an exepected survival window of under a minute. Which, considering its ancientness and obviousness, would see it die a couple miles out from wherever it launched from, long before sighting any convoy.
> 
> Besides...Ukraine has a bunch of Su-25's, which are a similar role aircraft from the same generation
> 
> They prefer modern Turkish drones. For good reason.




Lmao well put I remember my dad had a model of an A10 when I was younger and then reading about them in a Vietnam War book. Yeah I should hope that there's been new tech since then with the 100s of billions spent annually.


----------



## Adieu

Fuuuck


I just saw the Belarus State News on what "happened" in Kharkiv


Lukashenko Alternate Reality TV is reporting CIVIL WAR IN UKRAINE, WEST UKRAINIANS BOMBING THE SH!T OUT OF OUR POOR RUSSIAN-SPEAKING EAST UKRAINIAN BROTHERS IN KHARKIV

They literally bombed the shit out of a city to blame it on that city's own countrymen. For "good cause" for a holy war.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Guys, that dang thing from your fantasies was built in 1977. Stop following Putler down the rabbit hole of the delusion that roughly Vietnam-era solutions are gonna do well in 2022.
> 
> His whole problem right now is because he's throwing 1970s tech at 21st century countermeasures.
> 
> An A10 would be a joke with an exepected survival window of under a minute. Which, considering its ancientness and obviousness, would see it die a couple miles out from wherever it launched from, long before sighting any convoy.
> 
> Besides...Ukraine has a bunch of Su-25's, which are a similar role aircraft from the same generation
> 
> They prefer modern Turkish drones. For good reason.



Yeah, people have a fetish for the A10, likely because it has the biggest penis extension ever devised by man. And it is a very very cool plane.

But you are right that its not a very practical solution, to really anything at all. Doubly so in the modern era.

As we discovered in Afghanistan, against troops the A10 is kinda useless. Even using the 30mm against humans at all is a waste of expensive specialist ammo, since people die to 5.56mm just as well. It can drop bombs, but basically anything can drop bombs and they arent the big slow floating fortresses that the A10 is. A10s can take more damage before they explode, but they have to because they fly low and slow. A10s do fire missiles very well, but literally everything can do that, including drones, and they can do it safer, cheaper and in most cases with more ordinance. I'm not a big fan of the F35, but the infographics they put up showing how the platform can carry more ordinance than an A10 is actually true.

Oh and A10s are simply not going to work well in contested airspace. They do alright against man portable SAMs and at least they fly low to avoid proper SAM radars, but against planes they are slow and big and have no signature mitigation. You can stick a couple of sidewinders on an A10, but they better be all-aspect sidewinders because you sure as hell will not point the front of an A10 at a Fulcrum for long enough to lock it.

I think we (the armchair generals and forum warriors) like the A10 because it's scrappy. It's not super high tech, it's just an old work horse that comes with a big brrrrrt cannon. And they can get shot up and keep on flying. That makes them cool. But they are also kinda a warthog in the age of steam.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Adieu said:


> Guys, that dang thing from your fantasies was built in 1977. Stop following Putler down the rabbit hole of the delusion that roughly Vietnam-era solutions are gonna do well in 2022.
> 
> His whole problem right now is because he's throwing 1970s tech at 21st century countermeasures.
> 
> An A10 would be a joke with an exepected survival window of under a minute. Which, considering its ancientness and obviousness, would see it die a couple miles out from wherever it launched from, long before sighting any convoy.
> 
> Besides...Ukraine has a bunch of Su-25's, which are a similar role aircraft from the same generation
> 
> They prefer modern Turkish drones. For good reason.


Haha my A-10 comment was more of a joke, due to the long, straight lines of Russian vehicles just sat there in broad daylight. It wasn’t meant to be professing any sort of military wisdom  Just saying that it would be very satisfying to see it strafed and destroyed in spectacular fashion. 

I hope Ukraine WILL be using some power to fuck up that convoy 100%.


----------



## possumkiller

They need some guerrilla units to harass and demoralize those convoys on the way in. Give those motherfuckers a taste of IEDs and uncertainty. Just hit a couple of vehicles and then disappear for a while. 

Also, about convoys moving at a snails pace. I drove from Kuwait to Tuz airfield only stopping for hot refueling on the way. It took us three days. We drove day and night. We drove like 5-10mph. You could probably get out and run faster. Most of us were half asleep at the wheel from not sleeping so long. I saw the passenger door of the truck in front of me fly open at random and then feet sticking out followed by a stream of piss. My sergeant in my truck was shitting in empty MRE bags and tossing them out the window. And of course we always had those vehicles breaking down and needing to be towed. Those long invasion convoys are a really fucking miserable thing to be a part of.


----------



## possumkiller

Flappydoodle said:


> Haha my A-10 comment was more of a joke, due to the long, straight lines of Russian vehicles just sat there in broad daylight. It wasn’t meant to be professing any sort of military wisdom  Just saying that it would be very satisfying to see it strafed and destroyed in spectacular fashion.
> 
> I hope Ukraine WILL be using some power to fuck up that convoy 100%.


Those Apache pilots probably have raging boners looking at that as well.


----------



## Adieu

possumkiller said:


> They need some guerrilla units to harass and demoralize those convoys on the way in. Give those motherfuckers a taste of IEDs and uncertainty. Just hit a couple of vehicles and then disappear for a while.



Pretty sure Ukraine's military and irregulars have wrecked more enemy vehicles in a week than America has lost anywhere, total, in the like 50 years since Vietnam

It's somewhat unexpected, but they seem to be really really good at their jobs.

EVEN if half of it is wartime propaganda, which they are certainly freaking masters of


----------



## possumkiller

Adieu said:


> Pretty sure Ukraine's military and irregulars have wrecked more enemy vehicles in a week than America has lost anywhere, total, in the like 50 years since Vietnam
> 
> It's somewhat unexpected, but they seem to be really really good at their jobs.
> 
> EVEN if half of it is wartime propaganda, which they are certainly freaking masters of


It definitely warms my heart to see how well the Ukrainian forces are doing. These people are nothing short of legendary. I imagine for a long time after this, Zelensky and his army will be ranked up there with Leonidas and his 300.


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> Pretty sure Ukraine's military and irregulars have wrecked more enemy vehicles in a week than America has lost anywhere, total, in the like 50 years since Vietnam
> 
> It's somewhat unexpected, but they seem to be really really good at their jobs.
> 
> EVEN if half of it is wartime propaganda, which they are certainly freaking masters of











Attack On Europe: Documenting Russian Equipment Losses During The 2022 Russian Invasion Of Ukraine







www.oryxspioenkop.com




here are documented equipment losses with proofs and stuff and the guy there told he has problems with updating everything in time cause there's too much to process
I believe there's way more damage with lotsa other photos and videos moving through social networks and telegram channels not mentioned there and probably even more undocumented at all


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.htm
> 
> 
> here are documented equipment losses with proofs and stuff and the guy there told he has problems with updating everything in time cause there's too much to process
> I believe there's way more damage with lotsa other photos and videos moving through social networks and telegram channels not mentioned there and probably even more undocumented at all



I see an error 404 on the link and only two posts lonked from website home, both dated now, and only with Bayraktar kills, am I missing something?


----------



## narad

Adieu said:


> An A10 would be a joke with an exepected survival window of under a minute.



In which it will unleash 3,900 canon rounds!


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> I see an error 404 on the link and only two posts lonked from website home, both dated now, and only with Bayraktar kills, am I missing something?


fixed, was missing an l in html in the end

that's f*n hilarious, russian propaganda for their kids, I'll repost it once more when someone will add English subtitles


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Pretty sure Ukraine's military and irregulars have wrecked more enemy vehicles in a week than America has lost anywhere, total, in the like 50 years since Vietnam
> 
> It's somewhat unexpected, but they seem to be really really good at their jobs.
> 
> EVEN if half of it is wartime propaganda, which they are certainly freaking masters of



It's definitely heart warming, but it's also the exactly correct strategy for the Ukrainians. Ukraine absolutely cannot win a war of sweeping movement, so like any smaller force their goal is to make defeating them too costly for Russia to press forward with. 

We don't live in WW2, when tanks were being stamped out in their hundreds every day. Tanks are super complex pieces of equipment that require painstaking lab-based manufacturing processes to build their armor systems. Things that aren't made from advanced ceramic polymers are either made from radar transparent carbon fiber or titanium. Even stuff like turbine engines, which are mature technology, require precision manufacturing and you can't just snap your fingers and make it appear. 

While Russia probably won't run out of tanks and APCs; they notoriously never throw anything away; every tank that is lost is a genuine blow to Russia that they cannot immediately replace. The sanctions will hammer their domestic armaments industry, and also their ability to buy from abroad. So every time the Ukrainians kill a tank, or an APC, or a SAM vehicle, or an SPG, they win a little victory. The Russians simply cannot keep this up forever. 

We don't know what the losses have really been, but I think we can safely say that Russian advances have been slower than they wanted. While it is worrying to see the big build up of forces rumbling towards cities, the Ukrainians are certainly holding their fire to go hit those convoys at the best moment. They don't want to hit it now, they want to hit it once the attack is fully committed and hit it in several places to create massive traffic jams. 

If this was an anime, the Ukrainians would get that perfect road block moment, cut off the attacking Russians just as they start forward, then the remaining Ukrainian armored and air force hits the attackers together and scores a huge victory in the outskirts of Kiev. I don't think that will really happen, but if you are someone who likes to play wargames, that's exactly what you'd be trying to do.


----------



## Randy

> If this was an anime, the Ukrainians would get that perfect road block moment, cut off the attacking Russians just as they start forward...


...Goku appears on the horizon charging his spirit bomb


----------



## ItWillDo

Just wanted to apologise for some prior statements, read up some more on new statements about the Azov Batallion. 

Apparently they're not allowing native nor foreign (Indian exchange students) citizens to leave Kharkiv or Mariupol despite being completely encircled by Russia and they're even opening fire on civilian vehicles: 




I hope the civilians all are & remain ok, but I changed my opinion and hope your so called brave defenders (fascist cunts) choke on some 7.62x54mm.


----------



## Demiurge

Oh shit, the army has fascists in it?! Invade away, then, please.


----------



## thebeesknees22

Hasn't the ASB news twitter already been debunked as russian propaganda a while ago?

Might want to find better source.... Just sayin'...


----------



## Randy

*For the record, I and most of the mod team are aware of violations of general forum etiquette policy in here because (speaking for myself), I know the subject is raw and some people on here are actually living through this Hell. So I'm inclined to let some stuff slide because, for the most part, we've returned back to the overall discussion.*

*That said, do not take allowing some things to slide as meaning this thread is an opening for a free-for-all. I think most of you know when you're over the line but consider this the official "calm down" before things start getting a lot stricter.*


----------



## MaxOfMetal

I don't get the argument. So we should let Russian facists invade Ukraine or else the Ukrainian facists win? 

I mean, those Azov guys don't look good, but it's not like the units the Russians are sending in are Boy Scouts...even if they're sometimes old enough to be. 

War is messy as shit, but all things considered, the Russians seem to be in the wrong here considering they're the invading force. 

I don't understand why that's controversial.


----------



## Randy

Demiurge said:


> Oh shit, the army has fascists in it?! Invade away, then, please.


Problem: Fascist militia mistreats local civilians.

Solution: Send in foreign fascists to mistreat civilians.


----------



## nightflameauto

Wait, wait. Hold on. They cut the Russians off from Pornhub?

HOLY FUCK! SHIT JUST GOT REAL!

We should all have a fap in the Russian Civilians' honor.

In all seriousness though, some of the cut-offs are surprising. When you have major credit cards dropping an entire country in the span of a day or two? That's some SERIOUS business level "fuck you" being handed out. Hopefully the pressure of all that pushes its way upward and gets Putin popped by his own. Or at least knocked into the dirt.


----------



## LostTheTone

MaxOfMetal said:


> I don't get the argument. So we should let Russian facists invade Ukraine or else the Ukrainian facists win?
> 
> I mean, those Azov guys don't look good, but it's not like the units the Russians are sending in are Boy Scouts...even if they're sometimes old enough to be.
> 
> War is messy as shit, but all things considered, the Russians seem to be in the wrong here considering they're the invading force.
> 
> I don't understand why that's controversial.



Yeah, that's how I feel about it too.

The Azov guys are obviously not good people. But before this whole war business, we didn't care much about them. Yes, they are a bit fashy. But they are also idiot football hooligans who formed a militia and for complex reasons were signed up into the reserves. They are not even slightly representative of Ukraine as a whole.

If they are building gas chambers, then yeah I have a problem with that. But they don't seem to be doing that. And Ukraine is being invaded by Russians who are happily shelling civilians. 

So what are we even talking about?

Azov assholes can go fuck themselves. But there are at most 2000 of them total in Ukraine, a country with 40mil people. And the whole of Ukraine is being invaded.


----------



## bostjan

About 5% of the Azov Battalion are Russian nationals.


----------



## possumkiller

Wait, so because there are some racists in Ukraine, they should be invaded? Their civilians should be killed? 

So is Russia coming for the US next? I know shit tons of racists in Florida. Maybe Canada after that? Then India. Then China. Then the UK. Then Japan. Then Korea. 

When will they get around to invading and liberating themselves from racists and fascists?


----------



## bostjan

I guess let the country that has exactly zero racist people in it lead the charge then.

The entire idea of the neonazi angle that Putin is trying to play as justification is super weak sauce.


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> Just wanted to apologise for some prior statements, read up some more on new statements about the Azov Batallion.
> 
> Apparently they're not allowing native nor foreign (Indian exchange students) citizens to leave Kharkiv or Mariupol despite being completely encircled by Russia and they're even opening fire on civilian vehicles:
> 
> 
> I hope the civilians all are & remain ok, but I changed my opinion and hope your so called brave defenders (fascist cunts) choke on some 7.62x54mm.



Got any better proofs these are Azov then some random Serbian scum supporting Russian invasion?
This video is circulating since February 26, first it was posted with the caption it's Russian OMON or SOBR judging by their actions, then it was shared plenty of times by the pro-russian resources claiming it's Azov.


----------



## Flappydoodle

nightflameauto said:


> Wait, wait. Hold on. They cut the Russians off from Pornhub?
> 
> HOLY FUCK! SHIT JUST GOT REAL!
> 
> We should all have a fap in the Russian Civilians' honor.
> 
> In all seriousness though, some of the cut-offs are surprising. When you have major credit cards dropping an entire country in the span of a day or two? That's some SERIOUS business level "fuck you" being handed out. Hopefully the pressure of all that pushes its way upward and gets Putin popped by his own. Or at least knocked into the dirt.


I’ll be sad if they block uploads. Some of my favourite girls are Russian!

But yeah, the sanctions are wild. Basically they’re losing all the awesome stuff from the west - the entertainment (Netflix, Sony, Disney, Warner), fashion (ASOS and others), services (Apple products and App Store, and I assume iCloud functionality and other services like iMessage, email, photo storage??). On top of that is visa, MasterCard, all the banking restrictions etc. It’s going to be brutal real soon. They’ve kept their stock market closed so far.


----------



## LostTheTone

Flappydoodle said:


> I’ll be sad if they block uploads. Some of my favourite girls are Russian!
> 
> But yeah, the sanctions are wild. Basically they’re losing all the awesome stuff from the west - the entertainment (Netflix, Sony, Disney, Warner), fashion (ASOS and others), services (Apple products and App Store, and I assume iCloud functionality and other services like iMessage, email, photo storage??). On top of that is visa, MasterCard, all the banking restrictions etc. It’s going to be brutal real soon. They’ve kept their stock market closed so far.



Yup, and looks set to bite harder in the next few days. 

We saw runs on their banks on the first day. It can't be more than a couple of days until stores stop taking rubles. It's going to get dark, fast. The oligarchs won't crash just yet, but everyone needs food and water and petrol. All those legit businesses are either going to close or go broke when they re-order stuff.

And this stuff is permanent, unless Russia gives up and goes home. 

As best I can see, Russia is a week away from becoming zimbabwe.


----------



## Crungy

Good for this kid, though I don't think Putin or the oligarchs will respond like Elon if at all. 









The teenager who tracked Elon Musk's jet is now tracking Russian oligarchs


Jack Sweeney, a Florida teen who tracks Elon Musk's private jet online has a new aviation-themed target: Russian oligarchs and billionaires.




www.cnn.com


----------



## Randy

Keep his gieger counter handy.


----------



## oversteve

One more demonstration of russian military power to relieve the stress, guy fought against the door and lost...


----------



## LostTheTone

oversteve said:


> One more demonstration of russian military power to relieve the stress, guy fought against the door and lost...




It's rough being the new guy on the breaching team


----------



## devastone

Especially when all your buddies abandon you.


----------



## Randy

devastone said:


> Especially when all your buddies abandon you.


Couldn't make it there. Leaking gas tank. No clue how it happened.


----------



## oversteve

One more vivid example of how Russian news are made

Bayraktar drone shot down in Ukraine according to Russia


https://novostivl.ru/post/295608/



and photo taken from 2020 in Karabakh








Karabakh air defense shoots down another Turkey-made Bayraktar drone of Azerbaijan


At around 1:40pm, the Air Defense units of the Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) Defense Army have shot down—in the southeastern direction—another Bayraktar TB2 drone of the adversary. Shushan Stepanyan, spokesperson for the Ministry of Defense of Armenia, on Sunday informed about this on Facebook...




gagrule.net


----------



## nightflameauto

OneWeb's internet satellites caught in UK-Russia standoff days before launch


Russian space agency Roscosmos is refusing to launch the next batch of 36 OneWeb internet satellites unless the company meets the state agency's demands.




www.cnbc.com





LOL.

Brief:
Russian space agency demands UK sell its share of OneWeb and promise the satellites will never be used for military purposes.
UK : Eat shit.
Russian space agency: No launch. *POUT*

To me this is a fine example of Russia once again finding a way to aim the gun such that they shoot themselves right in the gut.

The only thing that could make this funnier to me is if Elon Musk, who owns a competing company with Starlink, were to step up and say, "Yo, bros! I got yer launch vehicle!" Putin's been pissy-pants about how fast SpaceX has advanced already. This would just up the LOLs for those of us interested in the space nerd sector.

Granted, those satellites already loaded to go are about a 50/50 shot at being lost until Russia pulls its head out of its ass, but the whole situation is so laughably stupid.


----------



## ItWillDo

> > Muh invadooooors


Like the US has anything beside this in their track record


> > NOOOOO OURS ARE THE GOOD NAZIS


Remember back when you guys had a hissy fit whenever you saw a red hat? Now you're confronted with real nazis and you can't wait to give each other high fives and reacharounds.



oversteve said:


> Got any better proofs these are Azov then some random Serbian scum supporting Russian invasion?
> This video is circulating since February 26, first it was posted with the caption it's Russian OMON or SOBR judging by their actions, then it was shared plenty of times by the pro-russian resources claiming it's Azov.


Seethe, cope & dialate. If you're only accepting `UKR FREEDOM FIGHTERS ABC` propaganda then nothing will work. Enjoy your 'MUH GHOST OF KIEV', '6 GORILION DEAD RUSSIONS, 0 UKR FIGHTERS, 12 BILLION CIVILANS'. Maybe if your forces spent half the time they spend in social media & the metaverse on the battlefield, they'd actually be able to hold a city.


----------



## LostTheTone

ItWillDo said:


> Remember back when you guys had a hissy fit whenever you saw a red hat? Now you're confronted with real nazis and you can't wait to give each other high fives and reacharounds.



It is possible for there to be some really bad people in Ukraine and Ukraine still being the wronged party in this war.

The West is most certainly not high fiving the neo-nazis. In fact, the west has attached strings to various deals after Crimea saying that equipment cannot go to the Azov. 

Why do you care so much about the Azov tossers? Why is them existing enough to make you think that children being hit with cluster bombs had it coming? Why this obsessive focus?


----------



## bostjan

I feel as though posts like that leave anywhere for the conversation to go. When you start doing inline quotes of absolute hyperbole no one said, you might as well erect a strawman in your bedroom with which to argue.


----------



## nightflameauto

LostTheTone said:


> It is possible for there to be some really bad people in Ukraine and Ukraine still being the wronged party in this war.
> 
> The West is most certainly not high fiving the neo-nazis. In fact, the west has attached strings to various deals after Crimea saying that equipment cannot go to the Azov.
> 
> Why do you care so much about the Azov tossers? Why is them existing enough to make you think that children being hit with cluster bombs had it coming? Why this obsessive focus?


It's the top-line Putin propaganda. Some people are convinced that a small percentage of Ukraine's population being shitty people means the entire country needs "saved." I find it hard to believe anyone's savvy enough to use a computer and so ill-informed that they truly believe Ukraine deserves what's happening, but there's a lot of people out there that get their narrative sorted and never want to let information in that doesn't agree with what that narrative is.

No, I do not believe every Ukraine citizen is a lily white pure angel.
Also,
No, I do not believe Russia had the right to invade Ukraine just because some small percentage of the Ukraine population aren't good people.

Also, he forgot to jibe us about screaming about genocide in his last post, when aside from this post he's literally the only one that's used the word genocide in this thread.


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> Seethe, cope & dialate. If you're only accepting `UKR FREEDOM FIGHTERS ABC` propaganda then nothing will work. Enjoy your 'MUH GHOST OF KIEV', '6 GORILION DEAD RUSSIONS, 0 UKR FIGHTERS, 12 BILLION CIVILANS'. Maybe if your forces spent half the time they spend in social media & the metaverse on the battlefield, they'd actually be able to hold a city.


The question here is credibility of the source and somehow I don't think some random pro-russian guy reposting a ukrainian video and calling it opposite is credible. Unfortunately same thing goes for the most of your comments making me think that we've got a severe case of Putin supporter here

P.S. it's Kyiv, not Kiev, usually Russian resources call it like that and that's just one more hint at where you are gathering your data

P.P.S. idk if this ghost guy is real but russian planes are falling and that's positive news for me 

And one more example of how pro-russian propaganda works


----------



## sleewell

found this on another forum, seems to make sense unfortunately


----------



## devastone

That makes more sense than anything else I've read about what is happening, although his intentions are still hard to decipher except to expand Russia's boundaries to in turn expand his ego. Thanks for posting that.


----------



## Andromalia

IbanezDaemon said:


> You just don''t get it. The ONLY way somebody with some USMC or SAS tattoo ends up seen trying to kill Putin is if it's a false flag. By Putin.
> 
> Nobody identifiably American or British will ever be used.


I don't think it actually matters. Putin would certainly tatoo the bodies if needed anyway. It's not like a successful assasination attempt against him can be done by just any few mercenaries with two grenades and a 10K check. the issue Putin has now is that he's been shown to be so unreliable that nobody will believe anything he says whatever the circumstances. The isolation of Russia won't stop if the war ends and Putin stays. I suppose at some point some russian officials will stage the coup themselves.


----------



## Andromalia

possumkiller said:


> Those Apache pilots probably have raging boners looking at that as well.


Hey, this shows the Eastern Europe scenario in Gunship is still valid.


----------



## nickgray

ItWillDo said:


> Now you're confronted with real nazis



Just fyi. Not posting this for you, since you seem to be quite far gone, but just for the general amusement of other users.









Night Wolves - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## 4Eyes

friend of mine recently shared this video, it covers situation from various angles - one of my Canadian friend, living here in Slovakia, keeps pointing out "but but they agreed NATO won't expand, back in 1990s", I've seen this narrative from more North America based people, who criticize US government, to be honest I don't buy it entirely and there has to be something more about it... coughoilgasmoneycough...sorry, no nazis.

I think the guy has some good points.


----------



## Wc707




----------



## Crungy

oversteve said:


> The question here is credibility of the source and somehow I don't think some random pro-russian guy reposting a ukrainian video and calling it opposite is credible. Unfortunately same thing goes for the most of your comments making me think that we've got a severe case of Putin supporter here
> 
> P.S. it's Kyiv, not Kiev, usually Russian resources call it like that and that's just one more hint at where you are gathering your data
> 
> P.P.S. idk if this ghost guy is real but russian planes are falling and that's positive news for me
> 
> And one more example of how pro-russian propaganda works



In regard to the tweet you posted at the bottom, Belarus is claiming Neo nazis in Ukraine have those missiles? What in the actual fuck...


----------



## ItWillDo

nickgray said:


> Just fyi. Not posting this for you, since you seem to be quite far gone, but just for the general amusement of other users.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Night Wolves - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


Thanks, but I'm not really seeing the issue? I hope to God you're not associating the Orthodox Cross with some kind of extremist symbolism.


----------



## LostTheTone

4Eyes said:


> friend of mine recently shared this video, it covers situation from various angles - one of my Canadian friend, living here in Slovakia, keeps pointing out "but but they agreed NATO won't expand, back in 1990s", I've seen this narrative from more North America based people, who criticize US government, to be honest I don't buy it entirely and there has to be something more about it... coughoilgasmoneycough...sorry, no nazis.
> 
> I think the guy has some good points.



It's still crazy to me that anyone, especially anyone in the West, characterises free countries choosing to join NATO as being imperialist and aggressive. And the claims that NATO agreed never to expand aren't worth the paper they are (not) printed on.

In effect, a promise not to expand eastwards would be a promise that Russia would be allowed to re-annex the whole of the former USSR, and reform some new empire again.

So these people ask us to believe that having competed for 50 years of the Cold War, and NATO having won, that NATO then sat down and agreed that the 100mil people living in non-Russian Warsaw Pact countries had no right to self-determination and that Russia had an absolute right to conquer and dominate them.

I don't care how bad anyone thinks NATO are, this is obviously nonsense. NATO didn't force anyone to join, indeed Russian militarism forced nations like Poland to join. NATO never came uninvited, they simply offered legitimate, democratic states an option other than being conquered by Russia again.

And yeah, if you are in Latvia, that sounds like a good deal. 

And now Russia gets cranky because they want to conquer those countries. Well too fucking bad, if you don't like it try being the kind of nation that other countries actually want to join without a gun to their heads.


----------



## LostTheTone

ItWillDo said:


> Thanks, but I'm not really seeing the issue? I hope to God you're not associating the Orthodox Cross with some kind of extremist symbolism.



I think it's more the "biker gang who decided to join the invasion of Crimea" part that's the problem. Just random dudes on harleys with neck tattoos who are mates with Putin and show up to conflict zones with guns.

But I bet they are not in any way involved with political causes, right?


----------



## nickgray

ItWillDo said:


> Thanks, but I'm not really seeing the issue?



You just looked at the picture, didn't you? No googling, no nothing. Figures. They're ultra right Stalin supporting crazy motherfuckers with funding from Kremlin.

Dude, you're from Belgium? Are you insane? Are you a Russian spy or something? If they're paying you in Rubles - convert them asap.


----------



## BMFan30

Now Putin is putting grenades and bombs into teddy bears/toys which are scattered all over the ground so kids will pick up those toys then be blown to bits. That is what they call Russian peace. Ukrainians are telling their own people now to not pick any objects up off the ground to avoid getting blown up.

You know who else did that? Hitler.

Nato needs to interfere not only to avoid further Ukrainian bloodshed but also because Putin is threatening the west with nuclear weapons. Is that a world that people want to live in? That's not just bad for Ukraine, that's horrible for the rest of the world as well.


----------



## 4Eyes

seems that sanctions started the ball rolling - 1000000$ for Putin's head








Російський банкір пообіцяв $1 мільйон за голову Путіна


Він закликав силовиків виконати конституційний обов'язок та заарештувати злочинця Путіна.




www.unian.ua


----------



## LostTheTone

4Eyes said:


> seems that sanctions started the ball rolling - 1000000$ for Putin's head
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Російський банкір пообіцяв $1 мільйон за голову Путіна
> 
> 
> Він закликав силовиків виконати конституційний обов'язок та заарештувати злочинця Путіна.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.unian.ua



1,000,000USD or 17,000,000,000,000,000,000 Roubles at the current exchange rate


----------



## ItWillDo

nickgray said:


> You just looked at the picture, didn't you? No googling, no nothing. Figures. They're ultra right Stalin supporting crazy motherfuckers with funding from Kremlin.
> 
> Dude, you're from Belgium? Are you insane? Are you a Russian spy or something? If they're paying you in Rubles - convert them asap.


What is "ultra right Stalin"? Stalin is a Marxist extremist, "ultra right Marxist extremist" would imply centrists and I have no opinion on them. Banter aside, I glanced through the Wiki article and aside from riding shitty bikes and being homophobes they seem like a Lidl-brand Hells Angels which is mayo-grade spicy in the context we're discussing here.

I specifically requested to be paid in Rubles for my shilling as it will be the only currency accepted in trading pairs for oil, wheat & gas soon.


----------



## nightflameauto

LostTheTone said:


> 1,000,000USD or 17,000,000,000,000,000,000 Roubles at the current exchange rate


Hey, can we start a go-fund-me or something? I'm sure we can increase that payout.


----------



## 4Eyes

nightflameauto said:


> Hey, can we start a go-fund-me or something? I'm sure we can increase that payout.


just posted a comment about it to the guy on his facebook.


----------



## LostTheTone

ItWillDo said:


> Stalin is a Marxist extremist



Stalin was a nationalist, an authoritarian, antisemitic, and was overtly reactionary. 

Go read what Trotsky had to say about his regime in The Revolution Betrayed.


----------



## BMFan30

Randy said:


> I'm not sure on the validity of the 40 mile long convoy either. Every still I've seen of it has been the same couple shots of a mile long section. Also, the pics are usually with two rows of vehicles you assume 40 miles of vehicles x 2 but I saw it alternatively reported by BBC as actually two rows of vehicles 17 miles long. So the reporting on what this convoy is exactly is inconsistent and I still have no idea why there's not better footage and why there's been no significant attacks on it.


Here is a link to the 40 mile convoy, it's not the only one but I just grabbed the first link that came up. I saw it on a Ukrainian news network though but other have picked the story up in the last day too it seems.


----------



## oversteve

Crungy said:


> In regard to the tweet you posted at the bottom, Belarus is claiming Neo nazis in Ukraine have those missiles? What in the actual fuck...


Nah, they simply claimed that Ukrainian "nazi" forces were bombing Kharkiv as a provocation in the news, nothing mentioned about the weapon, then the footage from cctv was analyzed and that missile not in Ukrainian arsenal was found

What's more ironic later some Russian news mentioned that missile was supposed to hit that blue and yellow tent that was according to them Azov batallion operating center but it was a volunteers coordination center and was standing there since Maidan in 2014


----------



## ItWillDo

LostTheTone said:


> Stalin was a nationalist, an authoritarian, antisemitic, and was overtly reactionary.
> 
> Go read what Trotsky had to say about his regime in The Revolution Betrayed.


in short, a Marxist extremist.


----------



## oversteve

Wc707 said:


> View attachment 104054



Funny thing is that his surname is derrived from Zelenyj which is green in Ukrainian


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> Remember back when you guys had a hissy fit whenever you saw a red hat? Now you're confronted with real nazis and you can't wait to give each other high fives and reacharounds.



Oh btw speaking about nazis can you please tell me something about these remarkable russian guys protecting Donbass? Especially Milchyakov who's pretty famous torturing animals as a hobby, posing with cut off human ears and then rewarded with a medal by nazi hating pro-russian authorities instead of "liberating" him? 









Вот кто воюет против Украины в Донбассе: российские нацисты из спецназа "Гром". ФОТОрепортаж


17.07.14 15:39 - Среди российских наемников, которые воюют на Донбассе на стороне террористов, немало фашистов, которых объединят ненависть к Европе,...




censor.net





p.s. couldn't find the english article but it can be easily translated by chrome if someone's interested


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> Remember back when you guys had a hissy fit whenever you saw a red hat? Now you're confronted with real nazis and you can't wait to give each other high fives and reacharounds.


You mean like this reply below I've re-insterted which I made that you convienienty glossed over? (click to expand the reply)



BMFan30 said:


> "Denazification of Ukraine"
> 
> Right as Putin bombs a Ukrainian Television station and a Holocaust memorial. Now, how the fuck is that "Denazification?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Furthermore, Putin sends fucks like this one ^ from "Wagner Group" to denazify Ukraine? You cannot make this shit up even if you tried.


Not to mention Zelenski is Jewish, so that begs the question what is Putin truly Denazifying?

If everything points to Putin being the Nazi in this situation despite him having a tough life he should have learned from but he turned around and became worse than the people that put him through poverty?

@ItWillDo you have got to stop sniffing glue, my guy.


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> Funny thing is that his surname is derrived from Zelenyj which is green in Ukrainian



As well as in Russian, Polish, Czech, Bulgarian, Serbian, Slovenian, Slovak, Croatian, etc.

Pretty much everywhere in Eastern Europe except Romania


----------



## BMFan30

More destruction in Kyiv & Ukraine:




More Russian soldiers sympathizing with Ukraine after being captured:


----------



## Adieu

Meanwhile, Russia still trying to censor all media and bullshit the internet into blissful ignorance

Can't even tell if this is some delusional belief that 1970's methods work in the 2020's or just sheer desperation


----------



## ItWillDo

oversteve said:


> Oh btw speaking about nazis can you please tell me something about these remarkable russian guys protecting Donbass? Especially Milchyakov who's pretty famous torturing animals as a hobby, posing with cut off human ears and then rewarded with a medal by nazi hating pro-russian authorities instead of "liberating" him?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Вот кто воюет против Украины в Донбассе: российские нацисты из спецназа "Гром". ФОТОрепортаж
> 
> 
> 17.07.14 15:39 - Среди российских наемников, которые воюют на Донбассе на стороне террористов, немало фашистов, которых объединят ненависть к Европе,...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> censor.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> p.s. couldn't find the english article but it can be easily translated by chrome if someone's interested


Friend, I'm not going to read that stuff but if that's true then it's pretty tragic indeed. Regardless, I do hope we can differentiate between isolating individuals and the "branding" of a whole batallion: 









BMFan30 said:


> You mean like this reply below I've re-insterted which I made that you convienienty glossed over? (click to expand the reply)
> 
> 
> Not to mention Zelenski is Jewish, so that begs the question what is Putin truly Denazifying?
> 
> If everything points to Putin being a Nazi despite him having a tough life he should have learned from but he turned around and became worse than the people that put him through poverty?
> 
> @ItWillDo you have got to stop sniffing glue, my guy.


In the case of the PMC, sure it's bad & ironic but the same logic applies as above, it's an individual and not an official corps of the national guard.

As for Zelenskyy being Jewish, I don't know what you want me to say? It's not some magical catch 22 scenario where this occurrence is impossible. But to stick with your type or arguments, Putin can't possible be a Nazi because:


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> Meanwhile, Russia still trying to censor all media and bullshit the internet into blissful ignorance
> 
> Can't even tell if this is some delusional belief that 1970's methods work in the 2020's or just sheer desperation


If he was telling the truth you would think he would let people decide for themselves what is true or not. But instead he threatens his own people with 15 years of jailtime for speaking against him? Sounds like tyranny to me.

He's so paranoid he won't even sit next to anyone that meets with him, that screams "I'm a terrorist and I know it" to me.


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> Friend, I'm not going to read that stuff but if that's true then it's pretty tragic indeed. Regardless, I do hope we can differentiate between isolating individuals and the "branding" of a whole batallion:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the case of the PMC, sure it's bad & ironic but the same logic applies as above, it's an individual and not an official corps of the national guard.
> 
> As for Zelenskyy being Jewish, I don't know what you want me to say? It's not some magical catch 22 scenario where this occurrence is impossible. But to stick with your type or arguments, Putin can't possible be a Nazi because:


So then why would he send Nazi's from Wagner Group (named after Hitlers favorite composer) to "denazify" Ukraine. What can you say about Zelenski being jewish? LOL

I don't know what anyone can say to him bombing a country that's the most Jewish friendly country with a Jewish president and call it denazification? Idk, you tell me. You're the one claiming Putin's not a terrorist. Not anyone else in here...

Super funny your source with a pic of him next to Jewish men, what the about the part of him invading Ukraine. How are his tanks in Ukraine and Ukrainian tanks are not in Russia? Can you provide those sources?

Been waiting 2 days for you to match my sources previously but you came up with nothing so far. I guess I'll just keep waiting...

Can you please go troll 4Chan, it would be way funnier than you trolling the lost lives of Ukraine... You sound like a Nazi in here yourself btw. Nazi sympathizer anyways...

Also the shitbits of Azov and Neonazi's in Ukraine justifies him bombing the civillians of an entire country when they are a small fringe minority? How about all the Neonazis in Amsterdam, America, Russia or any other country for that matter. I guess they're next by Putin's logic & nuclear threat.

Doesn't Azov hold Russian Neonazis as well? What do you say to that? Your logic is weaker than your throwing arm.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

ItWillDo said:


> Like the US has anything beside this in their track record
> 
> Remember back when you guys had a hissy fit whenever you saw a red hat? Now you're confronted with real nazis and you can't wait to give each other high fives and reacharounds.
> 
> 
> Seethe, cope & dialate. If you're only accepting `UKR FREEDOM FIGHTERS ABC` propaganda then nothing will work. Enjoy your 'MUH GHOST OF KIEV', '6 GORILION DEAD RUSSIONS, 0 UKR FIGHTERS, 12 BILLION CIVILANS'. Maybe if your forces spent half the time they spend in social media & the metaverse on the battlefield, they'd actually be able to hold a city.


Weren’t you going to stop replying a few pages back? Lmao


----------



## BMFan30

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Weren’t you going to stop replying a few pages back? Lmao


Yeah I've even replied to him with a good farewell message but he's back in here trolling cause he's got no life.

Amsterdam's red district must keep him more flaccid than trolling this thread... I bet his shitgiggles are on the rise but his hash supply is depleting. It's sad really...


----------



## ItWillDo

BMFan30 said:


> So then why would he send Nazi's from Wagner Group (named after Hitlers favorite composer) to "denazify" Ukraine. What can you say about Zelenski being jewish? LOL
> 
> I don't know what anyone can say to him bombing a country that's the most Jewish friendly country with a Jewish president and call it denazification? Idk, you tell me. You're the one claiming he's not a terrorist. Not anyone else in here...
> 
> Super funny your source with a pic of him next to Jewish men, what the about the part of him invading Ukraine. How are his tanks in Ukraine and Ukrainian tanks are not in Russia? Can you provide those sources?
> 
> Been waiting 2 days for you to match my sources previously but you came up with nothing so far. I guess I'll just keep waiting...


> Ukraine is not the most Jewish friendly country just because you have a Jewish PM & President.

> He's not a terrorist, otherwise Netanyahu, Obama and a plethora of other states-heads would be terrorists as well:


> Terrorism differs from traditional warfare, which is most often institutionalized violence per- petrated by state upon state and therefore carries a *badge of legitimacy*. Terrorism is nonstate violence and is regarded as illegitimate violence.
> - https://www.jstor.org/stable/45331190



> Invading Ukraine doesn't make him a terrorist or a Nazi, it makes him an invader/aggressor. And I don't know why you want me to give you sources of Ukranian tanks in Russia, why is this even a topic? I never said Ukraine was an aggressor?


----------



## ItWillDo

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Weren’t you going to stop replying a few pages back? Lmao


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> > Ukraine is not the most Jewish friendly country just because you have a Jewish PM & President.
> 
> > He's not a terrorist, otherwise Netanyahu, Obama and a plethora of other states-heads would be terrorists as well:
> 
> 
> > Invading Ukraine doesn't make him a terrorist or a Nazi, it makes him an invader/aggressor. And I don't know why you want me to give you sources of Ukranian tanks in Russia, why is this even a topic? I never said Ukraine was an aggressor?


Jewish people feel safe in Ukraine, not only because their president is Jewish.

It does make Putin a terrorist because he's terrorizing Ukrainian civillians.

Putin's acting worse than a Nazi and sending nazi's from Wagner group to "denazify" Ukraine when he had a tough life and should hold himself to a higher standard by not terrorizing civillians of another country based on some Ukrainian neonazi's who also have Russian neonazis lodged into the same group.

What about the rest of my reply and you justifying Russians bombing, killing and terrorizing Ukrainian civilians because neonazis exist like anywhere else. What about the Nazi's in Russia, shouldn't he start underneath his own nose before sending tanks to Ukraine?

How is this logic falling into your head? Is it all the hash? By that logic, Putin should invade Amsterdam because neonazi's exist there too. You're insane.

How are you justifying anything you say at all, generally? Everything you say sounds like bollocks, not only to me but everyone else in here except yourself.

Where are the sources of Ukrainian tanks on Russian soil? There aren't any that's why. Plenty sources of Russian tanks blowing up Ukraine's schools, kindergartens, tv stations, holocaust memorials, homes, apartments, hospitals, cars, people and pets though. You love to justify these things with ill will and shithole intent.

Ukraine is too peaceful for it's own good, that's why they aren't killing the young Russian soldiers but feeding him via the sources I posted previously.


----------



## Adieu

ItWillDo said:


> Friend, I'm not going to read that stuff but if that's true then it's pretty tragic indeed. Regardless, I do hope we can differentiate between isolating individuals and the "branding" of a whole batallion:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the case of the PMC, sure it's bad & ironic but the same logic applies as above, it's an individual and not an official corps of the national guard.
> 
> As for Zelenskyy being Jewish, I don't know what you want me to say? It's not some magical catch 22 scenario where this occurrence is impossible. But to stick with your type or arguments, Putin can't possible be a Nazi because:



While I am extremely wary of the Azov people because they have the familiar smell of wingnut militia (which kinda turned out to be right about the needing to be armed to the teeth, though), I feel there's something that needs further clarification

THE TRIDENT IS A LEGITIMATE ACCEPTED UKRAINIAN SYMBOL. Lots of stylized trident-based logos can be reinterpreted as geometrically similar to swastikas all too easily.

These guys...maybe wanted it to look similar. But if you keep looking at others in search of Nazi symbolism, you might find lots of logos whose creators would genuinely be shocked if you tell them somebody saw swastikas there.


----------



## Adieu

Also, it feels like Azov loves to play into this.

Once they figured out they were the Russian Propaganda Machine's No. 1 bugbear, they decided to roll with it and reap the benefits.

If their enemy sees them as the scariest bastards that ever lived, that means it's working. And knowing Putin, if they didn't exist, he'd just manufacture "evidence" of them anyway, so...


----------



## ItWillDo

BMFan30 said:


> It does make him a terrorist because he's terrorizing Ukrainian civillians.


By definition no, by technicality sure. But the latter applies to any aggressor in the past which would make Julius Caesar & Alexandre the Great terrorists as well. And as cold as it sounds and sad as it is, civilians are considered collateral here just like in any conflict.



BMFan30 said:


> What about the rest of my reply and you justifying Russians bombing, killing and terrorizing Ukrainian civilians because neonazis exist like anywhere else. What about the Nazi's in Russia, shouldn't he start underneath his own nose before sending tanks to Ukraine?
> 
> How is this logic falling into your head? Is it all the hash? By that logic, Putin should invade Amsterdam because neonazi's exist there too.
> 
> How are you justifying anything you say at all, generally? Everything you say sounds like bollocks, not only to me but everyone else in here except yourself.
> 
> Where are the sources of Ukrainians on Russian soil? There aren't any that's why. Ukraine is too peaceful for it's own good, that's why they aren't killing the young Russian soldiers but feeding him via the sources I posted previously.


As for the rest of this, we've been through this a few pages back so I'm not going through the whole thing again but feel free to re-read. TLDR: 
- "Denazification" is bullshit media psyops
- Invasion of Ukraine is/was retaliation for Zelenskyy's pro-NATO policy
- Conflict could have been completely avoided imo by Zelenskyy dropping NATO involvement as it's not beneficial for Russia nor Ukraine.
- The sparing of young soldiers is not some higher-morality move as 1. it's basic PoW etiquette and 2. they're are actively used for propaganda as your sources show. Aside from that, there are tons of Telegram channels dedicated to documenting the young boys who didn't have the luck of becoming a PoW.


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> By definition no, by technicality sure. But the latter applies to any aggressor in the past which would make Julius Caesar & Alexandre the Great terrorists as well. And as cold as it sounds and sad as it is, civilians are considered collateral here just like in any conflict.


Sounds like the same logic that Putin uses by stating America terrorized the middle east so they think it's okay for them to terrorize Ukraine. Terrorism there means it's okay for terrorism here. Shithole logic again, you're good at it..



ItWillDo said:


> As for the rest of this, we've been through this a few pages back so I'm not going through the whole thing again but feel free to re-read. TLDR:
> - "Denazification" is bullshit media psyops


lol.....



ItWillDo said:


> - Invasion of Ukraine is/was retaliation for Zelenskyy's pro-NATO policy
> - Conflict could have been completely avoided imo by Zelenskyy dropping NATO involvement as it's not beneficial for Russia nor Ukraine.


So lets kill innocent kids in Ukraine, amirite? More pointless dingus stuff from you... I never said it was ok for America to go to war over oil in the middle east because I'm vehemetly against terrorism of any kind so I was against it then like I'm against it now. You like to justify terrorism...



ItWillDo said:


> - The sparing of young soldiers is not some higher-morality move as 1. it's basic PoW etiquette and 2. they're are actively used for propaganda as your sources show. Aside from that, there are tons of Telegram channels dedicated to documenting the young boys who didn't have the luck of becoming a PoW.


More lols....
You like Russian news right? It shows.

I showed you a metric fuckton of footage straight from Ukrainians phones, not some Russian fucknugget speaking on his own propaganda news network. You haven't provided a lick of shit so far.

Where are your sources? Lodged too far up Putin's dirty asshole, is where...


----------



## Adieu

The world has spoken. #1 Best Seller, holy shit.




PS it's a nice sticker and delivered like a week early


----------



## BMFan30

@ItWillDo
Why would Ukrainians bomb themselves?

If they are bombing themselves, why didn't they do it in the last 8 years of being provoked by Russia until Putin decided to bomb civilians so Ukraine was forced to defend themselves?

Did Ukraine force Russian tanks into Ukraine? Where did all those tanks come from?

Did Ukraine build those Russian tanks on their own in the last 8 years then rode them to Russia to cross the Ukrainian border to make it seem like Russia is doing it?

Did Putin allow Ukrainians to cross the Russian border then back into Ukraine again? Did Ukraine steal expired food while they were in Russia to leave them in Russian tanks to make Russia look bad? Did they also snag some Russian teens into their tanks just to give them false narrative? How did Putin allow all of this?

How is Russians bombing innocent Ukrainian kids and civilians not considered terrorism by someone like you? Is it also not a war crime to you?

Is a Jewish president Zelenski like a blind black-white supremacist from Dave Chappelle to you? Is a Jewish man being a Nazi here?


----------



## Adieu

Misguided ethnic solidarity, probably?

PS i meant the claims, not the non-existant Ukrainian-on-Ukrainian bombing (well, unless you consider the literal crapton of ethnic Ukrainians in Putin's inner circle, which is just.... ughh f*ck those war criminals)


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> Misguided ethnic solidarity, probably?
> 
> PS i meant the claims, not the non-existant Ukrainian-on-Ukrainian bombing (well, unless you consider the literal crapton of ethnic Ukrainians in Putin's inner circle, which is just.... ughh f*ck those war criminals)


I understood the tongue in cheek here, it's @ItWillDo that unironically believes the jokes he spews.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Andromalia said:


> I don't think it actually matters. Putin would certainly tatoo the bodies if needed anyway. It's not like a successful assasination attempt against him can be done by just any few mercenaries with two grenades and a 10K check. the issue Putin has now is that he's been shown to be so unreliable that nobody will believe anything he says whatever the circumstances. The isolation of Russia won't stop if the war ends and Putin stays. I suppose at some point some russian officials will stage the coup themselves.



I think that’s what everybody is hoping for, but nobody can say it. Hopefully people, including oligarchs, military leaders etc turn against him. However, western leaders can’t say that, because trying to enact regime change is a declaration of war. 


LostTheTone said:


> It's still crazy to me that anyone, especially anyone in the West, characterises free countries choosing to join NATO as being imperialist and aggressive. And the claims that NATO agreed never to expand aren't worth the paper they are (not) printed on.
> 
> In effect, a promise not to expand eastwards would be a promise that Russia would be allowed to re-annex the whole of the former USSR, and reform some new empire again.
> 
> So these people ask us to believe that having competed for 50 years of the Cold War, and NATO having won, that NATO then sat down and agreed that the 100mil people living in non-Russian Warsaw Pact countries had no right to self-determination and that Russia had an absolute right to conquer and dominate them.
> 
> I don't care how bad anyone thinks NATO are, this is obviously nonsense. NATO didn't force anyone to join, indeed Russian militarism forced nations like Poland to join. NATO never came uninvited, they simply offered legitimate, democratic states an option other than being conquered by Russia again.
> 
> And yeah, if you are in Latvia, that sounds like a good deal.
> 
> And now Russia gets cranky because they want to conquer those countries. Well too fucking bad, if you don't like it try being the kind of nation that other countries actually want to join without a gun to their heads.



I do see your point. But you also need to see Russias point. (And I am not defending their actions whatsoever). They think of themselves as a world power. In reality, they are - permanent UNSC seat with veto power, and a nuclear state with a space program etc. Also an enormous land mass, and lots of natural resources. 

They see western encroachment into what they think is their back yard. America would resist Mexico joining a Russian alliance, right?

I think you are totally right from a moral POV. Forcing other countries to do things based on force is obviously wrong. Russia should aspire to be a country that others WANT to align with. But in a real world POV, NATO expansion is absolutely a provocative action. American presidents and European leaders knew this, and Russia protested every time, but Western leaders did it anyway. Ukraine, from Russia’s POV, is the straw that broke the camel’s back - an unacceptable act of encroachment. 

Unfortunately you can’t say ‘don’t like it? Tough shit’ to a country with 4,000+ nuclear weapons. This is what Putin actually seems most bothered about - that people ignore and downplay Russia and forget they have the power to wipe us all out. He constantly accuses the West of ignoring Russian interests. I think Ukraine is his way of reminding us. 



BMFan30 said:


> Now Putin is putting grenades and bombs into teddy bears/toys which are scattered all over the ground so kids will pick up those toys then be blown to bits. That is what they call Russian peace. Ukrainians are telling their own people now to not pick any objects up off the ground to avoid getting blown up.
> 
> You know who else did that? Hitler.
> 
> Nato needs to interfere not only to avoid further Ukrainian bloodshed but also because Putin is threatening the west with nuclear weapons. Is that a world that people want to live in? That's not just bad for Ukraine, that's horrible for the rest of the world as well.



THIS sounds like propaganda or fake news. 

I haven’t seen it on any credible news outlet which verifies sources. 

And it’s the sort of thing which is so incredibly evil that it sounds made up. Not to mention the sheer impracticality of it, especially when Russia has so many other massive problems to take care of.


----------



## Grindspine

So, all ideologies aside, I read this article citing Ukraine's grain production as the primary target of the invasion in a move that will allow Russia to supply grain to China in trade for other resources.









Opinion | Why the U.S. Needs to Act Fast to Prevent Russia from Weaponizing Food Supply Chains


With help from China, Putin could use the war in Ukraine to upend the global economy.




www.politico.com





Thoughts?


----------



## Adieu

Grindspine said:


> So, all ideologies aside, I read this article citing Ukraine's grain production as the primary target of the invasion in a move that will allow Russia to supply grain to China in trade for other resources.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion | Why the U.S. Needs to Act Fast to Prevent Russia from Weaponizing Food Supply Chains
> 
> 
> With help from China, Putin could use the war in Ukraine to upend the global economy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thoughts?



Crap

Russia WAS a huge grain exporter, now that's probably buggered. As to land, they have more than they know what to do with. They literally hand it out for FREE (outside of population centers) to Russian citizens and ain't nobody taking them up on it.


----------



## nickgray

Flappydoodle said:


> This is what Putin actually seems most bothered about



The whole NATO thing just makes no sense. NATO would wipe the floor with Russia in conventional warfare, and with nuclear warfare it doesn't matter who starts it, everybody loses.

It's ideological. You're not Russian, so you just don't get it, sorry. You don't have access to Russian news sources and commentators, or an understanding of Putin's propaganda, or of Russian history. Maybe in part it's about NATO, I don't know, perhaps that's what Russian generals are telling themselves when they pulled the trigger, but the core reason, without doubt, is an ideological one.

People also don't seem to get that Ukraine is not just a neighboring country, it's not even a "brother nation", it's closer than that. It's literally hacking off your own hand or something along those lines. NATO excuse *does not* in any way, shape, or form fly here.

You should also never ever forget that Russia is a dictatorship. By now it's clear that it's a fascist dictatorship. There's a government censorship agency, the TV channels are state-owned, the opposition figures are murdered, poisoned, jailed, etc. Putin and his cronies are in no way, shape, or form representing the will of the Russian people. It's literally illegal (I'm not joking) to call it a war in Russia, it's a "special operation".



Flappydoodle said:


> But you also need to see Russias point.



Putin is a fascist dictator. There are no excuses for what is going on. End of story.


----------



## Adieu

Yeah, the whole blowing Kharkiv thing isn't JUST sheer madness

The enormity of it for any ex-Soviet is that Khakiv is, architecturally absolutely and culturally 95+%, a generic example of a TYPICAL SOVIET/RUSSIAN CITY THAT SPEAKS RUSSIAN.

If somebody told you that these were pictures from the other end your hometown, any Russian or Belarusian who wasn't currently there would be jumping on search engines in a panic to check.

Moscow, Minsk, Ekaterinburg, wherever with populations of 200k+ - IT LOOKS JUST LIKE THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. And its people look and sound pretty much the same too.

This ain't bombing some alien and incomprehensible brown people which they can just choose to not comprehend or feel for (which is morally reprehensible but just how it is)


----------



## nickgray

I swear, this is some kind of parallel universe type of shit...

_Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:

The great nation of #Ukraine
President #Zelenskyy 
Your honorable and almost unrivalled resistance uncovered the Satanic plots of enemies of mankind.
Trust that the great nation of #Iran is standing by you,while admiring this heroic persistence ._


----------



## Flappydoodle

nickgray said:


> The whole NATO thing just makes no sense. NATO would wipe the floor with Russia in conventional warfare, and with nuclear warfare it doesn't matter who starts it, everybody loses.
> 
> It's ideological. You're not Russian, so you just don't get it, sorry. You don't have access to Russian news sources and commentators, or an understanding of Putin's propaganda, or of Russian history. Maybe in part it's about NATO, I don't know, perhaps that's what Russian generals are telling themselves when they pulled the trigger, but the core reason, without doubt, is an ideological one.
> 
> People also don't seem to get that Ukraine is not just a neighboring country, it's not even a "brother nation", it's closer than that. It's literally hacking off your own hand or something along those lines. NATO excuse *does not* in any way, shape, or form fly here.
> 
> You should also never ever forget that Russia is a dictatorship. By now it's clear that it's a fascist dictatorship. There's a government censorship agency, the TV channels are state-owned, the opposition figures are murdered, poisoned, jailed, etc. Putin and his cronies are in no way, shape, or form representing the will of the Russian people. It's literally illegal (I'm not joking) to call it a war in Russia, it's a "special operation".
> 
> 
> 
> Putin is a fascist dictator. There are no excuses for what is going on. End of story.



This isn't a very helpful response. What ideology, exactly, is at stake here? He doesn't like Ukraine being democratic, and showing Russian people that there's an alternative to him being a dictator? Is that it? Is/was there any sort of real contest of his leadership that I don't know about?

Everything communicated by Russia to the West, from back when Clinton was inviting baltic states into NATO, has always been about NATO and US troops and weapons being in Europe, within Russia's perceived sphere of influence. It was in their list of demands in January while they were amassing troops on the border. It's been their number one public bitchin points for decades, and you're saying to totally disregard that?

I do feel very sorry for Russian citizens, who I imagine the majority want absolutely nothing to do with this.

And I'm in total agree that Putin is a total POS, and I was not providing "excuses", as you put it. But in the real world, he has 4,000+ nuclear weapons and a permanent UNSC seat. So that is maximum diplomatic power and maximum military power at his disposal. It's foolish for anybody to think they can push him around or belittle him. That's the line the west needs to tread now. They need to punish him for his actions, but they can't back him into a corner or openly try to bring about his downfall - otherwise there's a real risk of lashing out and WW3 happening.


----------



## Adieu

Murdering the bastard then revolution seems to be the only solution

Else it'll never end, because eventually he runs out of conventional weapons and personnel and it's right back to the nuclear option


----------



## nickgray

Flappydoodle said:


> This isn't a very helpful response.



Sorry, it's way too much info to try to condense it into a forum post. You can either believe me or not, I suppose.



Flappydoodle said:


> and you're saying to totally disregard that?



Not totally, but it's not the main point. Again, you need to understand the history behind Ukraine and Russia, you need to understand Putin's regime (kleptocracy, the ridiculously lavish official ceremonies, the propaganda machine... lots of things), you need to go and watch a bunch of recent interviews of quite a lot of prominent people and various commentators... The problem is that it's all in Russian.

You can read this juicy propaganda bit if you run it through google translate. It was accidentally posted at 26/02 and then quickly removed. Look up RIA news on google and look up Kiselyov. It's just the tip of the iceberg really.









Наступление России и нового мира


Новый мир рождается на наших глазах. Военная операция России на Украине открыла новую эпоху — причем сразу в трех измерениях. И конечно, в четвертом,... РИА Новости, 26.02.2022




web.archive.org


----------



## Randy

First Ukraine City Falls as Russia Strikes More Civilian Targets


Russian forces seized the southern city of Kherson and besieged other cities, with casualties and destruction mounting, as Western sanctions tightened their vise grip on Russia’s economy.




www.nytimes.com


----------



## Randy

In fairness, the whole south felt like a lost cause anyway. Took them a week to capture the nearest city to Crimea, where they also have a significant naval advantage and Ukraine has none?


----------



## Adieu

Sad, but ultimately not significant.

With all the sh!t they're throwing in every direction for a week, they were bound to capture SOMETHING at some point. That it took this long is just a monument to the horde's incompetence and lack of motivation.

Putin won't win.


----------



## Xaios

Winning was probably the easy part. 


Adieu said:


> Sad, but ultimately not significant.


I dunno about that. It does probably give them a decent inland airport from which to run resupplies and sorties. Granted, not _much_ inland, but it's certainly closer to Odessa than Crimea.


----------



## Adieu

Xaios said:


> Winning was probably the easy part.
> 
> I dunno about that. It does probably give them a decent inland airport from which to run resupplies and sorties. Granted, not _much_ inland, but it's certainly closer to Odessa than Crimea.



Couldn't they just use a stretch of highway or even a field? Eastern Ukraine is FLAT AF.

Like, reaally really flat.


----------



## High Plains Drifter

I'm going to apologize right off the bat because this post will probably be hella long and should probably go in the 'sad thread" instead. And if this falls into the void without being read, that's totally cool. But I gotta get this out regardless. I mean... I typically try not to watch or listen to too much news cause it's pretty depressing. But with all that's been happening lately, it's hard to ignore so, I just need to put my thoughts into words. 

I recently saw a photo of a Ukrainian girl and this young lady looked so healthy... so strong, so smart, and so innocent. And today... she's fucking dead. And her family is dead. And so many more are going to die soon. These families... these kind, hard-working, and truly passionate people... defending their freedom and their communities... are being killed...their solace and their happiness torn to shreds. Makes me physically sick to my stomach. 

As a child, my biggest fears were tornadoes and parent/ teacher conferences and the bullies that lived up the street... stuff like that. But I always had security at home when it came down to it. I always knew that my parents were there for me, and that I had a safe place physically and mentally. So as much as wars have always been a part of this world, I still cannot fathom what kind of people would consciously and without provocation... kill children. So many kids... so full of fucking life! They haven't been beaten down by shitty adult problems yet... no dead end jobs, no regrets, no addictions, no sorrow. Instead, just young lives full of hopes and of dreams... with aspirations and a chance to do good in this world... to maybe one day have a family of their own. All just fucking wasted... eradicated in some orchestrated savage nightmare. 

And what... these children are just collateral damage in the minds of these lunatic aggressors?? Jesus Fucking Christ. Fuck the leaders of the world that act with such defininitive brutality. Fuck those who condone this and who instigate this. And fuck every slimy greedy corporation, corrupt politician, and inhumane autocracy that have a hand in that contribute to the engagement of war on this scale.

Sorry, but my heart just hurts so badly for these children, for these families, and for the elderly and the weak that innocently get caught up in this shit... this shit that leaves their children bloodied and breathing their last breath. For the life of me, I simply cannot begin to imagine possessing such a disturbed level of greed and callousness as that which justifies the mass slaughter of children. 

Sorry, guys. I'm just fucking spent on this shit and my heart weeps so bad right now. Thanks for allowing me to vent/ end hijack.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Couldn't they just use a stretch of highway or even a field? Eastern Ukraine is FLAT AF.
> 
> Like, reaally really flat.



Some planes can take off long stretches of highway, and a handful of military jets can take off from prepared grass strips. But surprisingly few roads and fields are long and flat and straight enough.

There is also a much bigger problem that roads and fields completely lack infrastructure. Planes use a lot of fuel, and airports have big networks of fueling systems. And when planes are trying to takeoff and land, they need external controllers and radar. They don't necessarily need a physical tower, but they do definitely need air traffic controllers.


----------



## LostTheTone

ItWillDo said:


> Conflict could have been completely avoided imo by Zelenskyy dropping NATO involvement as it's not beneficial for Russia nor Ukraine.



No, it's not beneficial for Russia because they want to conquer Ukraine. It is beneficial for Ukraine because they don't want to be conquered.

I really don't know how you can keep saying that Ukraine should have just bowed to Russian control in order to avoid conflict.

How many bits of Ukraine does Russia have to cut off before you see that the only way to avoid a conflict was for Ukraine to just give up and be ruled by Putin?

Why do you think it's acceptable for Putin to just assert that Ukraine belongs to him now, but not acceptable for Ukraine to try and fight for their homes and their freedom?


----------



## Flappydoodle

nickgray said:


> Sorry, it's way too much info to try to condense it into a forum post. You can either believe me or not, I suppose.
> 
> 
> 
> Not totally, but it's not the main point. Again, you need to understand the history behind Ukraine and Russia, you need to understand Putin's regime (kleptocracy, the ridiculously lavish official ceremonies, the propaganda machine... lots of things), you need to go and watch a bunch of recent interviews of quite a lot of prominent people and various commentators... The problem is that it's all in Russian.
> 
> You can read this juicy propaganda bit if you run it through google translate. It was accidentally posted at 26/02 and then quickly removed. Look up RIA news on google and look up Kiselyov. It's just the tip of the iceberg really.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Наступление России и нового мира
> 
> 
> Новый мир рождается на наших глазах. Военная операция России на Украине открыла новую эпоху — причем сразу в трех измерениях. И конечно, в четвертом,... РИА Новости, 26.02.2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> web.archive.org


Sure, thanks. 

So from your perspective, what do you think Putin wants from this? What’s a win for him after rolling in the tanks?

UK intelligence said back in Jan that he was going to try and install some pro-Russian friendly leader. US Intel now says he’s going to put in the previous guy who was thrown out - just rolling back the clock.


----------



## nickgray

Flappydoodle said:


> What’s a win for him after rolling in the tanks?



There is no win. He lost. Horribly. It's just a question of when the protests in Russia become big enough to topple the government.


----------



## LostTheTone

Flappydoodle said:


> UK intelligence said back in Jan that he was going to try and install some pro-Russian friendly leader. US Intel now says he’s going to put in the previous guy who was thrown out - just rolling back the clock.



I suppose that's possible, but it's important to remember that this would require more change than just having a new leader in Ukraine - It would be the end of Ukrainian democracy entirely. Ukrainian democracy isn't the greatest, but they did legitimately elect Zelensky and the Ukrainians are in favour of being a democratic state.

Imposing autocracy won't sit well with the Ukrainians at all, and it's hard to see that such a regime could last. So what would be the point, in the end? If it buys Russia 18 months before there is another revolution, followed by immediate NATO membership, has anything really been achieved?


----------



## Flappydoodle

High Plains Drifter said:


> I'm going to apologize right off the bat because this post will probably be hella long and should probably go in the 'sad thread" instead. And if this falls into the void without being read, that's totally cool. But I gotta get this out regardless. I mean... I typically try not to watch or listen to too much news cause it's pretty depressing. But with all that's been happening lately, it's hard to ignore so, I just need to put my thoughts into words.
> 
> I recently saw a photo of a Ukrainian girl and this young lady looked so healthy... so strong, so smart, and so innocent. And today... she's fucking dead. And her family is dead. And so many more are going to die soon. These families... these kind, hard-working, and truly passionate people... defending their freedom and their communities... are being killed...their solace and their happiness torn to shreds. Makes me physically sick to my stomach.
> 
> As a child, my biggest fears were tornadoes and parent/ teacher conferences and the bullies that lived up the street... stuff like that. But I always had security at home when it came down to it. I always knew that my parents were there for me, and that I had a safe place physically and mentally. So as much as wars have always been a part of this world, I still cannot fathom what kind of people would consciously and without provocation... kill children. So many kids... so full of fucking life! They haven't been beaten down by shitty adult problems yet... no dead end jobs, no regrets, no addictions, no sorrow. Instead, just young lives full of hopes and of dreams... with aspirations and a chance to do good in this world... to maybe one day have a family of their own. All just fucking wasted... eradicated in some orchestrated savage nightmare.
> 
> And what... these children are just collateral damage in the minds of these lunatic aggressors?? Jesus Fucking Christ. Fuck the leaders of the world that act with such defininitive brutality. Fuck those who condone this and who instigate this. And fuck every slimy greedy corporation, corrupt politician, and inhumane autocracy that have a hand in that contribute to the engagement of war on this scale.
> 
> Sorry, but my heart just hurts so badly for these children, for these families, and for the elderly and the weak that innocently get caught up in this shit... this shit that leaves their children bloodied and breathing their last breath. For the life of me, I simply cannot begin to imagine possessing such a disturbed level of greed and callousness as that which justifies the mass slaughter of children.
> 
> Sorry, guys. I'm just fucking spent on this shit and my heart weeps so bad right now. Thanks for allowing me to vent/ end hijack.


I’m with you. It’s extremely tragic. Especially the impact on children who are totally innocent. Even though statistically most of them won’t be injured or killed, the mental trauma will be massive. It’s horrible. 

Best advice - just don’t read that stuff. Back in the day I watched the ISIS propaganda videos. I actively avoid harmful stuff now. It’s just not worth it. 



LostTheTone said:


> No, it's not beneficial for Russia because they want to conquer Ukraine. It is beneficial for Ukraine because they don't want to be conquered.
> 
> I really don't know how you can keep saying that Ukraine should have just bowed to Russian control in order to avoid conflict.
> 
> How many bits of Ukraine does Russia have to cut off before you see that the only way to avoid a conflict was for Ukraine to just give up and be ruled by Putin?
> 
> Why do you think it's acceptable for Putin to just assert that Ukraine belongs to him now, but not acceptable for Ukraine to try and fight for their homes and their freedom?



I don’t think he said it was ‘acceptable’ exactly. Just that it might have been the least murderous approach. Now you have millions of civilians stuck in the middle of this shit. 

End of the day, one country is a bully which has a massive army and nuclear weapons. The other is a scrappy brave little country whose friends absolutely will not help. There’s no way that Ukraine wins this militarily. But they may be able to make Russian occupation incredibly miserable, at enormous cost to the safety of their own people and destruction of their cities and infrastructure. Combined with Western sanctions, Putin *may* give up, but Ukraine is paying an enormous cost. 

Right now it’s a balancing act. It’s a reasonable argument that Ukraine should be trying to reach any sort of deal in order to prevent destruction and civilian deaths. Right now we’re still hoping sanctions and resistance might deter Putin. But who knows…


----------



## Flappydoodle

nickgray said:


> There is no win. He lost. Horribly. It's just a question of when the protests in Russia become big enough to topple the government.


Given everything you said about the propaganda etc, do you actually think that’s possible?

And from what I see, they’re slowly winning still. At least, they’re capturing cities. Holding them is a different matter of course. 

Let me rephrase the question: what do you think he wanted to achieve?


----------



## ItWillDo

LostTheTone said:


> No, it's not beneficial for Russia because they want to conquer Ukraine. It is beneficial for Ukraine because they don't want to be conquered.
> 
> I really don't know how you can keep saying that Ukraine should have just bowed to Russian control in order to avoid conflict.
> 
> How many bits of Ukraine does Russia have to cut off before you see that the only way to avoid a conflict was for Ukraine to just give up and be ruled by Putin?
> 
> Why do you think it's acceptable for Putin to just assert that Ukraine belongs to him now, but not acceptable for Ukraine to try and fight for their homes and their freedom?


Ukraine has always been considered part of the Russosphere and Putin considered it to be "under his thumb". He had the necessary assets (Crimea & Donetsk) to assert influence and this was more than okay for him. He did not have a desire to control the totality of Ukraine as it would imply additional expenses so the "silent vassal" role was more than enough for his interpretation. Trying to join NATO when he was very explicit about repercussions was an incredibly stupid move as Russia is historically known for their "FAFO" policy.

Aside from that, I don't understand how you justify starting a war to potentially avoid a conflict? "Let's keep challenging Putin to the point it's certain he might invade us which would disqualify us from joining NATO, because you never know when he might actually invade". How does that make sense? And sure there was still infighting & friction in the nation itself, but it sure as shit was a lot better than what has been started now.

Western media keeps raving about "mUh BrAvE fRoNtLiNe LeAdEr ZeLeNsKyY" and meanwhile this asshole has never seen the frontline, reuses old border inspection pictures as propaganda (https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-ukraine-russia-idUSL1N2V02DG) and fled to Lviv (https://www.tbsnews.net/world/russian-state-duma-speaker-volodin-says-zelensky-lviv-376633) the first opportunity he got while dragging the rest of the population into a conflict nobody wanted:


----------



## nickgray

Flappydoodle said:


> Given everything you said about the propaganda etc, do you actually think that’s possible?



Oh, the Russians are facing extremely brutal sanctions, their economy is destroyed, they just don't know it yet because it'll take some time for things to really get bad.

Propaganda will only work so far, we're not in Soviet Union anymore, it's 2022 - smartphones and all that. Eventually more and more people will understand the scope of the disaster that Putin had dragged them into. They're desperately trying to hide the information, but they can only stall so far.



Flappydoodle said:


> what do you think he wanted to achieve?



A puppet state like Belarus.



ItWillDo said:


> and fled to Lviv



Russian state duma speaker  That's it, I'm ignoring your stupid ass.


----------



## ItWillDo

nickgray said:


> Russian state duma speaker  That's it, I'm ignoring your stupid ass.


Be my guest, ignore it like you've seemed to be ignoring the actual state & cause of the conflict as well. You'll retrace once cognitive dissonance kicks out.


----------



## narad

ItWillDo said:


> Ukraine has always been considered part of the Russosphere and Putin considered it to be "under his thumb". He had the necessary assets (Crimea & Donetsk) to assert influence and this was more than okay for him. He did not have a desire to control the totality of Ukraine as it would imply additional expenses so the "silent vassal" role was more than enough for his interpretation. Trying to join NATO when he was very explicit about repercussions was an incredibly stupid move as Russia is historically known for their "FAFO" policy.
> 
> Aside from that, I don't understand how you justify starting a war to potentially avoid a conflict? "Let's keep challenging Putin to the point it's certain he might invade us which would disqualify us from joining NATO, because you never know when he might actually invade". How does that make sense? And sure there was still infighting & friction in the nation itself, but it sure as shit was a lot better than what has been started now.



This is like the geopolitical version of "She had it coming, wearing a skirt like that". It's distasteful in either context.


----------



## ItWillDo

narad said:


> This is like the geopolitical version of "She had it coming, wearing a skirt like that". It's distasteful in either context.


Lmao wow, sure. Have it your way.

Sure seemed to be an acceptable argument for the US when they razed Iraq looking for WMDs. I heard theyre still looking though.


----------



## 4Eyes

ItWillDo said:


> Be my guest, ignore it like you've seemed to be ignoring the actual state & cause of the conflict as well. You'll retrace once cognitive dissonance kicks out.


actual state and cause is - there was USSR once, as soon as post soviet countries could, they made sure they won't get under Russia again, because it's miserable ..and then oil, gas, money and shit.

you seem to ignore the fact that being neutral means having pro-russia oriented puppet government from their point of view.


----------



## LostTheTone

Flappydoodle said:


> Right now it’s a balancing act. It’s a reasonable argument that Ukraine should be trying to reach any sort of deal in order to prevent destruction and civilian deaths. Right now we’re still hoping sanctions and resistance might deter Putin. But who knows…



I don't think it's a reasonable argument, to be honest. Ukraine may well lose, but there is no guarentee at all the Russia will not just starve/oppress/murder Ukrainian civilians anyway. 



ItWillDo said:


> Ukraine has always been considered part of the Russosphere and Putin considered it to be "under his thumb". He had the necessary assets (Crimea & Donetsk) to assert influence and this was more than okay for him. He did not have a desire to control the totality of Ukraine as it would imply additional expenses so the "silent vassal" role was more than enough for his interpretation. Trying to join NATO when he was very explicit about repercussions was an incredibly stupid move as Russia is historically known for their "FAFO" policy.



Considered by Russia. 

Not considered by the people of Ukraine.

So why do we give any credance at all to what Russia thinks is the correct role for Ukraine?


----------



## possumkiller

Adieu said:


> Couldn't they just use a stretch of highway or even a field? Eastern Ukraine is FLAT AF.
> 
> Like, reaally really flat.


Ikr? Russian planes have always been touted as having heavy duty landing gear with fenders and the MiG-29 even has doors to close off the forward flow of the intakes and suck in through upper vents. Just for using damaged and makeshift runways. When they were talking about the airbases being hit, I was wondering why the Ukrainians were not using this to their advantage. Who knows how well it actually works in practice though.


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> Ukraine has always been considered part of the Russosphere and Putin considered it to be "under his thumb". He had the necessary assets (Crimea & Donetsk) to assert influence and this was more than okay for him. He did not have a desire to control the totality of Ukraine as it would imply additional expenses so the "silent vassal" role was more than enough for his interpretation. Trying to join NATO when he was very explicit about repercussions was an incredibly stupid move as Russia is historically known for their "FAFO" policy.
> 
> Aside from that, I don't understand how you justify starting a war to potentially avoid a conflict? "Let's keep challenging Putin to the point it's certain he might invade us which would disqualify us from joining NATO, because you never know when he might actually invade". How does that make sense? And sure there was still infighting & friction in the nation itself, but it sure as shit was a lot better than what has been started now.
> 
> Western media keeps raving about "mUh BrAvE fRoNtLiNe LeAdEr ZeLeNsKyY" and meanwhile this asshole has never seen the frontline, reuses old border inspection pictures as propaganda (https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-ukraine-russia-idUSL1N2V02DG) and fled to Lviv (https://www.tbsnews.net/world/russian-state-duma-speaker-volodin-says-zelensky-lviv-376633) the first opportunity he got while dragging the rest of the population into a conflict nobody wanted:



I don't want to comment the Russosphere and stuff since that was addressed here plenty of times to understand what's happening here.

Regarding Zelenskiys being in Lviv - have you checked the source of the article? Is *Russian State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin a credible source? *

Those images of Zelenskiy in armor are old, and no local news are claiming them to be actual images of Zelensky fighting, however there are videos of him being in Kyiv on Feb 25, 2nd day of when war started, if you can't google them I can easily help you with that. Idk where he is staying right now but lots of the local authorities are staying in Kyiv. Also there were a few Russian SO forces operations intercepted near governmental district that also say something about his probable location and it's a normal thing his deffinite location isn't advertised widely. 

Regarding the map - again that's one more piece of Russian manipulation, the actual map looks like this with the russian forces advances represented by those red lines and some small cities or villages taken along those lines, some of them even changing from being under Ukraine/Russia few times a day. 




I don't want to point fingers but somehow you are citing only pro-russian "facts" with no actual credibility


----------



## LostTheTone

possumkiller said:


> Ikr? Russian planes have always been touted as having heavy duty landing gear with fenders and the MiG-29 even has doors to close off the forward flow of the intakes and suck in through upper vents. Just for using damaged and makeshift runways. When they were talking about the airbases being hit, I was wondering why the Ukrainians were not using this to their advantage. Who knows how well it actually works in practice though.



The rough landing stuff more means airstrips that have been quickly constructed by field engineers, or landing at civilian grass strip runways, or taking over damaged military strips.

Obviously you need a lot of jet fuel to stage aircraft anywhere as well as radar and controllers, but you also need places to put the planes when they aren't flying, and places to store ordinance, and places for pilots to sleep. And since this is a war zone you need anti-air defense and security troops too.

You also need to remember that one MiG isnt all that useful. Sure, better than nothing, but the Ukrainians do have some air force left as well as plenty of MANPADS. And of course one fighter doesn't carry a vast amount of ordinance. So you want to fly plural planes at a time. That's not easy off an improvised strip at all. 

Unless your fighters cannot really fly the distance to the targets, I wouldn't want to try and use an improvised field. This is a proper war too - Russia can use Backfires and other proper long range bombers if they want to - So absolute range doesn't really matter at all.


----------



## Adieu

nickgray said:


> There is no win. He lost. Horribly. It's just a question of when the protests in Russia become big enough to topple the government.



Here's hoping.

Sadly, the Russian protest movement is mostly a bunch of peacenik pussy academics, wide-eyed kids, and underemployed college-educated housewives.

I *really* hope someone in Ukraine figures out that they need to land a few dozen maidan veterans behind enemy lines, infiltrate the protests, and help them taste first copper blood.

The problem is Russia has literally never, EVER seen anybody punch a cop at a protest and then have the COPS buckle/fall/run.

Hell, the last guy that tried was a) Chechen, b) didn't start it and didn't even win, just threw punches when attacked then ran, c) got hunted to the end of the Earth (aka the woods by the Belarusian border)


----------



## Adieu

narad said:


> This is like the geopolitical version of "She had it coming, wearing a skirt like that". It's distasteful in either context.



Worse

It's literally more like "how dare that sexy wench refuse to be my prom date back in 2004"

It's some next-level obsessive/vindictive stalker sh!t


----------



## possumkiller

narad said:


> This is like the geopolitical version of "She had it coming, wearing a skirt like that". It's distasteful in either context.


I was going to say the same thing about those Russian convoys lined up so close together in a straight line but I thought it would be in bad taste.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Worse
> 
> It's literally more like "how dare that sexy wench refuse to be my prom date back in 2004"
> 
> It's some next-level obsessive/vindictive stalker sh!t



Stupid sexy Ukraine...


----------



## 4Eyes

Russia is begging Google to stop sharing the truth about their specops in Ukraine.








Россия требует от Google не показывать кадры с войны


Роскомнадзор потребовал от корпорации Google прекратить распространять в РФ “ложные сведения политического характера о специальной операции России в Украине” через контекстную рекламу.




www.pravda.com.ua





I can imagine what private company without any RU influence response would be


----------



## Adieu

4Eyes said:


> Russia is begging Google to stop sharing the truth about their specops in Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Россия требует от Google не показывать кадры с войны
> 
> 
> Роскомнадзор потребовал от корпорации Google прекратить распространять в РФ “ложные сведения политического характера о специальной операции России в Украине” через контекстную рекламу.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pravda.com.ua
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can imagine what private company without any RU influence response would be



Yeah, Google co-founder Sergey Brin might be ex-Soviet, but his father was a grad student in Kharkiv.

I don't think bombing somebody's dad's Alma Mater is a good way to appeal to them

Actually, considering how filthy rich he is, Putin better hope Brin Sr. didn't have many fond memories of grad school

PS it's not specops. It's "THE special operation", allegedly occurring in Donbas, which is the cover story / it's totally not a war excuse those pre-electrification fossils in the Kremlin are running with for the entire Ukraine War.

Stupid dinosaurs.


----------



## possumkiller

I will be honest that a lot of my faith in humanity has been restored seeing how much of the planet is willing to do everything we are doing to help Ukraine. I just wish we could focus this same energy on other atrocities as well.


----------



## Adieu

possumkiller said:


> I will be honest that a lot of my faith in humanity has been restored seeing how much of the planet is willing to do everything we are doing to help Ukraine. I just wish we could focus this same energy on other atrocities as well.



ALMOST everything.

Except actual troops. Or even thinly veiled bullshit rebadged "volunteer" troops, at least as of now.

Although that MiG donation that was in the news a couple days back might well come with unofficial loaner pilots.


----------



## oversteve

one more explanation of Russian invasion by State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin - in brief if they didn't do it, NATO would start it the next day 









Володин объяснил выбор даты начала спецоперации на Украине







 www.4vsar.ru


----------



## possumkiller

Adieu said:


> ALMOST everything.
> 
> Except actual troops. Or even thinly veiled bullshit rebadged "volunteer" troops, at least as of now.
> 
> Although that MiG donation that was in the news a couple days back might well come with unofficial loaner pilots.


You know what I mean though. If the world can put this much effort behind trying to stop putin, imagine how we could do in other areas not even related to armed conflict.

Or against the US. Jesus I wish the world would band together and sanction the living shit out of the US when we do shit like invade Iraq or Vietnam under cover of lies.


----------



## LostTheTone

possumkiller said:


> I will be honest that a lot of my faith in humanity has been restored seeing how much of the planet is willing to do everything we are doing to help Ukraine. I just wish we could focus this same energy on other atrocities as well.



That's a fair point - I think Ukraine has brought it home to us that apathy abroad eventually leads to atrocity closer to home, until it's right on the border of the civilized world. To some degree, the Russian approach here has been to invade a country next door to two NATO members and say "Oh but you don't care, because it's some foreign country outside the west, right?". 

To which I have to say - Fuck yes I care. I think the West has a duty to protect and support democracy against aggression, full stop. 

Obviously we have to tread carefully around the dictators. But that's nothing new. We should have checked their aggression much earlier; so that Ukraine didn't need to be invaded. I hope that we learn from this, and actually act early and strongly in future. 

We cannot breathe the same air as these people. We should oppose them.


----------



## Adieu

possumkiller said:


> You know what I mean though. If the world can put this much effort behind trying to stop putin, imagine how we could do in other areas not even related to armed conflict.
> 
> Or against the US. Jesus I wish the world would band together and sanction the living shit out of the US when we do shit like invade Iraq or Vietnam under cover of lies.



Let's start "small" and deal with Putin first.

Things are upside down enough at the moment that even LINDSEY GRAHAM and ERDOGAN have proven quite useful. I mean, what were the odds?

Then again, even the Taliban and Ahmadinejad have been voicing support...


----------



## LostTheTone

possumkiller said:


> Or against the US. Jesus I wish the world would band together and sanction the living shit out of the US when they do shit like invade Iraq or Vietnam under cover of lies.



That's the flip side of this, right? 

Those who have power will always be tempted to use power in less then laudable ways. If the West (well, the US, UK and France anyway) are going to police the world, that means that there's a lot of military might being used in ways that at least some of the world won't agree with. 

And, frustratingly, there aren't really grand principles in the world of global strategy. It is hard to imagine how the US of the time avoids a war in Vietnam, or at least somewhere in South East Asia. The vision of a communist empire that was completely and totally opposed to western democracy was always going to provoke a response. It's just as true today (or in the 1950s anyway) as it was for the Peloponnesian War - A war fought over nothing, other than for Sparta to check the growing power of Athens. 

Frustratingly also; had the West handled the first Iraq war properly there wouldn't be such moral ambiguity. The first Iraq war was, quite literally, a dictator invading our friends and allies in Kuwait (who aren't lovely, but the Kuwaitis are fairly liberal and more "our kind of people" than say the Saudis). We should have toppled his regime then and there; Saddam had been a bastard for long enough and we had good cause to end him. Which is not to say that the results would have been wonderful, but at least it would have been justified.


----------



## Adieu

Good point.


Btw, Ukraine is far more "our kind of people", whether by announced values (democracy, goals, values) or unwritten criteria (white-ish, Christian-ish, European-ish).

But Saddam didn't have nukes. Well, we later said he did... which should have been obvious as lies go since we proceeded to invade him, which just doesn't happen with nuclear powered dicks.


----------



## possumkiller

Still, it is just mind blowing how putin has done more to help his enemies in the last week than we have been able to do ourselves in decades.


----------



## oversteve

possumkiller said:


> Still, it is just mind blowing how putin has done more to help his enemies in the last week than we have been able to do ourselves in decades.


Exactly, putin is the biggest help in persuading even the local heavily pro-russian forces that we should get away from Russia as a whole as fast as possible and consolidating Ukrainian nation

more funny stuff, someone from Russian communication forces captured, idk how it's properly called in English but you get the idea, and his equipment is some pre-historic device and .... an artificial pussy


----------



## Adieu

Damn Putinist hackers f*cking with Ukrainian TV right now

Definitely sad and desperate


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Good point.
> 
> 
> Btw, Ukraine is far more "our kind of people", whether by announced values (democracy, goals, values) or unwritten criteria (white-ish, Christian-ish, European-ish).
> 
> But Saddam didn't have nukes. Well, we later said he did... which should have been obvious as lies go since we proceeded to invade him, which just doesn't happen with nuclear powered dicks.



Oh indeed - Ukraine is definitely "our kind of people" which is why we pay so much more attention to this conflict. It's a very stark contrast between a country that is aspiring to democracy and one that is a dictatorship. This is quite unlike conflicts in Dagestan and Chechnya, where the rebels were fighting to impose a different flavor of dictatorship. 

We might not like to say it out loud, but places like Myanmar are largely considered to be far off back waters on the outskirts of bongo-bongo land, and so even though Aung San Suu Kyi and her democratic party were deposed, we kinda expect that sort of thing to happen in the thirdish world. That kind of response is certainly applied to most of Asia and Africa, and even in places like Turkey we somewhat feel that dictatorship-lite is the default form of government. 

Ukraine is both closer to home, but also was trying to become a Westernized state. The people of Ukraine voted for pro-European governments, who instituted policies aimed to meet the requirements of being a Western state. No, they were not perfect by any means. Corruption was still a big issue. The eastern parts of the country were still a big concern, since they didn't seem to share that goal. But whether out of for self-defense or just a desire for prosperity, Ukraine was trying to show the West that they shared our values.


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> Exactly, putin is the biggest help in persuading even the local heavily pro-russian forces that we should get away from Russia as a whole as fast as possible and consolidating Ukrainian nation
> 
> more funny stuff, someone from Russian communication forces captured, idk how it's properly called in English but you get the idea, and his equipment is some pre-historic device and .... an artificial pussy




Lol...."пiпiська з AliExpress" = knockoff fleshlight

"Хлопці взяли у полон російського радиста. При ньому була рація, - аналагав каторай нет в міре та піпіська з AliExpress"

Our boys captured a Russian military radio operator. He had on him a radio with some uniquely cutting-edge tech [super sarcasm] and a knockoff fleshlight from China.


----------



## Flappydoodle

possumkiller said:


> Motherfucker is already backed into a corner. The world has been interfering in every way apart from declaring war on Russia and sending in our own militaries. He's not going to nuke anything. His people wouldn't go through with it because they know it's suicide. They can let him hide in his bunker and give him a red button to push and feed him a video of the world evaporating. Let him think he nuked whatever he wants. Something like the Fletcher Memorial Home for Incurable Tyrants and Kings.



BBC just did a piece about his inner circle which is relevant to your post









Ukraine conflict: Who's in Putin's inner circle and running the war?


Russia's president cuts an isolated figure but he relies on an inner circle when he makes key decisions.



www.bbc.co.uk





Basically, a bunch of war hawks and loyal ideologues. In fact, they might be the ones pushing him into further aggression.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> He had on him a radio with some uniquely cutting-edge tech [super sarcasm]



To be fair to the Ruskies, all military radios tend to look like something from a Fallout game rather than a smartphone.

I would have to check but IIRC the radio used in NATO are things like the AN/PRC-152 which are all a bit chonky and clunky. But they are rugged and encrypted, and the bulk is largely down to battery.

You don't want to say any of this is "cutting edge" but it is pretty typical for actual military use.


----------



## 4Eyes

LostTheTone said:


> To be fair to the Ruskies, all military radios tend to look like something from a Fallout game rather than a smartphone.
> 
> I would have to check but IIRC the radio used in NATO are things like the AN/PRC-152 which are all a bit chonky and clunky. But they are rugged and encrypted, and the bulk is largely down to battery.
> 
> You don't want to say any of this is "cutting edge" but it is pretty typical for actual military use.


there were reports from agencies, who described RU troops literally like "bunch of disoriented kids with walkie-talkies" - implying they were using some cheap ass walmart radios without coding and encryption and simple, button cell phones for coordination.


----------



## Adieu

I think this is meant to allay the population's concerns

Far from rapey trained killers with scary kit, they got invaded by BARGAIN BIN JERKOFFS

Like, literally


----------



## ItWillDo

LostTheTone said:


> Considered by Russia.
> 
> Not considered by the people of Ukraine.
> 
> So why do we give any credance at all to what Russia thinks is the correct role for Ukraine?


Because they are a giant superpower lurking over your borders to defend their own interests? I don't understand that argument, do you have a steady perception of how reality works? If you have kids to feed and your boss is a dickhead and tells you not to do X, and you go do X to spite him. I hope you realise you're doing this with a (calculated) risk of ending up in a situation where you could jeopardise feeding your kids.



oversteve said:


> I don't want to comment the Russosphere and stuff since that was addressed here plenty of times to understand what's happening here.
> 
> Regarding Zelenskiys being in Lviv - have you checked the source of the article? Is *Russian State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin a credible source? *
> 
> Those images of Zelenskiy in armor are old, and no local news are claiming them to be actual images of Zelensky fighting, however there are videos of him being in Kyiv on Feb 25, 2nd day of when war started, if you can't google them I can easily help you with that. Idk where he is staying right now but lots of the local authorities are staying in Kyiv. Also there were a few Russian SO forces operations intercepted near governmental district that also say something about his probable location and it's a normal thing his deffinite location isn't advertised widely.
> 
> Regarding the map - again that's one more piece of Russian manipulation, the actual map looks like this with the russian forces advances represented by those red lines and some small cities or villages taken along those lines, some of them even changing from being under Ukraine/Russia few times a day.
> 
> View attachment 104062
> 
> 
> I don't want to point fingers but somehow you are citing only pro-russian "facts" with no actual credibility


What is a credible source these days? As mentioned beforehand, most mainstream media released frontpage articles about Zelenskyy being in the frontlines, and then later Reuters published a sidepager to debunk it. Either way, leave it up to your own confirmation bias to assume where he is but it's been quite a while since he posted a video of him being in Kiev.

And for the map, sure if it makes you feel better to only see highways & roads marked instead of municipalities & communes then use that map.



4Eyes said:


> there were reports from agencies, who described RU troops literally like "bunch of disoriented kids with walkie-talkies" - implying they were using some cheap ass walmart radios without coding and encryption and simple, button cell phones for coordination.


Imagine going to war with a "bunch of disoriented kids with walkie-talkies", and steadily losing ground. The endorphines feel good when reading it first, but goddamn will they probably make you feel stupid once the occupation is over.

Might be interesting to know that the US was actually complaining about being Russian EW superiority in Syria even back in 2018: https://www.thedefensepost.com/2018/05/01/russia-syria-electronic-warfare/. 
4 years later and suddenly the equipment consists of "walkie-talkies" and "soviet era radios"? Either you've been gobbling up propaganda like a glutton, or Russia isn't even half serious about the forces & equipment they've sent to Ukraine. For all we know, their MOD really might consider outdated equipment to be more than fit to handle the opposing forces.


----------



## Adieu

Lol

That was just a guy playing up concerns to get a few billion extra funding


----------



## narad

ItWillDo said:


> Because they are a giant superpower lurking over your borders to defend their own interests? I don't understand that argument, do you have a steady perception of how reality works? If you have kids to feed and your boss is a dickhead and tells you not to do X, and you go do X to spite him. I hope you realise you're doing this with a (calculated) risk of ending up in a situation where you could jeopardise feeding your kids.


M Night Shyamalan: And then it turns out he wasn't your boss.


----------



## 4Eyes

ItWillDo said:


> Either you've been gobbling up propaganda like a glutton, or Russia isn't even half serious about the forces & equipment they've sent to Ukraine. For all we know, their MOD really might consider outdated equipment to be more than fit to handle the opposing forces.


(this is completely made up) or they just flexed in Syria with all their fancy tech for rest of the world to take them seriously and now they sent what's left... it wouldn't be for the first time to find out that "the emperor is naked", especially in this regime.


----------



## Randy

Pretty good article posted a million pages back about some indication Russia's guided air-to-ground weapons significantly depleted from the Syrian conflict.


----------



## ItWillDo

Adieu said:


> Lol
> 
> That was just a guy playing up concerns to get a few billion extra funding





4Eyes said:


> (this is completely made up) or they just flexed in Syria with all their fancy tech for rest of the world to take them seriously and now they sent what's left... it wouldn't be for the first time to find out that "the emperor is naked", especially in this regime.


Thanks, info with reliability to match your sources I presume. At least we didn't go for "ANOMALY OF KIEV: VALIANT DEFENDER OF THE 400MHZ SPECTRUM".


----------



## IwantTacos

Sso bingo. Someone rando will always try their hardest to be the dumbest son of a bitch in the room.


----------



## LostTheTone

ItWillDo said:


> Because they are a giant superpower lurking over your borders to defend their own interests? I don't understand that argument, do you have a steady perception of how reality works? If you have kids to feed and your boss is a dickhead and tells you not to do X, and you go do X to spite him. I hope you realise you're doing this with a (calculated) risk of ending up in a situation where you could jeopardise feeding your kids.



If your boss tells you to eat his asshole, you punch him in the face and tell him to go fuck himself, even if your kids are going to go hungry.

If your boss tries to leverage your financial situation to force you to do this anyway, you call the fucking cops after you kick his ass.

Your analogy is, in effect, that if you get coerced into something appalling then you're a smart guy for not getting the consequences threatened. Yeah, super smart. Except you still had to eat some asshole. And the same thing is now being held over you forever and ever, and you can be forced to eat ass whenever your boss wants.

No.

You are wrong.


----------



## Flappydoodle

So Putin and Macron talked. Putin says he will continue until their goals are achieved.

Their demands:


Ukraine must "demilitarise" and "deNazify"
Crimea - Ukraine's southern peninsula annexed by Moscow in 2014 - is recognised by Kyiv as part of Russia
Two breakaway regions in eastern Ukraine - self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic and Luhansk People’s Republic - are formally recognised


----------



## TedEH

Flappydoodle said:


> will continue until their goals are achieved


I'm starting to see a pattern here.


----------



## nightflameauto

IwantTacos said:


> Sso bingo. Someone rando will always try their hardest to be the dumbest son of a bitch in the room.


Tries?

Dude is a case study in victim blaming and propaganda sponging. He injected Putin's ego straight into his veins.

When you watch someone killing children indiscriminately and decide that the one pulling the trigger deserves your sympathy more than the children or their countrymen? You've lost the thread. And your humanity.

There are some folks that just aren't worth engaging.


----------



## ItWillDo

LostTheTone said:


> If your boss tells you to eat his asshole, you punch him in the face and tell him to go fuck himself, even if your kids are going to go hungry.
> 
> If your boss tries to leverage your financial situation to force you to do this anyway, you call the fucking cops after you kick his ass.
> 
> Your analogy is, in effect, that if you get coerced into something appalling then you're a smart guy for not getting the consequences threatened. Yeah, super smart.
> 
> No.
> 
> You are wrong.


Damn my dude, I had no idea the situation in England was that dire but I was never offered such a growth opportunity. My analogy is in effect that in plenty situations becoming a martyr is a selfish choice.




nightflameauto said:


> Tries?
> 
> Dude is a case study in victim blaming and propaganda sponging. He injected Putin's ego straight into his veins.
> 
> When you watch someone killing children indiscriminately and decide that the one pulling the trigger deserves your sympathy more than the children or their countrymen? You've lost the thread. And your humanity.
> 
> There are some folks that just aren't worth engaging.


Sure is easy blaming others when it's not your nation doing the bombing this time huh? Aside from that, it's Azov killing kids and conscripting young men against their will. 

In other good news, despite UKR's effort to disable advancement by destroying railroads and bridges, Russia is finally capable of setting up a supply line for humanitarian aid:


----------



## wheresthefbomb

LostTheTone said:


> If your boss tells you to eat his asshole, you punch him in the face and tell him to go fuck himself, even if your kids are going to go hungry.
> 
> If your boss tries to leverage your financial situation to force you to do this anyway, you call the fucking cops after you kick his ass.
> 
> Your analogy is, in effect, that if you get coerced into something appalling then you're a smart guy for not getting the consequences threatened. Yeah, super smart. Except you still had to eat some asshole. And the same thing is now being held over you forever and ever, and you can be forced to eat ass whenever your boss wants.
> 
> No.
> 
> You are wrong.



People are coerced into doing things they'd rather not in order to keep their income source all the time, up to, including, and far beyond the_ mere_ eating of ass, often in situations where the cops can't or won't do anything to stop it. It's easy to sit back and judge but people are put in positions to make these choices every single day. Smart has nothing to do with it, it's pure pragmatism. 

If it was the difference between feeding my kids or not you'd better believe I'd be first in line at the booty buffet.*



*Eating ass wasn't specifically a factor, but insulating myself from this kind of decision making is exactly why I got a vasectomy. "Now that you mention it......"


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> What is a credible source these days? As mentioned beforehand, most mainstream media released frontpage articles about Zelenskyy being in the frontlines, and then later Reuters published a sidepager to debunk it. Either way, leave it up to your own confirmation bias to assume where he is but it's been quite a while since he posted a video of him being in Kiev.
> 
> And for the map, sure if it makes you feel better to only see highways & roads marked instead of municipalities & communes then use that map.


How about some bigger and more trustworthy media with more credible sources then Russian Duma speaker who claimed if they didn't start "the operation" NATO would have attacked the next day? 

And again for the map - those municipalities & communes are those red dots along those red lines. Can you please try to comprehend that the area of Ukraine is somewhat big, it's like 20 times bigger then Belgium in comparison and that area in the north marked on your map is mostly woods and fields of dirt, some seldom roads and some small villages between them and it totals to around 100k square km (roughly 40k sq miles).

But of course you can even say that the whole territory of Ukraine is a warzone and is suffereing since even living somewhere in the far West of the country there are a few alarms of air/rocket strikes here every day


----------



## LostTheTone

ItWillDo said:


> Damn my dude, I had no idea the situation in England was that dire but I was never offered such a growth opportunity. My analogy is in effect that in plenty situations becoming a martyr is a selfish choice.



"Just think of all those civilians that I will kill if you tell me no!" Said every terrorist in history. "Isn't it easier if you just do what I want instead? Because then I won't have to kill anyone."


----------



## LostTheTone

wheresthefbomb said:


> People are coerced into doing things they'd rather not in order to keep their income source all the time, up to, including, and far beyond the_ mere_ eating of ass, often in situations where the cops can't or won't do anything to stop it. It's easy to sit back and judge but people are put in positions to make these choices every single day. Smart has nothing to do with it, it's pure pragmatism.
> 
> If it was the difference between feeding my kids or not you'd better believe I'd be first in line at the booty buffet.*
> 
> 
> 
> *Eating ass wasn't specifically a factor, but insulating myself from this kind of decision making is exactly why I got a vasectomy. "Now that you mention it......"



We all make our own choices. 

But there is most definitely a line where "...Oh but you'll lose your job" stops being relevant. If your boss says "Hey, do this transaction in cash so I don't have to pay the tax", that's shady but not something you need to assault him for. But if he tells you to go and break someone's legs to repay a debt? Or kill a guy? Or distributed some heroin to children? Or film some underage pornography? 

You can be put in a tough position, for sure. Violence and coercion are real things. But the best way to not be violently coerced is to say no the first time. Because if you get under someone's thumb, it gets progressively harder to escape. And that's why you say no, and don't let someone control you. 

I'm not here to judge anyone for whatever butthole related shenanigans that are going on in their lives. You do you, my dude. But pragmatism only runs so far. And when you're dealing with an actor like Russia; someone who operates like the mafia; when you say yes to them one time they are getting their hooks into your life. 

Maybe the local mafiosi is crazy and dangerous enough to mean that your interaction with him ends in your death no matter what... But if that's the case, do you really want to go out eating his ass? Or do you want to stand up, say no, and take your chances?


----------



## wheresthefbomb

The real lesson here is that eating your boss' ass to pay the bills is a completely 100% whack metaphor for what's going on in Ukraine right now.


----------



## LostTheTone

wheresthefbomb said:


> The real lesson here is that eating your boss' ass to pay the bills is a completely 100% whack metaphor for what's going on in Ukraine right now.



Agree to disagree


----------



## IwantTacos

You guys have put a lot of thought into eating your boss's ass.


----------



## Flappydoodle

LostTheTone said:


> If your boss tells you to eat his asshole, you punch him in the face and tell him to go fuck himself, even if your kids are going to go hungry.
> 
> If your boss tries to leverage your financial situation to force you to do this anyway, you call the fucking cops after you kick his ass.
> 
> Your analogy is, in effect, that if you get coerced into something appalling then you're a smart guy for not getting the consequences threatened. Yeah, super smart. Except you still had to eat some asshole. And the same thing is now being held over you forever and ever, and you can be forced to eat ass whenever your boss wants.
> 
> No.
> 
> You are wrong.



Hollywood, K-Pop etc tells us that a LOT of people just get down and eat that ass. And the ones who refuse suffer the consequences of being ostracised, banned from the industry etc. Your analogy also doesn't work because there are no cops (in fact, Russia is arguably the cops since they have monopoly on force). 

And if we apply this more directly to Ukraine, they're now suffering 1,000's of civilian deaths, 1,000,000+ people fled the country, and god knows what damage to their infrastructure, historical buildings etc. Much worse than eating ass for a movie role.

I'm not saying that Ukraine should have just surrendered immediately. But let's not try to act like there is NO reasonable argument for surrendering as an act of self-preservation. And, IMO, if they're going to lose this thing, it would be better to surrender earlier and reduce the amount of pain and suffering for the population.


----------



## LostTheTone

IwantTacos said:


> You guys have put a lot of thought into eating your boss's ass.



For the record; I was fully opposed to eating your bosses asshole. While I will admit it is somewhat weird I've thought in depth about why I won't do that, I don't think I've come down on the weird side of this issue.


----------



## wheresthefbomb

I will agree with negotiating with employers is akin to negotiating with terrorists, with the exception that employees most often have even less power relative to the terrorists than your typical (inter)national actor.

It always makes my day when someone inadvertently makes a really sound illustration of why capitalism is a nightmare.


----------



## LostTheTone

Flappydoodle said:


> Hollywood, K-Pop etc tells us that a LOT of people just get down and eat that ass. And the ones who refuse suffer the consequences of being ostracised, banned from the industry etc. Your analogy also doesn't work because there are no cops (in fact, Russia is arguably the cops since they have monopoly on force).
> 
> And if we apply this more directly to Ukraine, they're now suffering 1,000's of civilian deaths, 1,000,000+ people fled the country, and god knows what damage to their infrastructure, historical buildings etc. Much worse than eating ass for a movie role.
> 
> I'm not saying that Ukraine should have just surrendered immediately. But let's not try to act like there is NO reasonable argument for surrendering as an act of self-preservation. And, IMO, if they're going to lose this thing, it would be better to surrender earlier and reduce the amount of pain and suffering for the population.



But this is all predicated on the idea that surrendering to Russia actually would preserve anything. 

Given that Ukraine would both face an extremely uncertain future, living under the thrall of an overtly murderous regime, they would also face future invasion and/or massacres anyway. 

Sure, it's ok to surrender sometimes. But not if surrendering means that your whole nation ceases to exist.


----------



## LostTheTone

wheresthefbomb said:


> It always makes my day when someone inadvertently makes a really sound illustration of why capitalism is a nightmare.



Imagine my shock that someone who doesn't understand that you always have the option to say no also doesn't understand how capitalism works.


----------



## wheresthefbomb

LostTheTone said:


> I don't think I've come down on the weird side of this issue.


----------



## LostTheTone

wheresthefbomb said:


>



You do realise that you came down on the "Nah man, you kinda have to eat the asshole" side, right?


----------



## profwoot

IwantTacos said:


> Sso bingo. Someone rando will always try their hardest to be the dumbest son of a bitch in the room.


I really wish those people would get banned. Every thread of any length ends up being consumed by everyone arguing with 1 moron. It makes the whole forum a lot less pleasant.


----------



## Jeffrey Bain

profwoot said:


> I really wish those people would get banned. Every thread of any length ends up being consumed by everyone arguing with 1 moron. It makes the whole forum a lot less pleasant.


Wouldn't be fun if we all shared the same opinions though friend. Gotta have _some_ discourse


----------



## ArtDecade

IwantTacos said:


> You guys have put a lot of thought into eating your boss's ass.



I work for Charlize Theron.


----------



## LostTheTone

ArtDecade said:


> I work for Charlize Theron.



So... A yes to ass licking then...?


----------



## Randy

Putin can eat my ass.


----------



## profwoot

Jeffrey Bain said:


> Wouldn't be fun if we all shared the same opinions though friend. Gotta have _some_ discourse


This is always the response, but I'm not talking about disagreement here. Threads tend to be dominated by someone that is cartoonishly, aggressively, assholishly extremist. There's simply no discussion to be had with those people. 

And in this case it's someone who's also spouting Putin's evil propaganda. There's no reason to provide a platform for it.


----------



## ArtDecade

Randy said:


> Putin can eat my ass.



Here is an unexpected role playing opportunity.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

Denazify? Is there really that much of an issue in Ukraine with regards to "nazis"?

Also, why would anyone next door to a dictator on a power trip attempting to invade and conquer them "demilitarize." What a buffoon.


----------



## LostTheTone

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Denazify? Is there really that much of an issue in Ukraine with regards to "nazis"?



No.

I believe "denazify" means "lock up and/or kill anyone Putin doesn't like".


----------



## Randy

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Denazify? Is there really that much of an issue in Ukraine with regards to "nazis"?
> 
> Also, why would anyone next door to a dictator on a power trip attempting to invade and conquer them "demilitarize." What a buffoon.


I liken that request to this:


----------



## ArtDecade

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Denazify? Is there really that much of an issue in Ukraine with regards to "nazis"?



Clearly a massive issue. That is why they elected a Jewish president. /sarcasm


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

LostTheTone said:


> No.
> 
> I believe "denazify" means "lock up and/or kill anyone Putin doesn't like".


Yeah, I sort of figured.


----------



## nightflameauto

profwoot said:


> I really wish those people would get banned. Every thread of any length ends up being consumed by everyone arguing with 1 moron. It makes the whole forum a lot less pleasant.


While in general I disagree with banning argumentative folks just because they're argumentative, the second they start spouting "facts" that are completely fabricated bullshit they cease to matter. I'm confused by how many people engage once that happens. I mean, sure, once or twice, but page after page of back-and-forth with the same character that utterly ignores sources, actual facts, and logical arguments and continuously spouts off the same utter nonsense?

Then again, some people like to be the sub in BDSM. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

nightflameauto said:


> While in general I disagree with banning argumentative folks just because they're argumentative, the second they start spouting "facts" that are completely fabricated bullshit they cease to matter. I'm confused by how many people engage once that happens. I mean, sure, once or twice, but page after page of back-and-forth with the same character that utterly ignores sources, actual facts, and logical arguments and continuously spouts off the same utter nonsense?
> 
> Then again, some people like to be the sub in BDSM. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


The mods don't have to ban them, but we can just hit the ignore button.


----------



## ArtDecade

nightflameauto said:


> Then again, some people like to be the sub in BDSM. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


It is because we deal with a lot of power in our daily lives and it is nice to let go.


----------



## LostTheTone

ArtDecade said:


> It is because we deal with a lot of power in our daily lives and it is nice to let go.



Did not a wise man once say "For every spanker there must be a spankee?".


----------



## Randy

Regarding banning people for derailng etc:

Derailing isn't against the rules, disagreeing or even arguing isn't against the rules, having an unpopular opinion isn't against the rules. Trolling (among other things) IS against the rules.

I've been around here long enough. One of the most common tactics of people if they don't like the subject of a thread or they're in the minority opinion of the thread and they can't come to terms with "losing" the argument is that they kamikaze the thread to basically make sure nobody can talk about that thing they don't like.

Sometimes they'll push totally untenable position to essentially bait people into "hitting first" or "hitting back", then make the thread about the fact they don't get along with eachother rather than the original subject. Mission accomplished.

Trolling will be dealt with when it happens. Arguing in bad faith is a good indicator you're heading that way.


----------



## Adieu

Flappydoodle said:


> Hollywood, K-Pop etc tells us that a LOT of people just get down and eat that ass. And the ones who refuse suffer the consequences of being ostracised, banned from the industry etc. Your analogy also doesn't work because there are no cops (in fact, Russia is arguably the cops since they have monopoly on force).
> 
> And if we apply this more directly to Ukraine, they're now suffering 1,000's of civilian deaths, 1,000,000+ people fled the country, and god knows what damage to their infrastructure, historical buildings etc. Much worse than eating ass for a movie role.
> 
> I'm not saying that Ukraine should have just surrendered immediately. But let's not try to act like there is NO reasonable argument for surrendering as an act of self-preservation. And, IMO, if they're going to lose this thing, it would be better to surrender earlier and reduce the amount of pain and suffering for the population.



I turn away for a couple hours and suddenly the Z's are all over sevenstring, too???


----------



## IwantTacos

I feel like people have forgotten what a disagreement is. 

Like I could say hey these sanctions make me sad because they are hurting people…many of which don’t support the war. 

And you could say hey sanctions work and they are faster then most alternatives. 

And then we could share studies and then probably agree to disagree or learn something in the process. 

But when someone comes along and says nop fam Ukraine started this war because they were asking for it. 

That’s like not a disagreement.


----------



## possumkiller

What is with the fixation on eating ass?


----------



## ArtDecade

possumkiller said:


> What is with the fixation on eating ass?



Aren't you German? Most of your country's porn output focuses on that very subject.


----------



## possumkiller

ArtDecade said:


> Aren't you German? Most of your country's porn output focuses on that very subject.


Dude, not everybody who likes Rammstein is German. I'm an American. Living in a Polish town. Which used to be German.


----------



## LostTheTone

IwantTacos said:


> I feel like people have forgotten what a disagreement is.
> 
> Like I could say hey these sanctions make me sad because they are hurting people…many of which don’t support the war.
> 
> And you could say hey sanctions work and they are faster then most alternatives.
> 
> And then we could share studies and then probably agree to disagree or learn something in the process.
> 
> But when someone comes along and says nop fam Ukraine started this war because they were asking for it.
> 
> That’s like not a disagreement.



Agreed - And honestly the bigger view of sanctions does deserve more discussion, because there really should be disagreement over such things. 

In WW1, the single most lethal weapon was not a machine gun or artillery or poison gas, it was the British blockade which killed something like 500,000 to 700,000 Germans. Stopping trade is no small thing.

It won't happen today, but the sanctions could well lead to more deaths than this war does. Medicines become unavailable, good doctors leave, bathtub vodka poisons people, rioting leads to deaths, crackdowns lead to firing squads. This stuff adds up and we shouldnt be be nonchalant about it.

But that is a different discussion than arguing over whether Ukraine should have known better than to anger their drunk ex husband who has a gun.


----------



## Xaios

Is there some way I can shoehorn a spirited discussion on human centipedes into this discussion that is about eating ass as a metaphor for international diplomacy but also about actually eating ass? I feel like it's relevant somehow, but I'm not exactly sure how.


----------



## ItWillDo

LostTheTone said:


> "Just think of all those civilians that I will kill if you tell me no!" Said every terrorist in history. "Isn't it easier if you just do what I want instead? Because then I won't have to kill anyone."


Bro who ever threatened with killing civilians? I don't know why this topic keeps arising, this is a textbook state-to-state conflict.



LostTheTone said:


> But this is all predicated on the idea that surrendering to Russia actually would preserve anything.
> 
> Given that Ukraine would both face an extremely uncertain future, living under the thrall of an overtly murderous regime, they would also face future invasion and/or massacres anyway.
> 
> Sure, it's ok to surrender sometimes. But not if surrendering means that your whole nation ceases to exist.


I want to understand why you assume that Russia has no intention of preserving anything? They share culture, land, genetics, history, ... And as many of you pointed out, Putin does indeed consider Ukraine a part Russia already. What would he gain in the destruction?
Aside from that, it's not like Ukraine wasn't facing an uncertain future already. Corruption didn't magically disappear with the election of Zelenskyy, and as also pointed out before, the dumbest way to prevent an invasion is to provoke one.
Surrender here would've spared the nation from conflict as Putin had issues with the regime, not at all with the people.



IwantTacos said:


> I feel like people have forgotten what a disagreement is.
> 
> Like I could say hey these sanctions make me sad because they are hurting people…many of which don’t support the war.
> 
> And you could say hey sanctions work and they are faster then most alternatives.
> 
> And then we could share studies and then probably agree to disagree or learn something in the process.
> 
> But when someone comes along and says nop fam Ukraine started this war because they were asking for it.
> 
> That’s like not a disagreement.


> Arguments are only arguments when they fit my bias
Why even argue then? Surround yourself with yes-men and live in a bubble like Putin does.

If you can't even come to terms with the notion that life isn't fair and bending the knee is usually a good solution to prevent bloodshed than there is no pointing in discourse at all.


----------



## ArtDecade

Xaios said:


> Is there some way I can shoehorn a spirited discussion on human centipedes into this discussion that is about eating ass as a metaphor for international diplomacy but also about actually eating ass? I feel like it's relevant somehow, but I'm not exactly sure how.


----------



## StevenC

At least now we know how @ItWillDo financed that ridiculous PRS Private Stock


----------



## ArtDecade

StevenC said:


> At least now we know how @ItWillDo financed that ridiculous PRS Private Stock



And he still won't tell us how it tastes...


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

possumkiller said:


> What is with the fixation on eating ass?


The humanoids are strange.


----------



## devastone

Spaced Out Ace said:


> The humanoids are strange.


Is that a DLR reference? I have nothing else to add here.


----------



## ItWillDo

StevenC said:


> At least now we know how @ItWillDo financed that ridiculous PRS Private Stock


I'm going to be honest, it's also a psyops. Putin was adamant about infiltrating the baritone community, and incompetent as they are they provided me with a scale shorter than standard.

If you remove the stickers, you will see its actually a Putin Rouble Stalin Privyet Stoka.



ArtDecade said:


> And he still won't tell us how it tastes...


It's a spectrum, I just skip desserts and hope he didn't have Asian food.


----------



## LostTheTone

ItWillDo said:


> Bro who ever threatened with killing civilians? I don't know why this topic keeps arising, this is a textbook state-to-state conflict.



If this is a textbook state vs state conflict, why shouldn't Ukraine try to join NATO if they want, and oppose Russia with every weapon at their disposal? 

You can't have it both ways. If this is a pure "might makes right" scenario, then you can't then also claim that Ukraine are in the wrong for attempting to obtain more might.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

devastone said:


> Is that a DLR reference? I have nothing else to add here.


Nope. I am not the weasel, YOU are! I am the BRAIN! Get it right!

/s


----------



## LostTheTone

Xaios said:


> Is there some way I can shoehorn a spirited discussion on human centipedes into this discussion that is about eating ass as a metaphor for international diplomacy but also about actually eating ass? I feel like it's relevant somehow, but I'm not exactly sure how.



In many ways international relations is like a human centipede. There's one guy who does not have to eat shit; but everyone else is going to eat shit whether they like it or not. Your only choice is whose shit you get to eat. Everyone wants to be the guy who does not eat shit, and in doing so they shit extra hard on the guy behind them. 

And the only way to win is to be the guy sewing peoples mouths to buttholes.


----------



## devastone

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Nope. I am not the weasel, YOU are! I am the BRAIN! Get it right!
> 
> /s


I'm tapping out on that, I'm clueless, but, at least I am aware that I am.


----------



## Adieu

possumkiller said:


> Dude, not everybody who likes Rammstein is German. I'm an American. Living in a Polish town. Which used to be German.



Btw, you guys are pretty much ground zero in case Putin and NATO decide to go at it directly, right?


----------



## Adieu

StevenC said:


> At least now we know how @ItWillDo financed that ridiculous PRS Private Stock



150 RUR a post...no wonder he's livid it's like $1 instead of $6 now


----------



## Drew

BMFan30 said:


> If Trump was president he would do more than Biden has by only freezing some Russian assets and accounts like Putin really cares about that right now.
> 
> He would have boots on the ground protecting Ukraine without even a glimpse of thought unlike this Biden back pussy has promised but severely under-delievered by "standing up to that Putin bully" then turning around and doing almost nothing about it when push came to shove already. 8 million votes, my ass that lying libcunt that needs a ginger to answer all his questions for him like she's president instead of Biden.


What world have you been living in? 

You're aware Zelenskyy, the president of Ukraine, was the same president of Ukraine Trump got impeached over for threatening to withhold Congressionally-approved military aid unless Zelenskyy could drum up some dirt on Hunter Biden for Trump? And that Trump, who's spent the last week praising Putin to any reporter who'd stick a mic into his face, would have _defended _Zelenskyy against Putin's army? The same Putin he's been calling a "genius" for his strategy of calling this a peacekeeping mission? 

If we're _lucky_, Trump wouldn't have done any more than praise Putin from the sidelines and make a few pointed comments about how Zelenskyy should have remembered who his friends were back in 2019, if he wanted to continue to get US support. More likely, this would have been the end of NATO.


----------



## Adieu

Btw, can anyone point me to what big win I missed? Ukraine's claimed high score went from 5600 to over 9000 in like a day, what happened?


----------



## thebeesknees22

Adieu said:


> Btw, can anyone point me to what big win I missed? Ukraine's claimed high score went from 5600 to over 9000 in like a day, what happened?


What's the high score? enemy combatants KIA?


----------



## possumkiller

Adieu said:


> Btw, you guys are pretty much ground zero in case Putin and NATO decide to go at it directly, right?


Is Germany wanting Danzig again?


----------



## Adieu

possumkiller said:


> Is Germany wanting Danzig again?



If you mean Gdansk, you DO know you're like 80 klicks from a Russian navy base right?

You're prolly within the *shelling* range of a cruiser right now. And it does feel like the fascists WILL shell something, anything, if they know their base is about to get flattened.


----------



## possumkiller

Adieu said:


> If you mean Gdansk, you DO know you're like 80 klicks from a Russian navy base right?


I've been wondering how awkward those people in the Russian exclave are feeling right now. I wonder if the government can maintain the same level of control as the mainland.


----------



## Adieu

possumkiller said:


> I've been wondering how awkward those people in the Russian exclave are feeling right now. I wonder if the government can maintain the same level of control as the mainland.



It's a navy enclave. They're triple-brainwashed I'd expect.


----------



## ItWillDo

LostTheTone said:


> If this is a textbook state vs state conflict, why shouldn't Ukraine try to join NATO if they want, and oppose Russia with every weapon at their disposal?
> 
> You can't have it both ways. If this is a pure "might makes right" scenario, then you can't then also claim that Ukraine are in the wrong for attempting to obtain more might.


No no, hold on to this as it's exactly what I've been trying to point out. The Ukrainian regime tried to join the NATO fully aware that this would piss off their trigger happy neighbour. The thing happening now is literally Ukraine opposing Russia with every weapon at their disposal.

The point I want to get across is that I'm extremely disappointed with the decision the Ukrainian regime made as it lead to unnecessary bloodshed.



Adieu said:


> 150 RUR a post...no wonder he's livid it's like $1 instead of $6 now


This is also an interesting subject I want to address as I feel a lot of you don't have a financial/forex background. So the rouble in context of the sanctions has taken a blow of course, but it's been bloated by the media of course to make it seem like Russia is nearing bankruptcy, while the currency's USD trading pair is still stronger than the Japanese Yen for example.

Now, the value of a nation's currency is to large extent also backed by it's exports. What a lot of people are missing out on (or don't want to see), is that Russia has been building an incredibly strong position & role when it comes to raw materials. While the rouble may be suffering, they can compensate by hitching the prices on oil, wheat & gas. Now let's see how this plays out for Europe:

- Europe's need for oil is far greater than its production
- Europe's need for wheat is greater than its production
- Europe's need for gas is is greater than its production
(Context article: https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/the-wests-green-delusions-empowered?s=r)

> Europe's wheat production is a lot more tech-based, but their greenhouses require gas to facilitate this growth
> The move to electric cars puts strain on the energy net, which requires gas. Moving back to oil is also a problem for obvious reasons.

Russia's import from Europe is mostly based on refined/luxury products which are less "life critical" to put it this way. So while the sanctions are definitely cutting into Russia's economy, it's only a matter of time before the European middle class experiences the other side of the blade and this becomes an economic war of attrition.


----------



## Wc707

I keep seeing talks of Zelenskyy wanting Ukraine to be a no-fly zone, but that would immediately cause a declaration of war.
How would this be an escalation, and what exactly are the parameters and ramifications of a no-fly zone?


----------



## LostTheTone

Drew said:


> What world have you been living in?
> 
> You're aware Zelenskyy, the president of Ukraine, was the same president of Ukraine Trump got impeached over for threatening to withhold Congressionally-approved military aid unless Zelenskyy could drum up some dirt on Hunter Biden for Trump? And that Trump, who's spent the last week praising Putin to any reporter who'd stick a mic into his face, would have _defended _Zelenskyy against Putin's army? The same Putin he's been calling a "genius" for his strategy of calling this a peacekeeping mission?
> 
> If we're _lucky_, Trump wouldn't have done any more than praise Putin from the sidelines and make a few pointed comments about how Zelenskyy should have remembered who his friends were back in 2019, if he wanted to continue to get US support. More likely, this would have been the end of NATO.



Here's the thing dude - People like you say that Trump's diplomatic success in handling North Korea prove that he is anti-American, somehow. That his bullish, aggressive form of foreign policy that made every dictator back off a step or two is just "not the way we do things". 

And then fast forward to today, when Russia has (again) invaded Ukraine, because the US has gone back to "the way we do things".

Germany has started paying the 2% of GDP for defense, btw. You remember that? When Trump said that NATO members needed to actually pay what they agreed to, if they expected America to come to their aid? Well, Germany decided to actually honor that again. Maybe if they had been doing that all along, and had a more bullish foreign policy approach, then Ukraine wouldn't be getting shelled.

In the 2020 election campaign, Joe Biden can be heard saying how he is the only candidate who knows how to handle Russia. In 2022, just over a year after he took office, Ukraine has been invaded by Russia. Draw your own conclusions.


----------



## bostjan

Kaliningrad? Cool place. Definitely Russia is holding onto it for strategic reasons having to do with the fact that it's Russia's only non-freezing port with access in the Baltic Sea. They also make a lot of electronics and stuff there.

But yeah, if there's any NATO-Russia war that happens because of this, Kaliningrad is going to get really active blowing up stuff along Poland's coast. If NATO has missiles in Gdansk, or if Putin *thinks* there are, things might get hot there, but that's still a few if's away.

As for being a Rammstein fan not meaning you are German, I'm not sure how that relates to the initial point of assumption. I would think being a Rammstein fan would be a stronger indicator than being German for the topic at hand.


----------



## LostTheTone

Wc707 said:


> I keep seeing talks of Zelenskyy wanting Ukraine to be a no-fly zone, but that would immediately cause a declaration of war.
> How would this be an escalation, and what exactly are the parameters and ramifications of a no-fly zone?



A no fly zone means that you shoot down anyone else who is flying. In effect, a no fly zone means sending NATO fighters into Ukraine with a mission to shoot down any Russian planes they find in the air. That clearly is an escalation, even if you try to dress it up as a defensive thing. It would very clearly be NATO joining the war.


----------



## Drew

LostTheTone said:


> Here's the thing dude - People like you say that Trump's diplomatic success in handling North Korea prove that he is anti-American, somehow. That his bullish, aggressive form of foreign policy that made every dictator back off a step or two is just "not the way we do things".
> 
> And then fast forward to today, when Russia has (again) invaded Ukraine, because the US has gone back to "the way we do things".
> 
> Germany has started paying the 2% of GDP for defense, btw. You remember that? When Trump said that NATO members needed to actually pay what they agreed to, if they expected America to come to their aid? Well, Germany decided to actually honor that again. Maybe if they had been doing that all along, and had a more bullish foreign policy approach, then Ukraine wouldn't be getting shelled.
> 
> In the 2020 election campaign, Joe Biden can be heard saying how he is the only candidate who knows how to handle Russia. In 2022, just over a year after he took office, Ukraine has been invaded by Russia. Draw your own conclusions.


Two thoughts, though. 

1) What was Trump's "diplomatic success" in North Korea? He gave them something they desperately wanted - attention, and recognition in the form of a formal heads of state meeting. And we got...? 

2) Putin _thought_ he could get away with invading Ukraine under Biden's watch. It's been just over a week. I wouldn't write the chapter on what lessons we can draw from this yet, when by all accounts it seems like things aren't going nearly as well for Putin as he expected. The international response has been pretty staggering, and while that hasn't translated into boots on the ground yet, the sanctions are absolutely decimating the Russian economy (their stock market has been closed since the invasion, but russian-linked overseas ADRs have implied a 50-60% decline, and preliminary high-frequency and market based indicator models are estimating an 11% hit to Russian GDP, and counting) , and the more blatantly Russia continues to target civilians, the more likely we DO start engaging militarily, even in limited ways like imposing a no-fly zone overt Ukraine (which will mean US fighters shooting down Russians when they invariably try to test our commitment). 

Considering Trump is busy cheering Putin on, I don't think his ideas of how to "handle" Putin are what we want here. Not to kink-shame, of course.


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Kaliningrad? Cool place. Definitely Russia is holding onto it for strategic reasons having to do with the fact that it's Russia's only non-freezing port with access in the Baltic Sea. They also make a lot of electronics and stuff there.
> 
> But yeah, if there's any NATO-Russia war that happens because of this, Kaliningrad is going to get really active blowing up stuff along Poland's coast. If NATO has missiles in Gdansk, or if Putin *thinks* there are, things might get hot there, but that's still a few if's away.



But like all military bases, NATO knows that it's there, and which ships are in it, and how many sailors and other personnel. 

And unlike on the ground, the NATO navies _vastly _outclass the Russians. Between Britain, France and Norway there is no real way for Russian naval assets to operate in the Baltic in a hot war. And the ground base itself would last only for as long as it takes for planes to fly from NATO airbases in Germany and Poland into the enclave. It is even conveniently located near the water so that sea launched cruise missiles can wipe out the anti-air defenses.


----------



## Wc707

LostTheTone said:


> A no fly zone means that you shoot down anyone else who is flying. In effect, a no fly zone means sending NATO fighters into Ukraine with a mission to shoot down any Russian planes they find in the air. That clearly is an escalation, even if you try to dress it up as a defensive thing. It would very clearly be NATO joining the war.


Ah okay, thanks


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> But like all military bases, NATO knows that it's there, and which ships are in it, and how many sailors and other personnel.
> 
> And unlike on the ground, the NATO navies _vastly _outclass the Russians. Between Britain, France and Norway there is no real way for Russian naval assets to operate in the Baltic in a hot war. And the ground base itself would last only for as long as it takes for planes to fly from NATO airbases in Germany and Poland into the enclave. It is even conveniently located near the water so that sea launched cruise missiles can wipe out the anti-air defenses.


Russia has the second biggest navy in the world. But who knows what that means. Pepsi literally had the sixth largest navy in the world at one moment in time.

I wouldn't say that they'd win any naval battles, but you don't need to win a battle in order to cause pain and suffering.


----------



## LostTheTone

Drew said:


> Two thoughts, though.
> 
> 1) What was Trump's "diplomatic success" in North Korea? He gave them something they desperately wanted - attention, and recognition in the form of a formal heads of state meeting. And we got...?
> 
> 2) Putin _thought_ he could get away with invading Ukraine under Biden's watch. It's been just over a week. I wouldn't write the chapter on what lessons we can draw from this yet, when by all accounts it seems like things aren't going nearly as well for Putin as he expected. The international response has been pretty staggering, and while that hasn't translated into boots on the ground yet, the sanctions are absolutely decimating the Russian economy (their stock market has been closed since the invasion, but russian-linked overseas ADRs have implied a 50-60% decline, and preliminary high-frequency and market based indicator models are estimating an 11% hit to Russian GDP, and counting) , and the more blatantly Russia continues to target civilians, the more likely we DO start engaging militarily, even in limited ways like imposing a no-fly zone overt Ukraine (which will mean US fighters shooting down Russians when they invariably try to test our commitment).
> 
> Considering Trump is busy cheering Putin on, I don't think his ideas of how to "handle" Putin are what we want here. Not to kink-shame, of course.



1) You got a thaw in relations with an eternal foe, and all it costs was a little publicity. That's the cheapest diplomacy I've ever seen. Oh, and if you think the North Koreans care what the press from outside North Korea are saying, you don't understand the DPRK at all. 

2) Yes, Putin thought he could get away with invading Ukraine on Biden's watch. Why do you think this is a good thing? There is an invasion, which should never have happened, because Biden is seen as being weak and that he won't really take meaningful action. And maybe that is wrong, but the sanctions on Russia will not bring back anyone who died. Weakness is a provocation.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Russia has the second biggest navy in the world. But who knows what that means. Pepsi literally had the sixth largest navy in the world at one moment in time.
> 
> I wouldn't say that they'd win any naval battles, but you don't need to win a battle in order to cause pain and suffering.



The Russian navy is junk and could probably be sunk by France and UK alone, without USA backup. Especially the Baltic fleet.

That said, if you're less than a hundred klicks from their base and near the shore, that really shouldn't be reassuring at all. More panic-inducing, really, since they're gonna be indoctrinated super-hard and twitchy AF.


----------



## 4Eyes

LostTheTone said:


> A no fly zone means that you shoot down anyone else who is flying. In effect, a no fly zone means sending NATO fighters into Ukraine with a mission to shoot down any Russian planes they find in the air. That clearly is an escalation, even if you try to dress it up as a defensive thing. It would very clearly be NATO joining the war.


Not just that, it would also mean destroing air defence near no fly zone - ie destroing air defence targets in Russia teritorry.

It was stated from various NATO representatives and member states that this is big no-no, as it could lead to nuclear conflict. Based on latest news Zelenskyy also undrerstands that and now requires air crafts to support Ukraine instead. - this option was also discussed in our west propaganda media as help of very questionable value as most of the jets in NATO are non-soviet and UKR may not have pilots who are ready to fly them in combat.


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Russia has the second biggest navy in the world. But who knows what that means. Pepsi literally had the sixth largest navy in the world at one moment in time.
> 
> I wouldn't say that they'd win any naval battles, but you don't need to win a battle in order to cause pain and suffering.



Russia's navy isn't like other navies. They have lots of submarines and anti-sub small ships, but their only carrier (which is garbage) is not active at present because it broke down a while back, and their traditional warship arm (destroyers, frigates, cruisers) is no bigger than Britain's. Their navy is designed for sub warfare, but the Baltic is a really dreadful place to try and do that, because there is so little space.


----------



## Adieu

Aircraft loaners have historically unofficially come complete with pilots, as evidenced by a plethora of cold war-era anecdotes

For example, Soviet folklore/jokes about Chinese/Korean/Vietnamese ace pilot "Lee Si Tsin" (Lisitsin, roughly Mr. Fox in Russian or other Slavic languages) and various accounts of "instructors" or "advisors" doing combat tours all over the globe


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> Russia's navy isn't like other navies. They have lots of submarines and anti-sub small ships, but their only carrier (which is garbage) is not active at present because it broke down a while back, and their traditional warship arm (destroyers, frigates, cruisers) is no bigger than Britain's. Their navy is designed for sub warfare, but the Baltic is a really dreadful place to try and do that, because there is so little space.


Subs with nuclear torpedoes and officers who don't particularly care about coming home in one piece. Like I said, I wouldn't bet on them winning, but wreaking havoc is a totally different game from winning.


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Subs with nuclear torpedoes and officers who don't particularly care about coming home in one piece. Like I said, I wouldn't bet on them winning, but wreaking havoc is a totally different game from winning.



Sure, but if things get nuclear then it doesn't matter what else is going on, or really which delivery system is used with said nukes.

In a non-nuclear conflict though, the Russian navy is not well positioned at all to fight in the Baltic. Their ships are just much less capable against air attacks, and there is no naval aviation to cover them. And then land based anti-sub planes can fly out of Germany and Poland with relative impunity. It's just not a good place for Russia to try and fight.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

I get not wanting to escalate and the very real threat of nutbar Putin taking things nuclear but like how much do you give him out of fear of making him mad like just seems like he will always have that option sucks to see world sit on their hands


----------



## bostjan

Agreed. Still a potentially really bad day for civilians along the Polish coastline if things go sour, though.


----------



## bostjan

Dineley said:


> I get not wanting to escalate and the very real threat of nutbar Putin taking things nuclear but like how much do you give him out of fear of making him mad like just seems like he will always have that option sucks to see world sit on their hands


You mean by the USA not actively attacking unilaterally?

Or do you mean the UN not stepping in?

Because the UN never steps in when it's a permanent member up to evildoing. And when the USA steps in, everyone complains (rightfully) that the USA has no moral authority to be the world's police.

If we set the precedent that we can attack whomever we disagree with in this case, then Trump gets elected in 2024, what do you think happens next? I mean, I don't want to find out.

I agree it sucks, but I can't think of a good way out of the problem.


----------



## Drew

LostTheTone said:


> 1) You got a thaw in relations with an eternal foe, and all it costs was a little publicity. That's the cheapest diplomacy I've ever seen. Oh, and if you think the North Koreans care what the press from outside North Korea are saying, you don't understand the DPRK at all.
> 
> 2) Yes, Putin thought he could get away with invading Ukraine on Biden's watch. Why do you think this is a good thing? There is an invasion, which should never have happened, because Biden is seen as being weak and that he won't really take meaningful action. And maybe that is wrong, but the sanctions on Russia will not bring back anyone who died. Weakness is a provocation.


1) We did? News to me.

2) If Putin fucked up, thought he could do something, and got caught with his hand in the cookie jar, you want me to believe that's _Biden's _fault? 

Again, if the main reason that you think Putin wouldn't have done this with Trump in office was because Trump had a fan-girl crush on Putin and was fawning over him and other global despots, one, that's a pretty good reason to want Trump _out_ of office, not in it, and two, I think we have to be open to the very real possibility that right now Putin would be invading Ukraine _with Trump's blessing. _


----------



## Adieu

Drew said:


> I think we have to be open to the very real possibility that right now Putin would be invading Ukraine _with Trump's blessing. _



Or some clown like Lindsey Graham or Ted Cruz and Lavrov doing the ol' Molotov-Ribentropp shake as they part her out


----------



## LostTheTone

Drew said:


> 1) We did? News to me.
> 
> 2) If Putin fucked up, thought he could do something, and got caught with his hand in the cookie jar, you want me to believe that's _Biden's _fault?
> 
> Again, if the main reason that you think Putin wouldn't have done this with Trump in office was because Trump had a fan-girl crush on Putin and was fawning over him and other global despots, one, that's a pretty good reason to want Trump _out_ of office, not in it, and two, I think we have to be open to the very real possibility that right now Putin would be invading Ukraine _with Trump's blessing. _



1) Yes, you did. First meeting of leaders in 50 years. 

2) You were the one who said "Putin thought he could invade on Biden's watch". You clearly think that this wouldnt have happened if Trump were in power.

The "fan girl crush" which you clearly see with such utter contempt was generally successful at easing tensions across the globe. You hate Trump's style; but it turns out that trying to be friends with people actually works. 

The friendly face of the military industrial complex who cannot stand to say one nice thing about Russia is what led to this crisis that could escalate into a global war.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

bostjan said:


> You mean by the USA not actively attacking unilaterally?
> 
> Or do you mean the UN not stepping in?
> 
> Because the UN never steps in when it's a permanent member up to evildoing. And when the USA steps in, everyone complains (rightfully) that the USA has no moral authority to be the world's police.
> 
> If we set the precedent that we can attack whomever we disagree with in this case, then Trump gets elected in 2024, what do you think happens next? I mean, I don't want to find out.
> 
> I agree it sucks, but I can't think of a good way out of the problem.



Yeah I in no way have the answer or just want USA world police just i dunno. Zelensky said something about why do we say "never again" for 80 years then sit and watch it all happen again. 

Just wish there was some middle ground of helping obviously there isn't really


----------



## bostjan

Dineley said:


> Yeah I in no way have the answer or just want USA world police just i dunno. Zelensky said something about why do we say "never again" for 80 years then sit and watch it all happen again.
> 
> Just wish there was some middle ground of helping obviously there isn't really


The UN was formed to assure that it didn't happen again, but, sadly, the people who formed the UN left too many loopholes such that it ensured it would eventually happen again.

"You take a mortal man and put him in control
Watch him become a god; watch peoples heads a 'roll.
Just like the pied piper led rats through the streets
We dance like marionettes swaying to the symphony of destruction."


----------



## StevenC

ItWillDo said:


> No no, hold on to this as it's exactly what I've been trying to point out. The Ukrainian regime tried to join the NATO fully aware that this would piss off their trigger happy neighbour. The thing happening now is literally Ukraine opposing Russia with every weapon at their disposal.
> 
> The point I want to get across is that I'm extremely disappointed with the decision the Ukrainian regime made as it lead to unnecessary bloodshed.


Ukraine: exists outside of Russian control
Russia: "Let's annex Crimea"
Ukraine: "Russia annexed Crimea, we should join NATO"
Russia: "Don't try to join NATO or we'll invade the rest of your territory"
You: "Why is Ukraine doing this to itself"

You're an imbecile.


----------



## nickgray

StevenC said:


> Russia: "Let's annex Crimea"



The earliest "big" meddling that I remember was Yuschenko's poisoning in 2004, a decade before Crimea. So it's way, way worse than most people would probably think, Crimea is just the most recent and prominent (though in practice the war in Donbass is far, far worse).


----------



## nightflameauto

ArtDecade said:


> It is because we deal with a lot of power in our daily lives and it is nice to let go.


Funny, we just watched the episode of Reign where the kitchen girl plays queen for a day and ties up the king and starts scolding him, then he gets all giddy about it.


----------



## spudmunkey

LostTheTone said:


> 1) Yes, you did. First meeting of leaders in 50 years.


Right...but "a thaw in relations with an eternal foe" has zero effect on North Korea's nuclear ambitions, tests, developments in ICBMs, etc.

At best, he kicked the can down the road...slightly.

And by "all it costs was a little publicity. That's the cheapest diplomacy I've ever seen", you mean how Trump committed to "safety guarantees"...and then didn't actually do anything, souring of those relations, and suspension of training exercises with South Korea. So while tempers may have cooled, it was because Trump basically offered NK everything they wanted, while gaining nothing, and put the world in a strategically-worse position in regards to NK.


LostTheTone said:


> You hate Trump's style; but it turns out that trying to be friends with people actually works.
> 
> The friendly face of the military industrial complex who cannot stand to say one nice thing about Russia is what led to this crisis that could escalate into a global war.



His "style" alienated and damaged relations with allies while appeasing adversaries. "The US doesn't compliment me anymore, so I'm going to invade this other country" is a take I didn't expect to see outside of an onion article.


----------



## tedtan

High Plains Drifter said:


> And what... these children are just collateral damage in the minds of these lunatic aggressors?? Jesus Fucking Christ..



When civilians and civilian infrastructure are accidentally killed or destroyed it is collateral damage. When they are intentionally targeted, it is not longer collateral damage, its war crime(s).


----------



## DiezelMonster

So now, Kosovo, Finland and Sweden have put in a bid to join NATO as well as Ukraine although they have fast tracked to join EU first. Russia has threatened economic and military force if Finland and Sweden join. 

These are interesting times.


----------



## Drew

LostTheTone said:


> 1) Yes, you did. First meeting of leaders in 50 years.
> 
> 2) You were the one who said "Putin thought he could invade on Biden's watch". You clearly think that this wouldnt have happened if Trump were in power.
> 
> The "fan girl crush" which you clearly see with such utter contempt was generally successful at easing tensions across the globe. You hate Trump's style; but it turns out that trying to be friends with people actually works.
> 
> The friendly face of the military industrial complex who cannot stand to say one nice thing about Russia is what led to this crisis that could escalate into a global war.


Ok, broken record here.

1) North Korea has been _trying_ to get a formal diplomatic meeting of heads of state for decades now. That was a high priority objective for the North Koreans. We just _gave_ them that. We'd previously held that out as a maybe-one-day possibility if they fully decommissioned their nuclear program. What, exactly, did WE get, for handing that to Kim Jong-un?

2) I don't think you understood me. Putin evidently thought Biden wouldn't do anything to_ stop _him if he invaded (and was wrong, as we're seeing). That's not the same as he thought Trump would stop him - quite the contrary, if Putin, who Trump admired, went into Ukraine with Trump in office, I'm worried Trump would have _supported _him, in retribution for Zelenskyy not agreeing to open an investigation into Hunter Biden.

Look at the timing - Trump lost in November of 2020, has been out of office since January of 2021, and it was only now, in 2022, that Putin invaded. If Biden taking the White House was what prompted this, then Putin was dragging his heels. If you want to look for a more realistic trigger, I'd point to the Chinese/Russian joint statement at the Winter Olympics supporting each other's efforts to carve out regional spheres of influence, and I'd say it's no coincidence that Russia waited until after the close of the Olympics to invade (and, I'd say further that the fact China plainly didn't expect them to invade is something Putin should be concerned about, as they've been pretty quiet about supporting Russia since).


----------



## High Plains Drifter

tedtan said:


> When civilians and civilian infrastructure are accidentally killed or destroyed it is collateral damage. When they are intentionally targeted, it is not longer collateral damage, its war crime(s).


 It was more rhetorical but I appreciate the reply. Been a long time since I've felt so saddened for so many children and families. And I guess to add... I understand to some degree the politics and protocols of war but as much as any country ( NATO or otherwise) is doing to help, it's so very infuriating and disheartening to simply spectate as this all happens... obviously, I know... but still.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

Dineley said:


> I get not wanting to escalate and the very real threat of nutbar Putin taking things nuclear but like how much do you give him out of fear of making him mad like just seems like he will always have that option sucks to see world sit on their hands


Going to war isn’t a great alternative.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

bostjan said:


> The UN was formed to assure that it didn't happen again, but, sadly, the people who formed the UN left too many loopholes such that it ensured it would eventually happen again.
> 
> "You take a mortal man and put him in control
> Watch him become a god; watch peoples heads a 'roll.
> Just like the pied piper led rats through the streets
> We dance like marionettes swaying to the symphony of destruction."


Dave, for a guy who spent a lot of time smoking crack, snorting coke, and smoking heroin, he certainly had a pretty good grasp on the bullshit globalism was wrecking on the planet.


----------



## nightflameauto

DiezelMonster said:


> So now, Kosovo, Finland and Sweden have put in a bid to join NATO as well as Ukraine although they have fast tracked to join EU first. Russia has threatened economic and military force if Finland and Sweden join.
> 
> These are interesting times.


Wow. I mean, on reflection it's not a huge shock, but Russia's moves are really galvanizing the world against them in a way I would have never thought possible a couple weeks ago.


----------



## DiezelMonster

nightflameauto said:


> Wow. I mean, on reflection it's not a huge shock, but Russia's moves are really galvanizing the world against them in a way I would have never thought possible a couple weeks ago.



It's anyone's guess if this will actually happen, but it signals a shift for sure, that THESE countries are afraid Russia will invade them. Russia and Finland share a very long border though and the odds of them getting the go ahead are low I assume, it would indeed mean a new set of increased tensions with those countries not seen in a long time.

But both of the people in Charge of those two countries I think are sly enough to do it. 

This is a big game of RISK we are al watching play out in front of our eyes, except real people are and will die.

I mean you know you fucked up when Germany, since the second world war has decided to send weaponry outside of it's country, Sweden, France, Finland and Switzerland are all either sending money or military (lethal aid) 
Countries that have remained relatively quiet regarding wars and limited skirmishes. 

Either those leaders all know something? which i'm sure they do, or they are all REALLY looking for a fight. It does appear that either Russia is sandbagging it right now or they really are a lot weaker than we assumed and perhaps this is the time NATO squashes them and installs a west/Europe friendly gov in an ultimate bid to say fuck you to China who are the "actual" enemy of the west?

I don't know anything though, I'm Canadian, all we have been worried about are mandates and racist truckers? *big shrug*


----------



## nightflameauto

DiezelMonster said:


> It's anyone's guess if this will actually happen, but it signals a shift for sure, that THESE countries are afraid Russia will invade them. Russia and Finland share a very long border though and the odds of them getting the go ahead are low I assume, it would indeed mean a new set of increased tensions with those countries not seen in a long time.
> 
> But both of the people in Charge of those two countries I think are sly enough to do it.
> 
> This is a big game of RISK we are al watching play out in front of our eyes, except real people are and will die.
> 
> I mean you know you fucked up when Germany, since the second world war has decided to send weaponry outside of it's country, Sweden, France, Finland and Switzerland are all either sending money or military (lethal aid)
> Countries that have remained relatively quiet regarding wars and limited skirmishes.
> 
> Either those leaders all know something? which i'm sure they do, or they are all REALLY looking for a fight. It does appear that either Russia is sandbagging it right now or they really are a lot weaker than we assumed and perhaps this is the time NATO squashes them and installs a west/Europe friendly gov in an ultimate bid to say fuck you to China who are the "actual" enemy of the west?
> 
> I don't know anything though, I'm Canadian, all we have been worried about are mandates and racist truckers? *big shrug*


I'm thinking those countries might be watching what's happening in Ukraine and thinking Putin's regime is so bullheaded they may all be in danger of being next. Which may not be that far from the truth with the way Putin's swinging his dick around right now with threats of pressing the button if anybody does anything he vaguely doesn't like.


----------



## tedtan

High Plains Drifter said:


> It was more rhetorical but I appreciate the reply. Been a long time since I've felt so saddened for so many children and families. And I guess to add... I understand to some degree the politics and protocols of war but as much as any country ( NATO or otherwise) is doing to help, it's so very infuriating and disheartening to simply spectate as this all happens... obviously, I know... but still.


I fully agree.

I just meant that these actions are no longer accidental, they’re criminal, and the criminals must be held to account. From the lieutenants and captains in the field following their orders all the way up the chain of command, they’re criminals and must be held to account.


----------



## 4Eyes

nightflameauto said:


> I'm thinking those countries might be watching what's happening in Ukraine and thinking Putin's regime is so bullheaded they may all be in danger of being next. Which may not be that far from the truth with the way Putin's swinging his dick around right now with threats of pressing the button if anybody does anything he vaguely doesn't like.


this is exactly what will happen and it's not a secret. as soon as Russian economy and army heal from this war, they'll target next countries. and they don't even have to attack NATO allies, they can use their filthy, dirty propaganda to manipulate public opinion in post soviet countries, where soviet sentiment is strong, to get pro-russian governments democratically elected, which will then "democratically" vote for leaving NATO and even EU in which case it will be piece of cake for creating USSR 2.0. and that's' not alternative reality like other member was pointing out with his Putler made nazi propaganda. this is what's happening now, here in Slovakia, we have fascists and strong pro-Russia oriented opposition in our government who are publicly calling for leaving NATO or vilify NATO membership and are for strengthening relations with Russia and their popularity is raising again. it's far more complicated than just justifying what Russia is doing to Ukraine, years of corruption and stealing from public resources made majority of population poor, depending on minimal wage salaries and poor social system and those people will jump on any cheap trick during elections...and then it's step away from autocracy (does it sound familiar?). they were close though to finish their mission in the past years/ but every time, when such government was elected, there was president elected who was direct opposition to them, so it kinda balanced in our political system.

even now, when it's clear who is aggressor attacking our neighbour, when UKR people are running away to our country, when RU shell civilian buildings, schools, hospitals and when RU made it clear their aim is to get whole UKR and they wont stop until they finish their goals, these political parities are against military help sent to UKR forces or against the need to strengthen east NATO borders with our ally forces...

I'm seriously thinking of "plan B" and getting my family as far as I could from Russian regime, if this turns out to be happening in my country (pro-russian oriented gov elected). If I had nothing to loose, I'd be probably thinking of joining international legion which is forming in UKR, now. they're not fighting for their freedom only - I get it's hard to understand for anyone west from Germany, but being born in Czechoslovakia in time when it was heavily under USSR influence. I don't want any modern era comrades dictating my life again, there is nothing good coming from that regime, nothing. Don't make any illusions about being neutral, when you have RU knocking on your door, it means being their puppet and eat Putler's ass.


----------



## Adieu

DiezelMonster said:


> It's anyone's guess if this will actually happen, but it signals a shift for sure, that THESE countries are afraid Russia will invade them. Russia and Finland share a very long border though and the odds of them getting the go ahead are low I assume, it would indeed mean a new set of increased tensions with those countries not seen in a long time.
> 
> But both of the people in Charge of those two countries I think are sly enough to do it.
> 
> This is a big game of RISK we are al watching play out in front of our eyes, except real people are and will die.
> 
> I mean you know you fucked up when Germany, since the second world war has decided to send weaponry outside of it's country, Sweden, France, Finland and Switzerland are all either sending money or military (lethal aid)
> Countries that have remained relatively quiet regarding wars and limited skirmishes.
> 
> Either those leaders all know something? which i'm sure they do, or they are all REALLY looking for a fight. It does appear that either Russia is sandbagging it right now or they really are a lot weaker than we assumed and perhaps this is the time NATO squashes them and installs a west/Europe friendly gov in an ultimate bid to say fuck you to China who are the "actual" enemy of the west?
> 
> I don't know anything though, I'm Canadian, all we have been worried about are mandates and racist truckers? *big shrug*



China's not the real enemy

China's the real RIVAL. There is a huge difference.


----------



## High Plains Drifter

I needed to do this today for those in need and I guess in a way, for myself as well. We weren't able to donate much but we gave what we could.

Link for anyone wanting to donate directly through Laika Cheesecake & Espresso: http://laikacheesecakes.com/

_"Anna Afanasieva, the Ukrainian co-owner of Laika Cheesecake & Espresso in San Antonio, Texas, was visibly overcome in an Instagram video on Wednesday as she revealed the total donations her shop had raised from the community to support Ukraine.

Afanasieva opened Laika Cheesecake in late 2020. Her home city is Odessa, Ukraine, the largest port city on the Black Sea and a key target for advancing Russian forces. Military analysts have warned that Odessa is critical to Ukraine's economic survival and residents are bracing for a major attack. On Wednesday, Kherson became the first major Ukrainian city to fall to Russian troops after days of battle that left 300 Ukrainian civilians and fighters dead, according to the city's mayor. Kherson is just over 120 miles from Odessa.

Afanasieva told Newsweek that her father, mother, sister and grandmother were all still in Odessa. "The thought has crossed my mind to go there and be there with them," she said. "But I think I can be of more help here. I can collect the money, I can donate."

Between Friday, February 25, and Sunday, February 27, Afanasieva said her bakery collected $72,405 for a fundraising account of the National Bank of Ukraine that will head toward the Armed Forces of Ukraine. While most of the total was raised from sales of cheesecakes, coffee and merchandise, about $25,000 came from direct donations that were not associated with sales.

"This is completely crazy, this is completely mind-blowing," she said on Instagram. "We have never expected this much support and we are very very grateful to everybody who showed up."

Members of the San Antonio community waited in line for hours to support Laika Cheesecake after the shop announced on February 24 that its weekend sales would be donated to Ukraine. Word of the local business's efforts spread quickly through social media. A video taken by Troy Kless with local station KENS-TV showed a long line of customers that sprawled for blocks leading up to the bakery."_


----------



## ItWillDo

StevenC said:


> Ukraine: exists outside of Russian control
> Russia: "Let's annex Crimea"
> Ukraine: "Russia annexed Crimea, we should join NATO"
> Russia: "Don't try to join NATO or we'll invade the rest of your territory"
> You: "Why is Ukraine doing this to itself"
> 
> You're an imbecile.



Nice cope, here's a book recommendation:


----------



## Adieu

High Plains Drifter said:


> I needed to do this today for those in need and I guess in a way, for myself as well. We weren't able to donate much but we gave what we could.
> 
> Link for anyone wanting to donate directly through Laika Cheesecake & Espresso: http://laikacheesecakes.com/
> 
> _"Anna Afanasieva, the Ukrainian co-owner of Laika Cheesecake & Espresso in San Antonio, Texas, was visibly overcome in an Instagram video on Wednesday as she revealed the total donations her shop had raised from the community to support Ukraine.
> 
> Afanasieva opened Laika Cheesecake in late 2020. Her home city is Odessa, Ukraine, the largest port city on the Black Sea and a key target for advancing Russian forces. Military analysts have warned that Odessa is critical to Ukraine's economic survival and residents are bracing for a major attack. On Wednesday, Kherson became the first major Ukrainian city to fall to Russian troops after days of battle that left 300 Ukrainian civilians and fighters dead, according to the city's mayor. Kherson is just over 120 miles from Odessa.
> 
> Afanasieva told Newsweek that her father, mother, sister and grandmother were all still in Odessa. "The thought has crossed my mind to go there and be there with them," she said. "But I think I can be of more help here. I can collect the money, I can donate."
> 
> Between Friday, February 25, and Sunday, February 27, Afanasieva said her bakery collected $72,405 for a fundraising account of the National Bank of Ukraine that will head toward the Armed Forces of Ukraine. While most of the total was raised from sales of cheesecakes, coffee and merchandise, about $25,000 came from direct donations that were not associated with sales.
> 
> "This is completely crazy, this is completely mind-blowing," she said on Instagram. "We have never expected this much support and we are very very grateful to everybody who showed up."
> 
> Members of the San Antonio community waited in line for hours to support Laika Cheesecake after the shop announced on February 24 that its weekend sales would be donated to Ukraine. Word of the local business's efforts spread quickly through social media. A video taken by Troy Kless with local station KENS-TV showed a long line of customers that sprawled for blocks leading up to the bakery."_



You know the Ukrainian armed forces LITERALLY take credit cards, right?


----------



## Shoeless_jose

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Going to war isn’t a great alternative.




Yeah I don't want full blown war just wish we had something that could serve as an actual deterrent. In no way am hoping it gets bigger just


----------



## BMFan30

Drew said:


> What world have you been living in?
> 
> You're aware Zelenskyy, the president of Ukraine, was the same president of Ukraine Trump got impeached over for threatening to withhold Congressionally-approved military aid unless Zelenskyy could drum up some dirt on Hunter Biden for Trump? And that Trump, who's spent the last week praising Putin to any reporter who'd stick a mic into his face, would have _defended _Zelenskyy against Putin's army? The same Putin he's been calling a "genius" for his strategy of calling this a peacekeeping mission?
> 
> If we're _lucky_, Trump wouldn't have done any more than praise Putin from the sidelines and make a few pointed comments about how Zelenskyy should have remembered who his friends were back in 2019, if he wanted to continue to get US support. More likely, this would have been the end of NATO.


This has been extensively gone over with me by a brigade of forum posters before you. You should have kept scrolling to those parts or at least the part before that where I've stated that I had that opinion that went off me not following American politics and Trumps stance on being right wing. Nothing else. 

You should have also scrolled to the parts where I've changed my stance and agreed with that same brigade of posters since I had no real substance to have my views before that. But I'm sure many more will be like you and read only to that part then repeat everything that's already been repeated to me.


----------



## High Plains Drifter

Adieu said:


> You know the Ukrainian armed forces LITERALLY take credit cards, right?


Nope... I did not. Anyway...I like to support local business whenever I can so just did what I felt was the right thing to do.


----------



## Adieu

High Plains Drifter said:


> Nope... I did not. Anyway...I like to support local business whenever I can so just did what I felt was the right thing to do.











Національний банк відкрив спецрахунок для збору коштів на потреби армії (оновлено)


Національний банк України ухвалив рішення відкрити спеціальний рахунок для збору коштів на підтримку Збройних Сил України. Таке рішення ухвалене у зв’язку із введенням воєн...




bank.gov.ua





Click EN in top right corner if you can't read/guess your way through Ukrainian


----------



## BMFan30

Flappydoodle said:


> THIS sounds like propaganda or fake news.
> 
> I haven’t seen it on any credible news outlet which verifies sources.
> 
> And it’s the sort of thing which is so incredibly evil that it sounds made up. Not to mention the sheer impracticality of it, especially when Russia has so many other massive problems to take care of.


I wish I could find more sources on this... My source was on a segment of Ukrainian news I saw in passing so I could only dig these sources up below since I heard it elsewhere but I wouldn't be surprised, it's war.

It wasn't just toys they said. It was in boxes of chocolate, devices, phones and other objects they can fit explosives in discretely. Which prompted them to tell Ukrainians to not pick up any objects off the ground. Mines could also be placed anywhere.

Hey, and LOL at Russian problems that need to be taken care of while Ukrainians civilians are terrorised brutally.









From mines to toys in Ukraine


A NATO project to disarm mines might be expanded across East Europe.




www.csmonitor.com













Ukrainian schools train for bomb alerts


How much explosive can this fluffy toy owl hold?This is what this Ukrainian bomb disposal serviceman asked astonished children in an emergency drill class in Kyiv. Law enforcement officers organized the training after a series of hoax bomb alerts forced evacuation of schools in the capital and...




news.yahoo.com


----------



## jaxadam

I saw my next door neighbor's wife outside yesterday and talked for a bit. She's Russian (I'm pretty sure) and he's Ukranian (I'm 100% sure). He's never really here because he owns a company that is headquartered in NYC, so he's up there a lot, but what I did not know is that he also has another major branch in Kyiv. Well, he was able to evacuate his whole staff over there which is pretty damn amazing. They are setting up a donation for children's clothes and toys and we have plenty of that stuff so we'll be giving them some older stuff we have. Hell, the way my kids act half the time I might just donate some of their current stuff!


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> Murdering the bastard then revolution seems to be the only solution
> 
> Else it'll never end, because eventually he runs out of conventional weapons and personnel and it's right back to the nuclear option


It worked for Bosnia. Will work here too, I'm all for it.



nickgray said:


> The whole NATO thing just makes no sense. NATO would wipe the floor with Russia in conventional warfare, and with nuclear warfare it doesn't matter who starts it, everybody loses.
> 
> It's ideological. You're not Russian, so you just don't get it, sorry. You don't have access to Russian news sources and commentators, or an understanding of Putin's propaganda, or of Russian history. Maybe in part it's about NATO, I don't know, perhaps that's what Russian generals are telling themselves when they pulled the trigger, but the core reason, without doubt, is an ideological one.
> 
> People also don't seem to get that Ukraine is not just a neighboring country, it's not even a "brother nation", it's closer than that. It's literally hacking off your own hand or something along those lines. NATO excuse *does not* in any way, shape, or form fly here.
> 
> You should also never ever forget that Russia is a dictatorship. By now it's clear that it's a fascist dictatorship. There's a government censorship agency, the TV channels are state-owned, the opposition figures are murdered, poisoned, jailed, etc. Putin and his cronies are in no way, shape, or form representing the will of the Russian people. It's literally illegal (I'm not joking) to call it a war in Russia, it's a "special operation".
> 
> 
> 
> Putin is a fascist dictator. There are no excuses for what is going on. End of story.


Finally someone who understands.


nickgray said:


> Sorry, it's way too much info to try to condense it into a forum post. You can either believe me or not, I suppose.
> 
> 
> 
> Not totally, but it's not the main point. Again, you need to understand the history behind Ukraine and Russia, you need to understand Putin's regime (kleptocracy, the ridiculously lavish official ceremonies, the propaganda machine... lots of things), you need to go and watch a bunch of recent interviews of quite a lot of prominent people and various commentators... The problem is that it's all in Russian.
> 
> You can read this juicy propaganda bit if you run it through google translate. It was accidentally posted at 26/02 and then quickly removed. Look up RIA news on google and look up Kiselyov. It's just the tip of the iceberg really.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Наступление России и нового мира
> 
> 
> Новый мир рождается на наших глазах. Военная операция России на Украине открыла новую эпоху — причем сразу в трех измерениях. И конечно, в четвертом,... РИА Новости, 26.02.2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> web.archive.org


Most of the west thinks this war is only 8 years old with no reguard to history and Ukraine stuck in manifactured famines while Russian leaders ate anything they wanted.


----------



## Alberto7

Can anyone confirm? Was sent to me by a Russian coworker.









Putin likens Western sanctions to war as Russian assault traps Ukrainian civilians


Russian President Vladimir Putin said Western sanctions were akin to war as his forces pressed their assault on Ukraine on Saturday for a 10th day and the IMF warned the conflict would have a "severe impact" on the global economy.




www.reuters.com


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> Ukraine has always been considered part of the Russosphere and Putin considered it to be "under his thumb". He had the necessary assets (Crimea & Donetsk) to assert influence and this was more than okay for him. He did not have a desire to control the totality of Ukraine as it would imply additional expenses so the "silent vassal" role was more than enough for his interpretation. Trying to join NATO when he was very explicit about repercussions was an incredibly stupid move as Russia is historically known for their "FAFO" policy.
> 
> Aside from that, I don't understand how you justify starting a war to potentially avoid a conflict? "Let's keep challenging Putin to the point it's certain he might invade us which would disqualify us from joining NATO, because you never know when he might actually invade". How does that make sense? And sure there was still infighting & friction in the nation itself, but it sure as shit was a lot better than what has been started now.
> 
> Western media keeps raving about "mUh BrAvE fRoNtLiNe LeAdEr ZeLeNsKyY" and meanwhile this asshole has never seen the frontline, reuses old border inspection pictures as propaganda (https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-ukraine-russia-idUSL1N2V02DG) and fled to Lviv (https://www.tbsnews.net/world/russian-state-duma-speaker-volodin-says-zelensky-lviv-376633) the first opportunity he got while dragging the rest of the population into a conflict nobody wanted:


Zelenski is out on the street with his own people without any shame or fear while Putin is putting a paranoid mile long table between him and other leaders excluding Ukraine. Stop smoking crack. 


You're just a troll and I will ignore any of your posts without reading into them because you're beyond a lost cause and you conveniently browse right over anything of substance, you only reply with the same dead beat horse you have the entire thread... 

You're a sad human being who will soon join the shame of Russia, Belarus and quite possible China soon...


----------



## mbardu

Alberto7 said:


> Can anyone confirm? Was sent to me by a Russian coworker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Putin likens Western sanctions to war as Russian assault traps Ukrainian civilians
> 
> 
> Russian President Vladimir Putin said Western sanctions were akin to war as his forces pressed their assault on Ukraine on Saturday for a 10th day and the IMF warned the conflict would have a "severe impact" on the global economy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com



This is real.
And since it's 2022, you can even watch a livestream of the shelling and fires at the plant.

What a time to be alive (not for that much longer tho).


----------



## Randy

Alberto7 said:


> Can anyone confirm? Was sent to me by a Russian coworker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Putin likens Western sanctions to war as Russian assault traps Ukrainian civilians
> 
> 
> Russian President Vladimir Putin said Western sanctions were akin to war as his forces pressed their assault on Ukraine on Saturday for a 10th day and the IMF warned the conflict would have a "severe impact" on the global economy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com


I heard the 'realtime' Telegram thread say it was getting shelled an hour or two ago, so I'd say this lines up.


----------



## Randy

Speaking of which, where did Big Brain go so he can explain what destroying a nuclear power plant has to do with freeing people from a neo nazi militia?

I hope the wind isn't blowing too hard his direction.


----------



## Alberto7

Ayayay... I don't have anything of much value or significant insight to add to the discussion, but this whole sucks big time. Civilians shouldn't need to pay the price for the petty squabbles of an old and paranoid idiot.

Interesting read, this thread, if extremely saddening.


----------



## BMFan30

LostTheTone said:


> Here's the thing dude - People like you say that Trump's diplomatic success in handling North Korea prove that he is anti-American, somehow. That his bullish, aggressive form of foreign policy that made every dictator back off a step or two is just "not the way we do things".
> 
> And then fast forward to today, when Russia has (again) invaded Ukraine, because the US has gone back to "the way we do things".
> 
> Germany has started paying the 2% of GDP for defense, btw. You remember that? When Trump said that NATO members needed to actually pay what they agreed to, if they expected America to come to their aid? Well, Germany decided to actually honor that again. Maybe if they had been doing that all along, and had a more bullish foreign policy approach, then Ukraine wouldn't be getting shelled.
> 
> In the 2020 election campaign, Joe Biden can be heard saying how he is the only candidate who knows how to handle Russia. In 2022, just over a year after he took office, Ukraine has been invaded by Russia. Draw your own conclusions.


It's true, Biden puffed his chest out so much saying he will stand up to "Bully Putin" when he has done as much or less as anyone else has already with sanctions and the help of resources which I'm grateful for but still, he made it seem like he will actually stand up to him like he said he would.


----------



## BMFan30

Drew said:


> Two thoughts, though.
> 
> 1) What was Trump's "diplomatic success" in North Korea? He gave them something they desperately wanted - attention, and recognition in the form of a formal heads of state meeting. And we got...?
> 
> 2) Putin _thought_ he could get away with invading Ukraine under Biden's watch. It's been just over a week. I wouldn't write the chapter on what lessons we can draw from this yet, when by all accounts it seems like things aren't going nearly as well for Putin as he expected. The international response has been pretty staggering, and while that hasn't translated into boots on the ground yet, the sanctions are absolutely decimating the Russian economy (their stock market has been closed since the invasion, but russian-linked overseas ADRs have implied a 50-60% decline, and preliminary high-frequency and market based indicator models are estimating an 11% hit to Russian GDP, and counting) , and the more blatantly Russia continues to target civilians, the more likely we DO start engaging militarily, even in limited ways like imposing a no-fly zone overt Ukraine (which will mean US fighters shooting down Russians when they invariably try to test our commitment).
> 
> Considering Trump is busy cheering Putin on, I don't think his ideas of how to "handle" Putin are what we want here. Not to kink-shame, of course.


I really hope he will do more soon because the second hand on a clock is a body on the ground in Ukraine right now...


----------



## ramses

4Eyes said:


> [...] as soon as Russian economy and army heal from this war, they'll target next countries. [...]



Putin has candidly stated this in the open multiple times over the years — he wants to recapture all the old territories. This is why it is a disgrace that countries like Germany decided to become energy-dependent on Russia.

It is truly angering that nations refuse to learn from history. Dictators cannot be appeased ... and this time we even decided to become dependent on an imperialistic autocracy.


----------



## Randy

Where's that fuckin convoy lately?


----------



## BMFan30

bostjan said:


> You mean by the USA not actively attacking unilaterally?
> 
> Or do you mean the UN not stepping in?
> 
> Because the UN never steps in when it's a permanent member up to evildoing. And when the USA steps in, everyone complains (rightfully) that the USA has no moral authority to be the world's police.
> 
> If we set the precedent that we can attack whomever we disagree with in this case, then Trump gets elected in 2024, what do you think happens next? I mean, I don't want to find out.
> 
> I agree it sucks, but I can't think of a good way out of the problem.


I don't feel like that since they are basically taking that authority already by having a military base in more countries than anyone else but they have only set sanctions like everyone else while bloodshed in Ukraine is still on the rise.


----------



## ramses

jaxadam said:


> [...] he's Ukranian (I'm 100% sure). [...] he owns a company that is headquartered in NYC, so he's up there a lot, but what I did not know is that he also has another major branch in Kyiv. Well, he was able to evacuate his whole staff over there which is pretty damn amazing. They are setting up a donation for children's clothes [...]



Fuck, that's impressive! You have an amazing neighbor.

Did you have a chance to ask when and why did he decide to evacuate his employees? Also, the logistics?


----------



## thebeesknees22

Randy said:


> I heard the 'realtime' Telegram thread say it was getting shelled an hour or two ago, so I'd say this lines up.


just saw that. that's crazy. Like ...legit crazy to hit a nuclear power plant. friggin' morons.


----------



## BMFan30

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Going to war isn’t a great alternative.


Going to war will inevitably happen after all of Ukraine is turned into a desert anyway, but the question stands why wait that long when the threat can be faced right now?


----------



## BMFan30

Putin was feeling nostalgic for the USSR, well he can have the real thing for at least the next ten years as he has a Holodomor of his own like the Ukrainian people have since he will have no one to fatten him up without lifting a god damn finger anytime soon. Let him become independent like the Ukrainians wanted for themselves before being denied their idependence though terrorist means by Russia.

Putin wants to have shit ambitions next to Stalin, Lenin & Hitler. Well he can have a grave next to them to complete his ambitions.

The only reason the Soviet Union worked was because everyone broke their backs working to build up the riches of Russia and pump them full of resources. Since Russians don't know how to make an honest living over there because all they know how to do is steal and be lazy as fuck. Since that's the only way Putin became one of the richest people, not through honest means.

How will they do that now that they will be forced to work honestly for themselves since all of their goods are imported? I was extremely shocked to find some of the goods I thought they provided themselves actually came from the west. They are fucked, their lines to a bank that leads to an empty ATM look like the lines to food during Ukraine's Holodomor.

Ukraine will suck their gut in and rebuild after being infiltrated and destroyed. Ukrainians live in hell right now where their spoon is too long to feed oneself but they band together and help feed and nourish each other for free right now. I can't say Russians know how to work together like Ukrainians since they can only reap the benefits of someone else's work, those god damn pigs.

They will be left to rob their neighbor from now on. Since the last meal provided by Ukraine went to teenage soldiers that went against them, but no more... Enough is enough...


----------



## jaxadam

ramses said:


> Fuck, that's impressive! You have an amazing neighbor.
> 
> Did you have a chance to ask when and why did he decide to evacuate his employees? Also, the logistics?



All I know right now is I saw the air conditioner guy out there late the other night fixing something (which is a constant thing in Florida, I feel like I seen an AC truck on my road every day), and he said he had to get that shit fixed pronto because the man was scooting up to NY Sunday on an emergency. I didn't really think anything about it at first. I'm assuming the evacuation was at the beginning of this week. I see her almost every day and have her number so I can ask.


----------



## Adieu

Alberto7 said:


> Can anyone confirm? Was sent to me by a Russian coworker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Putin likens Western sanctions to war as Russian assault traps Ukrainian civilians
> 
> 
> Russian President Vladimir Putin said Western sanctions were akin to war as his forces pressed their assault on Ukraine on Saturday for a 10th day and the IMF warned the conflict would have a "severe impact" on the global economy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com



Yes and no

Disturbing but not dire and the building in the picture ain't a reactor.

Energodar's population has tried an unarmed human blockade etc to keep Russian forces away earlier, they eventually got shot at, if I got it right and that was from the same place, one person's leg got blown off and everyone ran


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

mbardu said:


> This is real.
> And since it's 2022, you can even watch a livestream of the shelling and fires at the plant.
> 
> What a time to be alive (not for that much longer tho).


Is it real, or is it “real” like the Holocaust museum that apparently is fine?


----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> Where's that fuckin convoy lately?



Waiting for fuel and reinforcements from Belarus or stalling for tomorrow's expected mass conscription to start generating numbers

Somebody crunched the numbers and they just don't line up. 

Even if he magicked away their government and army tomorrow, Putin needs literally 20x more manpower AND collaborators on top of that or 30x more manpower without collaborators deployed to Ukraine if he means to "pacify" a large country of >40 million that happens to be highly armed and very pissed at him.

Deployed long-term.

And he doesn't have anywhere near that many troops available.

Also, his country is too large and too rich in enemies to pull any more existing troops to Ukraine, it would leave him beyond undefended.

He had BARELY enough to control a mostly-pro-takeover country with a few wingnut holdouts after a credible-ish regime change. But that was just a pipe dream.


----------



## DiezelMonster

Adieu said:


> China's not the real enemy
> 
> China's the real RIVAL. There is a huge difference.


That's why I put " " around actual. It's the western media saying things like "china panic" with regards to the situation.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Drew said:


> What world have you been living in?
> 
> You're aware Zelenskyy, the president of Ukraine, was the same president of Ukraine Trump got impeached over for threatening to withhold Congressionally-approved military aid unless Zelenskyy could drum up some dirt on Hunter Biden for Trump? And that Trump, who's spent the last week praising Putin to any reporter who'd stick a mic into his face, would have _defended _Zelenskyy against Putin's army? The same Putin he's been calling a "genius" for his strategy of calling this a peacekeeping mission?
> 
> If we're _lucky_, Trump wouldn't have done any more than praise Putin from the sidelines and make a few pointed comments about how Zelenskyy should have remembered who his friends were back in 2019, if he wanted to continue to get US support. More likely, this would have been the end of NATO.



Oh, come on. Loads of this is horribly mis-stated

Actually listen to what Trump said. 



> “Under Bush, Russia invaded Georgia. Under Obama, Russia took Crimea. Under Biden, Russia invaded Ukraine. I stand as the only president of the 21st century on whose watch Russia did not invade another country.”



That's not wrong.



> He asserted that Putin has suffered no repercussions beyond sanctions, which he has shrugged off for 25 years. “The problem is not that Putin is smart – which of course, he’s smart – but the real problem is that our leaders are dumb. They’ve so far allowed him to get away with this travesty and an assault on humanity.”
> 
> He added: “So sad. Putin is playing Biden like a drum and it’s not a pretty thing as somebody that loves our country to watch.”



This isn't wrong either.

I get that people blindly hate Trump but he was really correct about a lot of things. Putin HAS been very "smart", in that he has consistently achieved everything he wanted to achieve and advanced his own interests, and nobody has really tried to stop him. Putin annexed Crimea and got himself a nice new military base. Nothing of consequence happened. He openly poisoned people in London multiple times. Nothing happened. He spent months building up forces next to Ukraine. Nothing happened. Only now, when it's arguably too late, are western countries finally applying sanctions. Even then, it's likely IMO that Putin will still take Ukraine and install a puppet government there, with the conflict itself destroying the lives of so many civilians. It's incredibly tragic. It remains to be seen whether the sanctions make the cost greater than the benefit Putin gets from it.

And Trump, while certainly criticising NATO, was constantly arguing for strengthening it. When 80% of the members are not contributing the amount of $$ they said they would, that's a big problem. Europe was constantly downplaying threats and laughing at Trump, cutting their military spending because big daddy America would always come and look after them. That's a problem too. Trump also talked out against the Nordstream 2, and pointed out how it's insane that European countries are actually making themselves more reliant on Russia for energy supply. He offered to supply gas and oil from America and European politicians laughed at him. Now look how they suddenly changed their tune and they're acting all shocked, and are desperately increasing military spending and scrabbling to find alternative supplies of oil and gas.

End of the day, I think Trump has some very correct observations which are based in the real world rather than ideology. Russia is a "big" country in every meaningful definition (permanent UNSC seat, nuclear weapons - so maximum political and military power levels). Like it or not, you can't just push them around and expect nothing to happen. And Putin is emboldened by literally decades of being a total dick and the west just shrugging their shoulders and still buying his oil and gas, treating them nicely and letting them shit all over western institutions.

I have no idea what would have happened if Trump were still in power. Maybe he'd have parked US troops in the middle. Maybe he'd have served Ukraine up on a silver platter to appease Putin and avoid war. But in some ways that unpredictability wasn't a bad thing. Biden and others have absolutely made it explicitly clear that Ukraine is on it's own. To my mind, that spells out that Russia will eventually win this, and it's going to drag on and cost a lot more lives than it probably needs to.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Wc707 said:


> I keep seeing talks of Zelenskyy wanting Ukraine to be a no-fly zone, but that would immediately cause a declaration of war.
> How would this be an escalation, and what exactly are the parameters and ramifications of a no-fly zone?


Well, you can DECLARE something all you want. The idea is to say that nobody is allowed to operate within that region. That's straightforward enough.

But how are you going to ENFORCE a no-fly zone?

The only way is to put NATO member planes in the air, and anti-aircraft missiles on the ground, and enforcing it by shooting down Russian planes

Once NATO starts shooting Russian planes and killing pilots - that's WWIII


----------



## Flappydoodle

Adieu said:


> Waiting for fuel and reinforcements from Belarus or stalling for tomorrow's expected mass conscription to start generating numbers
> 
> Somebody crunched the numbers and they just don't line up.
> 
> Even if he magicked away their government and army tomorrow, Putin needs literally 20x more manpower AND collaborators on top of that or 30x more manpower without collaborators deployed to Ukraine if he means to "pacify" a large country of >40 million that happens to be highly armed and very pissed at him.
> 
> Deployed long-term.
> 
> And he doesn't have anywhere near that many troops available.
> 
> Also, his country is too large and too rich in enemies to pull any more existing troops to Ukraine, it would leave him beyond undefended.
> 
> He had BARELY enough to control a mostly-pro-takeover country with a few wingnut holdouts after a credible-ish regime change. But that was just a pipe dream.



I'd love to see those numbers, because I'm sceptical. 

40 million total population. Discount the women and the children, disabled and elderly. You're down to around 15 million fighting-aged men. Is every single one of them going to be willing to fight? I doubt it. And how many are actually trained and capable? There are around 1 million men who have done some sort of military service. And are the other men actually capable of organising and formulating tactics, communicating and coordinating, and operating the equipment? Can they actually be supplied with food, water, ammunition, fuel etc enough to be effective? I have no idea.

The ratio I heard from BBC is that you need a 5:1 ratio to successfully overcome an insurgency. So there's a big home field advantage for Ukranians. Combine that with all the shoulder-operated weapons shipped in by the West (stingers, Tridents etc) and they can certainly make it very ugly for the Russian advance. In Afghanistan and Iraq it was mostly guys with small arms and RPGs, which can't really hurt armour. The main weapon was IEDs and that made it very miserable for the Americans and British. So yeah, if every rooftop or street corner potentially has a Ukrainian with proper anti-tank weapons, that can be a big problem for Putin. However, running an insurgency campaign from a built-up European city is also hugely problematic. Especially when you have an enemy that gives zero fucks about just carpet bombing it again and again and again, which the US was never willing to do in Afghanistan. You risk entire cities being razed to the ground, and you still have millions of civilians caught up in the middle of this. I honestly struggle to think about the reality of it and whether either side can actually "win".


----------



## jaxadam

ramses said:


> Fuck, that's impressive! You have an amazing neighbor.
> 
> Did you have a chance to ask when and why did he decide to evacuate his employees? Also, the logistics?










So it sounds like he got about 50 of his peeps out of there. What a good boss. I will definitely think twice now about letting my dog take a dump in his yard. Although what I think she failed to mention was the use of a covert Ugandan special forces team.


----------



## High Plains Drifter

Damn, dude ^


----------



## ramses

jaxadam said:


> So it sounds like he got about 50 of his peeps out of there. What a good boss. I will definitely think twice now about letting my dog take a dump in his yard. Although what I think she failed to mention was the use of a covert Ugandan special forces team.



That's amazing. Your neighbor Alex intuited what was going to happen at the right time, and he chose to take the risk. You should get an investigative journalist to interview him.

By the way, thank you for figuring out these extra details.


----------



## ItWillDo

BMFan30 said:


> I wish I could find more sources on this... My source was on a segment of Ukrainian news I saw in passing so I could only dig these sources up below since I heard it elsewhere but I wouldn't be surprised, it's war.
> 
> It wasn't just toys they said. It was in boxes of chocolate, devices, phones and other objects they can fit explosives in discretely. Which prompted them to tell Ukrainians to not pick up any objects off the ground. Mines could also be placed anywhere.
> 
> Hey, and LOL at Russian problems that need to be taken care of while Ukrainians civilians are terrorised brutally.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From mines to toys in Ukraine
> 
> 
> A NATO project to disarm mines might be expanded across East Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.csmonitor.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukrainian schools train for bomb alerts
> 
> 
> How much explosive can this fluffy toy owl hold?This is what this Ukrainian bomb disposal serviceman asked astonished children in an emergency drill class in Kyiv. Law enforcement officers organized the training after a series of hoax bomb alerts forced evacuation of schools in the capital and...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.yahoo.com


Lmao this is such a garbage take and I really suspect and hope it's just your own vitriol, but if the local news are spreading such statements than they're trying to cause more harm than good.

As for the nuclear panic, it was a desperate attempt to get NATO involved as the plant manager confirmed there is nothing to worry about and that nuclear plants are to large extent built to survive bombing/fires/earthquakes/...


----------



## 4Eyes

ItWillDo said:


> Lmao this is such a garbage take and I really suspect and hope it's just your own vitriol, but if the local news are spreading such statements than they're trying to cause more harm than good.
> 
> As for the nuclear panic, it was a desperate attempt to get NATO involved as the plant manager confirmed there is nothing to worry about and that nuclear plants are to large extent built to survive bombing/fires/earthquakes/...


they're not non-destroyable either, continuous shelling can cause severe damage and Europe wide catastrophe. we can speculate about how long it will stand or what consequences would be. but actual fact is - shelling nuclear plants is against Geneva conventions, Putler is breaking international laws again. Not mentioning that Putlerists shooting at firefighters trying to get fire under control tells something about his "good" intensions, too.


----------



## LostTheTone

Flappydoodle said:


> Oh, come on. Loads of this is horribly mis-stated
> 
> Actually listen to what Trump said.
> 
> 
> 
> That's not wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't wrong either.
> 
> I get that people blindly hate Trump but he was really correct about a lot of things. Putin HAS been very "smart", in that he has consistently achieved everything he wanted to achieve and advanced his own interests, and nobody has really tried to stop him. Putin annexed Crimea and got himself a nice new military base. Nothing of consequence happened. He openly poisoned people in London multiple times. Nothing happened. He spent months building up forces next to Ukraine. Nothing happened. Only now, when it's arguably too late, are western countries finally applying sanctions. Even then, it's likely IMO that Putin will still take Ukraine and install a puppet government there, with the conflict itself destroying the lives of so many civilians. It's incredibly tragic. It remains to be seen whether the sanctions make the cost greater than the benefit Putin gets from it.
> 
> And Trump, while certainly criticising NATO, was constantly arguing for strengthening it. When 80% of the members are not contributing the amount of $$ they said they would, that's a big problem. Europe was constantly downplaying threats and laughing at Trump, cutting their military spending because big daddy America would always come and look after them. That's a problem too. Trump also talked out against the Nordstream 2, and pointed out how it's insane that European countries are actually making themselves more reliant on Russia for energy supply. He offered to supply gas and oil from America and European politicians laughed at him. Now look how they suddenly changed their tune and they're acting all shocked, and are desperately increasing military spending and scrabbling to find alternative supplies of oil and gas.
> 
> End of the day, I think Trump has some very correct observations which are based in the real world rather than ideology. Russia is a "big" country in every meaningful definition (permanent UNSC seat, nuclear weapons - so maximum political and military power levels). Like it or not, you can't just push them around and expect nothing to happen. And Putin is emboldened by literally decades of being a total dick and the west just shrugging their shoulders and still buying his oil and gas, treating them nicely and letting them shit all over western institutions.
> 
> I have no idea what would have happened if Trump were still in power. Maybe he'd have parked US troops in the middle. Maybe he'd have served Ukraine up on a silver platter to appease Putin and avoid war. But in some ways that unpredictability wasn't a bad thing. Biden and others have absolutely made it explicitly clear that Ukraine is on it's own. To my mind, that spells out that Russia will eventually win this, and it's going to drag on and cost a lot more lives than it probably needs to.



Well said.

I know that people hate Trump's style, both personal and political. But his "tough on friends, friendly to enemies" approach was certainly a change of pace, and a welcome one if you ask me.

It wasnt that long ago that Secretary of State Hilary Clinton was talking about putting a No Fly Zone over Syria, to shoot down Russian jets. Can you imagine?

Americas "friends" in Europe constantly talked down America and American power and all the while continued to presume that the Americans would always come and die for them, without them even having to pay for their part. 

You don't see Poland and Estonia shitting on the US, nor do you see them stopping their defense spending. Why? Because they can feel the breath of Russia on their necks, while the Germans try to become a superpower with no army.

How does it look to Russia when Germany has a run down army and also is buying more and more Russia gas, and building a specific pipeline so that even if something dreadful were to happen to, say, Ukraine the gas can keep flowing? 

Contrast to the US under Trump - Energy independent, and increasing fracking and drilling. Not spoiling for a fight, but ready to go to war with everything they have tomorrow. They don't need Russia for anything. But they also talk softly the Russia and act like Russia is a big deal. They flatter Putin, but carry a really big stick.

Like I said before, weakness is a provocation. 

And yet we still get this hilarious garbage about Trump somehow being a Russian agent, that Putin won the 2016 elections (which is literally the same thing as Trump saying 2020 was rigged). But the same people who say that also want us to keep buying gas and oil from Russia, while also calling them bastards.

Trumps approach was to stop buying gas and oil, but also to call them friends. Trump tried to stop funding Russia's war machine, while smoothing their feathers so it didn't seem like an insult. And yet Trump is called every name under the sun anyway.

It is simply crazy to me that to many people, both in the US and abroad, think that the only way the "control" Putin is to hand him money, and be dependant on his exports. That is literally the opposite. That is how to prolong and embolden the Russian regime.


----------



## LostTheTone

ItWillDo said:


> Lmao this is such a garbage take and I really suspect and hope it's just your own vitriol, but if the local news are spreading such statements than they're trying to cause more harm than good.
> 
> As for the nuclear panic, it was a desperate attempt to get NATO involved as the plant manager confirmed there is nothing to worry about and that nuclear plants are to large extent built to survive bombing/fires/earthquakes/...



Yeah, but Russia is still shelling a nuclear plant.

And when I see anyone from outside Ukraine, sitting safe at home, saying they are "not amused" by Ukraine "misleading" about this, I see someone who has lost the fucking plot.

It really doesn't matter whether or not a nuclear disaster is likely, shelling a nuclear reactor is a really terrible idea. The fact that Ukraine is playing this literal war crime up to attract attention is neither here nor there.

It sounds like someone who is safe from the conflict is saying "Pfft, there's not going to be a meltdown you babies, so stop complaining and let the shells fall on you".


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> tomorrow's expected mass conscription



Oh shit, I hadn't heard about that.

Forget about anything else, if Putin has to call up fresh recruits today (day 9) then this war is not going well for him.

I'm not even sure that a round of conscription even helps him - The infrastructure needed to transport and equip green lads is still really substantial. What was it Moltke said; "the deployment of millions cannot be improvised".


----------



## destroyerdogs




----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> Lmao this is such a garbage take and I really suspect and hope it's just your own vitriol, but if the local news are spreading such statements than they're trying to cause more harm than good.
> 
> As for the nuclear panic, it was a desperate attempt to get NATO involved as the plant manager confirmed there is nothing to worry about and that nuclear plants are to large extent built to survive bombing/fires/earthquakes/...



So Zelensky held a pressconference yesterday in Kyiv with plenty of journalists, how about admitting that Russian State Duma Speaker Volodin is a crappy source after all?


----------



## possumkiller

tedtan said:


> I fully agree.
> 
> I just meant that these actions are no longer accidental, they’re criminal, and the criminals must be held to account. From the lieutenants and captains in the field following their orders all the way up the chain of command, they’re criminals and must be held to account.


Yeah right. People are still hunting down nazis after 80 years and putting them on trial, meanwhile the boomers who did shit like My Lai get to brag about it the rest of their days. Seems like war crimes don't mean that much after WW2.


----------



## possumkiller

Also, weren't people really confident about Chernobyl being all modern and safe and everything until it suddenly started to explode?


----------



## 4Eyes

possumkiller said:


> Also, weren't people really confident about Chernobyl being all modern and safe and everything until it suddenly started to explode?


that's what soviet regime said, I wouldn't bet my balls on it.. they also denied something happened for about a week, till someone in Sweden noticed increased radiation in the air and world started to ask. They continuously prove that world cannot trust anything their regime say.


----------



## LostTheTone

possumkiller said:


> Yeah right. People are still hunting down nazis after 80 years and putting them on trial, meanwhile the boomers who did shit like My Lai get to brag about it the rest of their days. Seems like war crimes don't mean that much after WW2.



Well... That's complicated.

Firstly - The actual Nazis are kinda the consensus bad guys of the 20th century. Everyone after the war hated the Nazis and wanted to punish those who escaped. And that's a pretty reasonable position to take, since they are the literal Nazis. Also Israel (understandably) kinda held a grudge and sent it's proper intelligence agents out to find Nazis, with Eichman being their biggest win, although it is rumoured that if they had shown up to an Argentinian farm a week earlier they would have caught Mengele. The Soviets didnt do so much international hunting, but they certainly enacted brutal reprisals on any Nazis found in their territory. Suffice to say, the images of Auswitz stick in the memory and in fairness they are a very unique form of evil.

Secondly - While Stalin and Mao both killed more of their own people, they didn't live long enough to face international justice once their regimes collapsed. Neither did their officials who organised the Holodomor and the Great Leap Forward, respectively. These were appalling things, but justice could only be delivered in defeat, and the West wasn't super keen to start the next world war in 1950.

The criticisms of the Neuremburg trials as "victors justice" are somewhat true, but Albert Speer certainly was not going to appear in court on trial for his life unless Germany was defeated, was he? One of the reasons why Hitler's generals never turned on him, even to the last days of the war, was because everyone senior in the regime was on the hook for appalling crimes, even more so than even the Allies knew at the time.

In the post-war world... We did have a clearer sense of what war crimes and crimes against humanity were, but they still weren't clearly defined at the sub-holocaust level. On top of that, the big conflicts that the west was involved in, in Korea and Vietnam, were indecisive. There wasn't really a time where justice could easily be sought by either side.

Vietnam is also good example of why prosecuting either your own troops, or pressing charges as a third party, is really hard. It was a guerilla war, and an especially brutal one. We all kinda know that the rules have to be different when you have soldiers, civilians, irregular ununiformed fighters, and enemy soldiers, all existing in the same space.

Throughout most of human history it has been accepted practise that pretending to be a civilian then attacking soldiers results in horrendous reprisals. In fact, doing so is itself a breach of Geneva convention. That doesn't excuse summarily shooting everyone who you suspect of being a vietcong but it does add a lot of complexity.

This is a seriously confused environment, with a lot of uncertainty. Making the wrong decision about who is hostile may mean that you die, or watching friends die. While events like My Lai certainly deserved some proper punishments, most of the civilians killed by the US/SV forces were accidental or incidental. Sometimes bombs get dropped in the wrong place, and sometimes civilians just do odd stuff that freaks out tightly wound GIs.

If you're going to prosecute anyone, you need names and times and dates, but witnesses are not easy to find and there often isn't hard evidence, just testimony. And traumatised people who personally knew the dead guy aren't likely to give the benefit of the doubt to the soldiers who may well have acted appropriately enough. Such prosecutions are prone to monday morning quarterbacking about what could or should have happened, even years later.

This is in large part why the US ignores the ICC. Because even with the best intentions, wars are really messy. We might like it if every soldier always thought hard about who he might hit before he pulls the trigger. But the other guy trying to kill him won't hesitate. You can never know for sure, but you have a whole apparatus above you to tell you (as best as they can) where the enemy is and how to react. You can't run an army if the soldiers won't fight without having a meeting about it. You can't have soldiers being terrified that they may go to prison for life just for doing what they have been trained to do, and following lawful orders.

And since there is no victorious power to force the issue on America, and anyone who might be taken seriously at the ICC depends on NATO to defend them... This stuff is only rolled out to refer to the other side of whatever war we are involved in.

To be fair, it isn't done lightly. There really was a genocide in Yugoslavia. NATO didn't act perfectly in Bosnia/Kosovo but there was a real genocide going on. And while NATO certainly did kill some civilians, it was generally agreed that no-one on the NATO side was going to get prosecuted for it.

Contrasted to My Lai, where it is almost certain that the US troops were ordered to go in to the village and kill literally everyone. It's disputed if that was really the order, but it seems certain that the troops believed that this was the order. That is definitely a war crime, and the white wash of charges was comical. But the people giving out the orders wern't even charged. The troops should have faced justice, but clearly this was a bigger problem.

Looking at atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan, I don't believe there have been incidents quite like that. There have certainly been plural deaths, but it tends to be troops executing reprisals against whoever they could find to hurt, following an IED or similar. Obviously thats just as awful, but it is a slightly different thing to generals saying "Yeah shoot them all", which is what it used to be before the second world war. Soldiers should expect to be prosecuted for this, and their squad mates should call the fucking MPs. Armies aren't perfect but there has to be discipline.

I don't really have a conclusion here, honestly. I'm just saying that it really is complex and difficult.

And I think it's important to separate out concerns about previous atrocities, which we should all care about, from the discussion about present ones and what we should or shouldn't do about it. In international relations there is no-one who is without sin, but stones definitely will be cast. Whatever Western troops have done before, the Russians are doing bad things now and will continue until someone stops them.

The people who are saying (and I'm not accusing you of saying this, just that its a common enough thing being said today) "Ah but we are no better, so what right do we have to stop them massacring civilians?" have imbibed moral relativity to an obscene degree. Whataboutery is, in effect, an accusation of hypocrisy, but I am ok with being a hypocrite on this issue.


----------



## StevenC

possumkiller said:


> Also, weren't people really confident about Chernobyl being all modern and safe and everything until it suddenly started to explode?


No. No one thought that, and even then Chernobyl was almost a comedy of errors. It didn't suddenly start to explode, people that didn't know what they were doing made the wrong decision at several steps of the process. Like catastrophically wrong decisions.

That's not to say Chernobyl wasn't very flawed in design, but the disaster was caused by human error.


----------



## possumkiller

StevenC said:


> No. No one thought that, and even then Chernobyl was almost a comedy of errors. It didn't suddenly start to explode, people that didn't know what they were doing made the wrong decision at several steps of the process. Like catastrophically wrong decisions.
> 
> That's not to say Chernobyl wasn't very flawed in design, but the disaster was caused by human error.


Humans who were very confident they were not making errors until it became clear that they were making errors.


----------



## StevenC

possumkiller said:


> Humans who were very confident they were not making errors until it became clear that they were making errors.


Nope, people that weren't trained adequately setup a test under improper conditions, then let the test get out of hand, then didn't make the right decisions to slow the reaction. Anyone who was properly trained, or understood the design and safeguards in place would not have caused that meltdown. No one thought it was a good idea to disable automatic shutdowns, but they did that anyway.

Information was withheld from operators, and the information that was provided wasn't followed.


----------



## LostTheTone

StevenC said:


> Nope, people that weren't trained adequately setup a test under improper conditions, then let the test get out of hand, then didn't make the right decisions to slow the reaction. Anyone who was properly trained, or understood the design and safeguards in place would not have caused that meltdown. No one thought it was a good idea to disable automatic shutdowns, but they did that anyway.
> 
> Information was withheld from operators, and the information that was provided wasn't followed.



i dunno - I think we shouldn't be too gung ho about saying this couldn't happen again because Soviet operators were trash and we're real smart and have it figured out. 

You're right that Chernobyl was a human created disaster, but we aren't immune to hubris.


----------



## StevenC

LostTheTone said:


> i dunno - I think we shouldn't be too gung ho about saying this couldn't happen again because Soviet operators were trash and we're real smart and have it figured out.
> 
> You're right that Chernobyl was a human created disaster, but we aren't immune to hubris.


That's not what I said though. Systems cause accidents and systems prevent accidents. The systems in Chernobyl are what caused the problems (along with a design that made the required systems ruthless). The same problem isn't possible in newer reactor types, and provided the systems are followed nuclear power plants are safer than non nuclear power plants.

It's not about hubris. It's about making and following good procedures.


----------



## Randy

StevenC said:


> provided the systems are followed


Thats a pretty big caveat.


----------



## bostjan

The Chernobyl disaster was triggered by a test that they should not have been doing. It is correct to state that it wouldn't have happened with a modern reactor design, but honestly it wouldn't have happened with the design they used if they hadn't tried to run such aggressive tests, either. There are still at least half a dozen large channel type reactors, similar to Chernobyl, with the same extremely high positive void coefficients, in operation as of 2022.

EDIT: TL;DR - Chernobyl was <1% caused by the people who designed the reactor and probably >80% caused by the people who operated the reactor.


----------



## tedtan

possumkiller said:


> Yeah right. People are still hunting down nazis after 80 years and putting them on trial, meanwhile the boomers who did shit like My Lai get to brag about it the rest of their days. Seems like war crimes don't mean that much after WW2.


I realize we haven’t handled war criminals properly in the past, but that doesn’t mean that we are doomed to repeat the past. The past is there so we can learn from it so that we don’t repeat those past mistakes. And while I don’t hold much hope that the western governments will take this approach, it is still important to set the precedent moving forward.


----------



## possumkiller

tedtan said:


> I realize we haven’t handled war criminals properly in the past, but that doesn’t mean that we are doomed to repeat the past. The past is there so we can learn from it so that we don’t repeat those past mistakes. And while I don’t hold much hope that the western governments will take this approach, it is still important to set the precedent moving forward.


I'm just saying if we have the power to prosecute war criminals from the current war and we have the power to still prosecute war criminals from WW2, we should hunt down and prosecute the criminals from the wars in between as well. It's a really huge gap where we let people get away with it.


----------



## Adieu

possumkiller said:


> I'm just saying if we have the power to prosecute war criminals from the current war and we have the power to still prosecute war criminals from WW2, we should hunt down and prosecute the criminals from the wars in between as well. It's a really huge gap where we let people get away with it.



It's a nice though, but a very "tomorrow" issue. The "today" agenda is kinda busy at the moment and the more active calls to pay attention to other wrongs very much appear to be intentional campaigns to get the world off today's villains' besieged backs.


----------



## Cyanide_Anima

The amount of Trump and Putin simping in this thread by a few folks is disconcerting.


----------



## bostjan

So, short of finding a genie in a bottle who grants wishes, what are your thoughts on a potential way out of this mess?


----------



## Adieu

Stall the war in Ukraine with endless monetary support and military kit, to be supplied to locals, foreign volunteers, and foreign "volunteers", while throwing billions and the world's best propagandists and insurgency specialists at overthrowing Putin's regime from within


----------



## 4Eyes

4Eyes said:


> that's what soviet regime said, I wouldn't bet my balls on it.. they also denied something happened for about a week, till someone in Sweden noticed increased radiation in the air and world started to ask. They continuously prove that world cannot trust anything their regime say.


Based on recent news Putlerists are not allowing to create green coridors for humanitarian help - something they agreed to allow 2 days ago..f'in war criminals


----------



## Adieu

His biggest bugbear has always been a Ukrainian-style "Maidan" (literally square/plaza, has come to refer to a demonstration large and enthusiastic enough to produce regime change), allegedly NATO-engineered

I say... good idea, thanks for the tip Mr. Putler!


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> Stall the war in Ukraine with endless monetary support and military kit, to be supplied to locals, foreign volunteers, and foreign "volunteers", while throwing billions and the world's best propagandists and insurgency specialists at overthrowing Putin's regime from within


Maybe I shouldn't ask, but what's the difference between foreign volunteers and foreign "volunteers?"

What if the world's best propagandists are already working for Putin?


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> The Chernobyl disaster was triggered by a test that they should not have been doing. It is correct to state that it wouldn't have happened with a modern reactor design, but honestly it wouldn't have happened with the design they used if they hadn't tried to run such aggressive tests, either. There are still at least half a dozen large channel type reactors, similar to Chernobyl, with the same extremely high positive void coefficients, in operation as of 2022.
> 
> EDIT: TL;DR - Chernobyl was <1% caused by the people who designed the reactor and probably >80% caused by the people who operated the reactor.



According to NASA officials, the probability of the Challenger disaster was 1 in 100,000, with some individual components failure rate believed to be 1 in 100,000,000. They also claimed that when O-Rings only burned a third of the way through, this denoted a safety factor of 3, even though the O-Rings were failing, and were not supposed to burn at all. They kept telling themselves it was safe.

These wildly unrealistic numbers led them to launch Challenger at a temperature below that of the lowest ever successful launch, even though the engineering team said it was too cold and so dangerous.

The launch engineers believed that the risks of operating shuttles generally was something like 0.5% to 2% per launch. Which was pretty close to true. Out of 130 launches, 2 shuttles exploded. The engineers understood the risks. Management though were the ones who made the decisions and were utterly convinced that they could launch shuttles every day for a hundred years with no losses.

The problem with Chernobyl wasn't that the engineers and managers were idiots who didn't know what they were doing. It was that they did not correctly understand what the risks were and how they multiplied together. They had a fundamental belief that what they were doing would work out fine. That's why they did it. As it turns out, it would be hard to come up with a better way to demolish the reactor. But they thought it was fine.

It's not just about designing better - That does help, of course - But the world has a habit of designing a better idiot to break things.


----------



## Adieu

Part of Putin's Ukraine fixation has always been that a neighboring country with Russian-speaking veterans of successful protests could engineer his own downfall from within.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Maybe I shouldn't ask, but what's the difference between foreign volunteers and foreign "volunteers?"
> 
> What if the world's best propagandists are already working for Putin?



"Volunteers" as in active duty servicemen of friendly nations who don't wish to officially get involved, but allow (en masse) or order (typically on a small scale, for elites or specialists) their guys to enlist in foreign volunteer units

It can vary from letting people take a leave of absence and telling them where to go all the way to ordering them (typically for something small in number but devastatingly effective, like pilots of donated aircraft or air defense system operators)


----------



## tedtan

bostjan said:


> So, short of finding a genie in a bottle who grants wishes, what are your thoughts on a potential way out of this mess?


Massive efforts to turn the Russian people against Putin and encourage a coup combined with the assassination of Putin and his regime. That last part can’t be done above the board, but it can still be done.


----------



## nightflameauto

Yeah, where we're at now it doesn't feel like there's much the west can do to stop the bleeding short-term. Internal actors taking down Putin and his regime are about our best shot.

Read an interesting take in a comment on another site I frequent. Their theory was that Putin started this not as an attempt at unification, but as a punishment against those who broke the old USSR apart. In that person's head, Putin literally wants to punish ALL of Russia for allowing that dissolution to happen in the first place. And his end-goal is to kill off as many "bad faith actors" as he can both in Ukraine and Russia.

Interesting theory, and would sorta/kinda fit what appears to be a nearly incompetent start on the surface.


----------



## Randy

Cyanide_Anima said:


> The amount of Trump and Putin simping in this thread by a few folks is disconcerting.


Bolton: "We didn’t sanction Nord Stream 2…we should have, we should have brought the project to an end. We did impose sanctions on Russian oligarchs and several others because of their sales of S-400 antiaircraft systems to other countries. *But in almost every case, the sanctions were imposed with Trump complaining about it saying we were being too hard. The fact is that he barely knew where Ukraine was. He once asked John Kelly, his second chief of staff, if Finland were a part of Russia.* It is just not accurate to say that Trump’s behavior somehow deterred the Russians. I think the evidence is that Russia didn’t feel that their military was ready."


----------



## 4Eyes

Adieu said:


> "Volunteers" as in active duty servicemen of friendly nations who don't wish to officially get involved, but allow (en masse) or order (typically on a small scale, for elites or specialists) their guys to enroll in foreign volunteer units


As far as I've seen the news - countries which allowed their citizens to join UKR to fight against RU made it clear, that people in active duty are not allowed to do so, as it would effectively mean joining war by NATO


----------



## Randy

4Eyes said:


> As far as I've seen the news - countries which allowed their citizens to join UKR to fight against RU made it clear, that people in active duty are not allowed to do so, as it would effectively mean joining war by NATO


I think Adieu's point is to_ wink wink_ not ask where they decided to go on vacation. That's what Putin did with the last incursion into Ukraine a couple years when dead Russian kept turning up and he said "Oh well I can't help what my soldiers choose to do on their free time".


----------



## 4Eyes

Randy said:


> I think Adieu's point is to_ wink wink_ not ask where they decided to go on vacation. That's what Putin did with the last incursion into Ukraine a couple years when dead Russian kept turning up and he said "Oh well I can't help what my soldiers choose to do on their free time".


I got it, but everyone is scared to give him the smallest reason to blame NATO for joining the conflict. Even the military help happens without single NATO foot crossing the border (at least officially)


----------



## oversteve

tedtan said:


> Massive efforts to turn the Russian people against Putin and encourage a coup combined with the assassination of Putin and his regime. That last part can’t be done above the board, but it can still be done.


I'm not sure that persuading people there is achievable short term, many of them believe in Mother-Russia supremacy stuff. Like when end of WW2 in general is a day of remembrance with the idea of "never again" in Russia it's a big feast with a slogan "we can repeat". Even pro-european social polls show some nasty results of Putin's support up to 60-70% among his people and it even rised after the invasion started. Many people are dumbed down by propaganda and those who are not simply don't care or are afraid of being persecuted by the state. 

So a coup by local oligarchs is probably the easiest and fastest solution.


----------



## oversteve

Randy said:


> I think Adieu's point is to_ wink wink_ not ask where they decided to go on vacation. That's what Putin did with the last incursion into Ukraine a couple years when dead Russian kept turning up and he said "Oh well I can't help what my soldiers choose to do on their free time".


Someone from EU authorities suggested that we should be given some planes with the "volunteering" pilots and we should give them our citizenship making it look like Ukrainians fighting for Ukraine.


----------



## Randy

4Eyes said:


> I got it, but everyone is scared to give him the smallest reason to blame NATO for joining the conflict. Even the military help happens without single NATO foot crossing the border (at least officially)


To be clear, there are zero good options right now and even less options that don't have a significant chance of mass extinction.


----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


> Bolton: "We didn’t sanction Nord Stream 2…we should have, we should have brought the project to an end. We did impose sanctions on Russian oligarchs and several others because of their sales of S-400 antiaircraft systems to other countries. *But in almost every case, the sanctions were imposed with Trump complaining about it saying we were being too hard. The fact is that he barely knew where Ukraine was. He once asked John Kelly, his second chief of staff, if Finland were a part of Russia.* It is just not accurate to say that Trump’s behavior somehow deterred the Russians. I think the evidence is that Russia didn’t feel that their military was ready."



...That quote _perfectly _backs up the claim that Trump preferred to be friends with Russia, while making the US less dependant on them and maintaining military readiness.

And do you really think that Russia selling a SAM system on the international market, something that American and European countries do all the time, including to repressive regimes like Bahrain and Saudi, is something which is disgusting and we cannot stand for?

The people who are saying that Trump did not deter Russia have no answer for why Russian invasions happened on Bush's watch, on Obama's watch, and now on Biden's watch, but not on Trump's watch. Are we saying that the Crimean invasion was such an exersion that they couldn't possibly invade anywhere for 8 years? Except... When they invaded this time, their troops weren't actually ready anyway! 

Look, everyone talked about a need to return to "business as usual" and "adults back in the room". And when we got back that, Russia invaded somewhere again.


----------



## sleewell

it makes no sense to me why they were firing on that nuclear power plant yesterday for a sustained period of time. they want to take over Ukraine so why on earth would you want to start off with nuclear disaster?

all I can think of is just straight up gross incompetence which quite frankly is terrifying when it comes to nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants. 


it would be really great if all sides didn't have nukes and we could just invade russia and wipe putin off the map. he cant even organize a proper invasion of Ukraine, I bet the US would destroy him in less than a day.


----------



## bostjan

IDK, it sounds like there would potentially be a long long list of unintended consequences with backing an assassination or sending non-active military "volunteers." There's being brave and then there's being dumb and shouting "YOLO."



oversteve said:


> So a coup by local oligarchs is probably the easiest and fastest solution.


Hundreds of people were arrested in SPB a couple of days ago for disorderly conduct. There are over 8000 such arrests across Russia since last week. Seems like a lot more protesting than anything seen before.

But the bigger question is whether any of it will mean anything. Putin could probably arrest everyone who so much as sneers at his portrait, but at some point, either the prisons will overflow or Putin will stop (or be stopped). The avenues for world governments to take to affect any change, though, all seem pretty slow. The USA should have stopped imports from Russia in response to this a week ago, but they're still only just at the point where congress is kicking around the idea. It could be weeks more before anything happens. Governments in the West could be putting more economic pressure on other governments that are friendly toward Putin, but that will take even longer to have any effect on Putin directly. But the longer the West sits around pondering how much sacrifice it's willing to make economically, the longer it will take for the pressure to be felt in the Kremlin, and the more likely Russia will succeed at whatever the hell it's trying to accomplish here.


----------



## Randy

LostTheTone said:


> have no answer for why Russian invasions happened on Bush's watch, on Obama's watch, and now on Biden's watch, but not on Trump's watch.


Because they were making progress chipping away at the West from within. Victory without bloodshed.

Another quote:

*Reynolds: *_And then there’s the nuclear element. Many people have thought that we’d never see a large ground war in Europe or a direct confrontation between NATO and Russia, because it could quickly escalate into a nuclear conflict. How close are we getting to that?

*Hill:* Well, we’re right there. Basically, what President Putin has said quite explicitly in recent days is that if anybody interferes in Ukraine, they will be met with a response that they’ve “never had in [their] history.” And he has put Russia’s nuclear forces on high alert. So he’s making it very clear that nuclear is on the table.

Putin tried to warn Trump about this, but I don’t think Trump figured out what he was saying. In one of the last meetings between Putin and Trump when I was there, Putin was making the point that: “Well you know, Donald, we have these hypersonic missiles.” And Trump was saying, “Well, we will get them too.” Putin was saying, “Well, yes, you will get them eventually, but we’ve got them first.” There was a menace in this exchange. Putin was putting us on notice that if push came to shove in some confrontational environment that the nuclear option would be on the table._

Again, these aren't "never Trumpers" these are people that worked for him, and every anecdote floats around between he was either too stupid to know what was happening around him or he was actively enabling it.

It's also worth noting two of the people you mention had an 8-year window for Russia to do some bullshit (which they tend to do quite often) and Trump only had a four year window, along with all the other reasons "nothing happened" (besides hacking and phishing the west to undermine them for 6 years in the wide open by compromising one of their leaders).


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> ...That quote _perfectly _backs up the claim that Trump preferred to be friends with Russia, while making the US less dependant on them and maintaining military readiness.
> 
> And do you really think that Russia selling a SAM system on the international market, something that American and European countries do all the time, including to repressive regimes like Bahrain and Saudi, is something which is disgusting and we cannot stand for?
> 
> The people who are saying that Trump did not deter Russia have no answer for why Russian invasions happened on Bush's watch, on Obama's watch, and now on Biden's watch, but not on Trump's watch. Are we saying that the Crimean invasion was such an exersion that they couldn't possibly invade anywhere for 8 years? Except... When they invaded this time, their troops weren't actually ready anyway!
> 
> Look, everyone talked about a need to return to "business as usual" and "adults back in the room". And when we got back that, Russia invaded somewhere again.


Someday, an asteroid will come barreling toward the planet, and someone out there will blame Obama for it, and someone else out there will blame Trump. 

This is a problem that has everything to do with Putin being Putin. No one had to twist his arm into shelling Kiev. He just wanted to. Not everything that happens in the world is a direct result of a US presidential election. We simply are not that important over here.


----------



## LostTheTone

sleewell said:


> it makes no sense to me why they were firing on that nuclear power plant yesterday for a sustained period of time. they want to take over Ukraine so why on earth would you want to start off with nuclear disaster?
> 
> all I can think of is just straight up gross incompetence which quite frankly is terrifying when it comes to nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants.
> 
> 
> it would be really great if all sides didn't have nukes and we could just invade russia and wipe putin off the map. he cant even organize a proper invasion of Ukraine, I bet the US would destroy him in less than a day.



Almost certainly true - The Russian military is not all its cracked up to be. But it is large, and the technology related parts are well equipped. They are a distinctly second tier force. But they are still large and well equipped. Ukraine can hold them up, because they have become unexpectedly well equipped too, but size will eventually be the winner.

The NATO armies are very focused on quality, and they really are marvels. Smaller than Russia, but the doctrine is wild and ambitious, and backed with the technology to carry it off. It's called Full Spectrum Dominance, and it involves denying all Russian sensor platforms (including satellites) using that to win air superiority, then using that to blunt Russian attacks and attack logistics from the air. This why NATO is so keen on stealth technology. And then ground forces win battles of movement with great intel delivered in real time and pick them apart.

NATO can really fucking bring it, they've spent decades obsessively focused on how to defeat Russia/USSR in a conventional battle. 

But its all been kind of a waste, because NATO will almost certainly never fight a peer army. The hope is that they are so good that they don't need to.


----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


> Because they were making progress chipping away at the West from within. Victory without bloodshed.



...You do understand the problem is the bloodshed, right?

And all claims of Russian subversion are literal conspiracy theories.


----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> I think Adieu's point is to_ wink wink_ not ask where they decided to go on vacation. That's what Putin did with the last incursion into Ukraine a couple years when dead Russian kept turning up and he said "Oh well I can't help what my soldiers choose to do on their free time".



Pretty much

Russian opposition dubbed them Ихтамнеты (The Theyrenottheres)


----------



## 4Eyes

sleewell said:


> it makes no sense to me why they were firing on that nuclear power plant yesterday for a sustained period of time. they want to take over Ukraine so why on earth would you want to start off with nuclear disaster?


I want to believe they're not that stupid, but their strategy is to scare civilians - occupy cities,cut of supplies - water, food,electricity, shell civilian targets, don't allow for any humanitarian help and let people starve and freeze until people surrender. Doing what they are best at for centuries


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> IDK, it sounds like there would potentially be a long long list of unintended consequences with backing an assassination or sending non-active military "volunteers." There's being brave and then there's being dumb and shouting "YOLO."
> 
> 
> Hundreds of people were arrested in SPB a couple of days ago for disorderly conduct. There are over 8000 such arrests across Russia since last week. Seems like a lot more protesting than anything seen before.
> 
> But the bigger question is whether any of it will mean anything. Putin could probably arrest everyone who so much as sneers at his portrait, but at some point, either the prisons will overflow or Putin will stop (or be stopped). The avenues for world governments to take to affect any change, though, all seem pretty slow. The USA should have stopped imports from Russia in response to this a week ago, but they're still only just at the point where congress is kicking around the idea. It could be weeks more before anything happens. Governments in the West could be putting more economic pressure on other governments that are friendly toward Putin, but that will take even longer to have any effect on Putin directly. But the longer the West sits around pondering how much sacrifice it's willing to make economically, the longer it will take for the pressure to be felt in the Kremlin, and the more likely Russia will succeed at whatever the hell it's trying to accomplish here.



Sadly, no, NOT a lot more protesting

Just a much much higher % of peaceful protesters getting hauled away in prisoner transport trucks

And they were saying they'd implement 6 year criminal sentences for "no war" demonstrations and 15 (!) years for "distribution of falsehoods about military actions" (= reporting or discussing casualties or atrocities or anything not 100% identical to state media reports is pretty much identical to treason)

Just woke up haven't heard yet it they passed, but it was supposed to be passed by Duma (Russian rubber stamp congress) today


----------



## bostjan

If Russia has some sort of EMP weapon (which they almost certainly have and maybe know how to use), and NATO pulls out their computer-assisted tactical weapons for an all-out war, the whole thing could get super messy.

I could see Russia somehow winning WW3 simply because they're missiles and stuff are guided by mechanical timers and pulleys and NATO/UK/USA/everyoneelse's stuff is controlled by EPROMs and computers, and Russia somehow figures out a way to make Windows DARPA edition into a brick.

I'm not saying it's the most likely outcome of such a scenario, but it's a possibility of which I think we ought to be cognizant.


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Someday, an asteroid will come barreling toward the planet, and someone out there will blame Obama for it, and someone else out there will blame Trump.
> 
> This is a problem that has everything to do with Putin being Putin. No one had to twist his arm into shelling Kiev. He just wanted to. Not everything that happens in the world is a direct result of a US presidential election. We simply are not that important over here.



That is probably true. Putin is going to Putin.

But fuck me, it boils my piss to see people saying that its' just a coincidence that Trump's approach coincided with easing tensions. 

See, this is the thing. Putin is going to Putin. But that means he does stuff that he thinks he can get away with. Putin is not a gambler. He's machiavellian, not unhinged. No, I don't think he deeply cares who is president. But he does know the world he lives in, and he doesn't shell civilians because it gives him a hardon. 

At some point we have to be able to say that some aspects of Trump's presidency were a success without calling this "simping for Trump".


----------



## Randy

LostTheTone said:


> ...You do understand the problem is the bloodshed, right?
> 
> And all claims of Russian subversion are literal conspiracy theories.


You're right bloodshed is the problem, so that's why that's what we have have primarily been discussing. You're right that Trump's cozy attitude maybe played a role (maybe) but you sanitize it by saying it was some elaborate chess match where Trump hated his guts but he was going to use complimenting him to hold him off. There's no indication Trumps adulation for Putin was less than authentic. None. The Bolton story reinforces that.

As far as "claims of Russian subversion being literal conspiracy theories"









Twelve Russians charged with US 2016 election hack


The dozen allegedly used spear phishing emails and malware and hacked voter data on a state website.



www.bbc.com


----------



## thebeesknees22

oof, one of the artists on my team has to go back to Ukraine to get his niece out. He can't cross the border though or else he'd be forced to stay so he has to just wait at the border for her to get through. 

Hope she gets out safe.


----------



## Randy

LostTheTone said:


> At some point we have to be able to say that some aspects of Trump's presidency were a success without calling this "simping for Trump".


Some were. That wasn't one of them.


----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


> Some were. That wasn't one of them.



Sure it wasn't buddy


----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


> As far as "claims of Russian subversion being literal conspiracy theories"



Ask Mueller about it mate.

That link is literally as convincing as Trump's claims that Biden stuffed ballot boxes and had votes from dead people.


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> That is probably true. Putin is going to Putin.
> 
> But fuck me, it boils my piss to see people saying that its' just a coincidence that Trump's approach coincided with easing tensions.
> 
> See, this is the thing. Putin is going to Putin. But that means he does stuff that he thinks he can get away with. Putin is not a gambler. He's machiavellian, not unhinged. No, I don't think he deeply cares who is president. But he does know the world he lives in, and he doesn't shell civilians because it gives him a hardon.
> 
> At some point we have to be able to say that some aspects of Trump's presidency were a success without calling this "simping for Trump".


My biggest worry in 2016 was how HRC and ПВВ would antagonize each other. I don't think Trump handled Russia particularly well, but I still think he handled diplomacy better than HRC would have.

Biden is, to me, a less egotistical version of HRC, so I figured that he'd be less likely to stir the pot the wrong way. But I also think that this would have happened either way. I know Trump would be saying a lot of different things if he were president right now, but I really don't think there'd be any difference in events so far. I guess we'll see if Biden's administration does anything at all about this situation.


----------



## Randy

LostTheTone said:


> Ask Mueller about it mate.
> 
> That link is literally as convincing as Trump's claims that Biden stuffed ballot boxes and had votes from dead people.


The link is or the information contained within? Trump's own Department of Justice charged Russians for disrupting (actual charges, not an investigation) the US election but that's just some conspiracy stuff? That's not particularily grounded in reality. I'm sorry that the facts (yes they are facts) don't align with your rewriting of history.


----------



## Randy

LostTheTone said:


> Sure it wasn't buddy


Putin compromising Trump brought them inches from him withdrawing the US from NATO and further disarming Ukraine militarily, and the fact neither of those things happened was in SPITE of Trump (per the people WORKING for him) rather than because of him. 

Putin wanted to finish the job in Ukraine (which he's been chipping at for decades), and the one guy out on an island that speaks highly of Putin, was "complaining" about the sanctions (behind closed doors, where he'd get no benefit of "mind freaking" Putin by saying it) and withholding aid to Ukraine was actually the hero all along? Who's talking about conspiracies now?


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> My biggest worry in 2016 was how HRC and ПВВ would antagonize each other. I don't think Trump handled Russia particularly well, but I still think he handled diplomacy better than HRC would have.
> 
> Biden is, to me, a less egotistical version of HRC, so I figured that he'd be less likely to stir the pot the wrong way. But I also think that this would have happened either way. I know Trump would be saying a lot of different things if he were president right now, but I really don't think there'd be any difference in events so far. I guess we'll see if Biden's administration does anything at all about this situation.



I think you are certainly right that Clinton would have been a foreign relations disaster as President. Lord knows she was bad enough as secretary of state. And I also agree that Trump's handling, while not perfect, was nevertheless better than the constant brinkmanship (Jesus christ Syrian No Fly Zone...). 

As for whether the invasion would have happened if Trump won a second term... I don't know. Part of me feels like Putin was just waiting for a good opportunity, and so would have waited a few years more. But equally the end of the pandemic and the economic uncertainty combined with the US importing oil again was also a good time to exert pressure. Hard to say what might have been. I dont think that the clock was just counting down and Putin would attack no matter what.

I do think Trump was a good foil for Putin, and was good at counterbalancing him. That may not mean squat if Putin felt he could get the upper hand, but a great many things would have been different too.


----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


> The link is or the information contained within? Trump's own Department of Justice charged Russians for disrupting (actual charges, not an investigation) the US election but that's just some conspiracy stuff? That's not particularily grounded in reality. I'm sorry that the facts (yes they are facts) don't align with your rewriting of history.



You do know that a bunch of people have been charged with election irregularities in 2020, right? 

Does that prove that the election was stolen? Fuck no! It just proves that there are ALWAYS people who try to cheat in elections. 

And this is my point - The claim that Russia hacked the 2016 election is exactly as laughable as claims that dead people voting won 2020.


----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


> Putin compromising Trump brought them inches from him withdrawing the US from NATO and further disarming Ukraine militarily, and the fact neither of those things happened was in SPITE of Trump (per the people WORKING for him) rather than because of him.
> 
> Putin wanted to finish the job in Ukraine (which he's been chipping at for decades), and the one guy out on an island that speaks highly of Putin, was "complaining" about the sanctions (behind closed doors, where he'd get no benefit of "mind freaking" Putin by saying it) and withholding aid to Ukraine was actually the hero all along? Who's talking about conspiracies now?



Oh so you really are just a conspiracy theorist then?

You are telling me that Trump was literally a Russian agent.

What the fuck are you talking about?


----------



## oversteve

bostjan said:


> Hundreds of people were arrested in SPB a couple of days ago for disorderly conduct. There are over 8000 such arrests across Russia since last week. Seems like a lot more protesting than anything seen before.


While I do appreciate their effort 8000 protesters spread throughout 140 mil. country is a joke. There are probably more people out there whining on instagram about not being able to buy latest iphone due to apple moving out of Russia or standing in line yesterday to buy something from Ikea in Moscow due to them closing their business due to sanctions.


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> Oh so you really are just a conspiracy theorist then?
> 
> You are telling me that Trump was literally a Russian agent.
> 
> What the fuck are you talking about?



Trump was STILL running around praising Putin and his war a genius a week ago

I've since stopped caring about US politics entirely, I just don't have the energy for it. But the claim that he's EFFECTIVELY a Russian agent (either through debt, Russian intelligence having dirt on him that would destroy him forever, a combination of the two) seems plenty believable.

Nobody's saying he was raised in vat in the KGB complex outside Yasenevo, Moscow or a sleeper agent or anything. Just that they have leverage on him.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Trump was STILL running around praising Putin and his war a genius a week ago
> 
> I've since stopped caring about US politics entirely, I just don't have the energy for it. But the claim that he's EFFECTIVELY a Russian agent (either through debt, Russian intelligence having dirt on him that would destroy him forever, a combination of the two) seems plenty believable.
> 
> Nobody's saying he was raised in vat in the KGB complex outside Yasenevo, Moscow or a sleeper agent or anything. Just that they have leverage on him.



No, he wasn't.

Someone gave the full quote a few pages back.

He said (paraphrased) "Putin is a smart guy, he has been playing Biden like a drum". 

And if you believe that Russia covertly controlled the US president, but also that they didn't take that opportunity to launch their war... I don't know what to tell you.


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> While I do appreciate their effort 8000 protesters spread throughout 140 mil. country is a joke. There are probably more people out there whining on instagram about not being able to buy latest iphone due to apple moving out of Russia or standing in line yesterday to buy something from Ikea in Moscow due to them closing their business due to sanctions.



Yeah and most are now on the run.

My idiot cousin's naive but ideologically solid son, a 20-something hipster who worked in some glamorous Moscow lifestyle publication, literally *escaped* to Kazakhstan yesterday (and for those not very familiar with geography, Kazakhstan is very much half a continent away and NOT somewhere somebody just goes on a whim)

Their magazine tried to shift to war/anti-war coverage and immediately got shut down. He had a record of a couple of fines for protesting and decided to run, figuring FSB would come to arrest him sooner or later.

Sadly, that is the extent of the Russian protest movement.

Nobody is going "Nazi occupants in jackboots are on our streets, let's kill em all".


----------



## Cyanide_Anima

Sure, the guy who got impeached (the first time) for withholding aid from Ukraine while attempting to extort a country for dirt on his political rival, the guy who wanted his country to leave NATO, calling NATO unnecessary (NATO being the only thing preventing Putin from pushing further west into Europe, who defended Putin when it was clear that he interfered with western elections, totally didn't do Putin any favors at all. Is Trump a willing ally to Putin? Who knows. At the very least he's a stupid, weak man who is easily manipulated and Putin played him like a fiddle. Trump was either knowlingly or unknowlingly attempting to give Ukraine to Putin uncontested in order to impress someone who he holds in high regards. What the nature of that regard is is not fully understood.

These are undeniable and unequivocal facts.


----------



## LostTheTone

Cyanide_Anima said:


> Sure, the guy who got impeached (the first time) for withholding aid from Ukraine while attempting to extort a country for dirt on his political rival, the guy who wanted his country to leave NATO, calling NATO unnecessary (NATO being the only thing preventing Putin from pushing further west into Europe, who defended Putin when it was clear that he interfered with western elections, totally didn't do Putin any favors at all. Is Trump a willing ally to Putin? Who knows. At the very least he's a stupid, weak man who is easily manipulated and Putin played him like a fiddle. Trump was either knowlingly or unknowlingly attempting to give Ukraine to Putin uncontested in order to impress someone who he holds in high regards. What the nature of that regard is is not fully understood.
> 
> These are undeniable and unequivocal facts.



And so, obviously, Putin waited for the next guy to get in power to take advantage of these things...


----------



## Drew

LostTheTone said:


> ...That quote _perfectly _backs up the claim that Trump preferred to be friends with Russia, while making the US less dependant on them and maintaining military readiness.
> 
> And do you really think that Russia selling a SAM system on the international market, something that American and European countries do all the time, including to repressive regimes like Bahrain and Saudi, is something which is disgusting and we cannot stand for?
> 
> The people who are saying that Trump did not deter Russia have no answer for why Russian invasions happened on Bush's watch, on Obama's watch, and now on Biden's watch, but not on Trump's watch. Are we saying that the Crimean invasion was such an exersion that they couldn't possibly invade anywhere for 8 years? Except... When they invaded this time, their troops weren't actually ready anyway!
> 
> Look, everyone talked about a need to return to "business as usual" and "adults back in the room". And when we got back that, Russia invaded somewhere again.


That quote was in response to someone asking John Bolton if he thought Trump being in the White House would have deterred Putin, and being surprised when Bolton said no. 

I don't know what your angle is here or what you're trying to prove, but when you start talking about how no one's willing to admit that Trump's presidency corresponded with an improvement in the Russia-US relationship, the thing we keep telling you that youy evidently can't or won't understand is we're saying that's the _problem. _

It matters fuck-all if Trump and Putin are "friends," if the result of that friendship is the US almost pulls out of NATO, DOES pull out of the UN Human Rights Accord, and Trump is cheering Putin on while tanks roll towards Kyiv. Trump and Putin being best buds is not a geopolitical outcome that anyone gives a shit about. Putin not invading his neighbors is.


----------



## LostTheTone

Drew said:


> That quote was in response to someone asking John Bolton if he thought Trump being in the White House would have deterred Putin, and being surprised when Bolton said no.
> 
> I don't know what your angle is here or what you're trying to prove, but when you start talking about how no one's willing to admit that Trump's presidency corresponded with an improvement in the Russia-US relationship, the thing we keep telling you that youy evidently can't or won't understand is we're saying that's the _problem. _
> 
> It matters fuck-all if Trump and Putin are "friends," if the result of that friendship is the US almost pulls out of NATO, DOES pull out of the UN Human Rights Accord, and Trump is cheering Putin on while tanks roll towards Kyiv. Trump and Putin being best buds is not a geopolitical outcome that anyone gives a shit about. Putin not invading his neighbors is.



Ah, so you think that living on the brink of war with a nuclear power is the correct course of action? And that anyone who tries to be friends with Russia is literally a traitor?

Yeah dude, no problems with that point of view.

Oh and... The US didn't pull out of NATO.

Just, so you know...

Look, I think I've been pretty clear here that I am anti-war and anti-Russian here. I'm just saying that perhaps the best way to deter Russia is to stop talking about starting world war 3 and start saying that we can maybe learn to live with each other.

When you have stronger power, which the west does, you can afford to back off and allow some space for reciprocity. The alternative, as exemplified by Ms Clinton, is to constantly ramp up tension until there is nowhere else to go.


----------



## Drew

BMFan30 said:


> This has been extensively gone over with me by a brigade of forum posters before you. You should have kept scrolling to those parts or at least the part before that where I've stated that I had that opinion that went off me not following American politics and Trumps stance on being right wing. Nothing else.
> 
> You should have also scrolled to the parts where I've changed my stance and agreed with that same brigade of posters since I had no real substance to have my views before that. But I'm sure many more will be like you and read only to that part then repeat everything that's already been repeated to me.


This thread is now 40 pages longer than it was when you replied to me. You expect me to read 40 pages on the off chance that maybe you've changed your mind, before I tell you you're wrong?  

One of the risks of talking about American politics, when you don't follow American politics and don't really understand the views of the people you're defending, is that a LOT of people are going to tell you that you're wrong. If you don't want people telling you, days later, you're wrong, after you've realized yourself you're wrong, maybe keep that in mind the next time you're going to weigh in on something that - by your own admission - you don't really know anything about.


----------



## Drew

Flappydoodle said:


> I get that people blindly hate Trump but he was really correct about a lot of things. Putin HAS been very "smart", in that he has consistently achieved everything he wanted to achieve and advanced his own interests, and nobody has really tried to stop him. Putin annexed Crimea and got himself a nice new military base. Nothing of consequence happened. He openly poisoned people in London multiple times. Nothing happened. He spent months building up forces next to Ukraine. Nothing happened. Only now, when it's arguably too late, are western countries finally applying sanctions. Even then, it's likely IMO that Putin will still take Ukraine and install a puppet government there, with the conflict itself destroying the lives of so many civilians. It's incredibly tragic. It remains to be seen whether the sanctions make the cost greater than the benefit Putin gets from it.
> 
> And Trump, while certainly criticising NATO, was constantly arguing for strengthening it. When 80% of the members are not contributing the amount of $$ they said they would, that's a big problem. Europe was constantly downplaying threats and laughing at Trump, cutting their military spending because big daddy America would always come and look after them. That's a problem too. Trump also talked out against the Nordstream 2, and pointed out how it's insane that European countries are actually making themselves more reliant on Russia for energy supply. He offered to supply gas and oil from America and European politicians laughed at him. Now look how they suddenly changed their tune and they're acting all shocked, and are desperately increasing military spending and scrabbling to find alternative supplies of oil and gas.



Your first paragraph, sure, but keep in mind some of those poisonings occurred under Trump's watch, so when you say no one did anything about them, that's Trump you're thinking of, which kind of undercuts this as a defense of Trump's "friendship" strategy. 

As far as NATO, it's tough to say he was arguing for "strengthening" it when he was trying to pull out of NATO. He didn't want Europe to pay more to make NATO stronger, he just didn't want the US to have any involvement in all in Europe's defense. If you want to argue that this was an intelligent thing to do, by all means, I disagree but we can have a valid conversation about whether or not it's in our strategic interest to have an involvement in European security while Russia is becoming more aggressive. But, that's a FAR cry from saying Trump wanted to "make NATO stronger," unless of course you think NATO somehow becomes stronger without the US. 

There's also the quote Randy mentioned a little while back, from John Bolton on why he thinks Trump wouldn't have deterred Putin here, saying that Trump SHOULD have sanctoned Russia over Nordstream 2 to to try to stop the project, so it's all well and good that Trump was _saying _that it was a bad idea for Europe to tie themselves more closely to Russian oil (though I'd keep in mind this was in the context of pressuring Germany to increase their military spending), but when it was time to put his money where his mouth was, well, he didn't.


----------



## Drew

LostTheTone said:


> Ah, so you think that living on the brink of war with a nuclear power is the correct course of action? And that anyone who tries to be friends with Russia is literally a traitor?
> 
> Yeah dude, no problems with that point of view.
> 
> Oh and... The US didn't pull out of NATO.
> 
> Just, so you know...
> 
> Look, I think I've been pretty clear here that I am anti-war and anti-Russian here. I'm just saying that perhaps the best way to deter Russia is to stop talking about starting world war 3 and start saying that we can maybe learn to live with each other.
> 
> When you have stronger power, which the west does, you can afford to back off and allow some space for reciprocity. The alternative, as exemplified by Ms Clinton, is to constantly ramp up tension until there is nowhere else to go.


Hyperbole much? 

I'll reiterate - Trump and Putin bring friends doesn't advance our national security interests if that friendship is based on Trump capitulating to Putin and letting Putin do pretty much whatever he wants. That's a pretty undeniable point, and the fact that you're response is to instead say I'm calling Trump a traitor is, well, interesting.


----------



## bostjan

oversteve said:


> While I do appreciate their effort 8000 protesters spread throughout 140 mil. country is a joke. There are probably more people out there whining on instagram about not being able to buy latest iphone due to apple moving out of Russia or standing in line yesterday to buy something from Ikea in Moscow due to them closing their business due to sanctions.


You are probably right. I would say, though, that it's worth considering that, if 8k people were arrested, that's likely a much larger number who were protesting.

But it's a moot point at the moment. Maybe protests will turn into something other than protests, but protesting an autocratic dictator who lives in an underground palace cut off from the outside world is probably going to be even far less effective than throwing a stone at a tank. But, if you start passing laws to make a criminal penalty of 15+ years for peaceful protest, you place the protester into the gambit of choosing whether to go home and potentially be arrested anyway for thinking bitter thoughts or to escalate their stance. Given several thousand such people, maybe there's enough to get a grass roots movement going that will mean something.

Maybe not, but anyway, I don't think the Russian people are as happy with this, in general, as the Russian media/government wants us to think.


----------



## LostTheTone

Drew said:


> Your first paragraph, sure, but keep in mind some of those poisonings occurred under Trump's watch, so when you say no one did anything about them, that's Trump you're thinking of, which kind of undercuts this as a defense of Trump's "friendship" strategy.
> 
> As far as NATO, it's tough to say he was arguing for "strengthening" it when he was trying to pull out of NATO. He didn't want Europe to pay more to make NATO stronger, he just didn't want the US to have any involvement in all in Europe's defense. If you want to argue that this was an intelligent thing to do, by all means, I disagree but we can have a valid conversation about whether or not it's in our strategic interest to have an involvement in European security while Russia is becoming more aggressive. But, that's a FAR cry from saying Trump wanted to "make NATO stronger," unless of course you think NATO somehow becomes stronger without the US.
> 
> There's also the quote Randy mentioned a little while back, from John Bolton on why he thinks Trump wouldn't have deterred Putin here, saying that Trump SHOULD have sanctoned Russia over Nordstream 2 to to try to stop the project, so it's all well and good that Trump was _saying _that it was a bad idea for Europe to tie themselves more closely to Russian oil (though I'd keep in mind this was in the context of pressuring Germany to increase their military spending), but when it was time to put his money where his mouth was, well, he didn't.



You're just flatly lying about NATO and spnding.

He specifically said that if Germany (et al) didn't pay their way, the US shouldn't bother with the alliance either.


----------



## LostTheTone

Drew said:


> Hyperbole much?
> 
> I'll reiterate - Trump and Putin bring friends doesn't advance our national security interests if that friendship is based on Trump capitulating to Putin and letting Putin do pretty much whatever he wants. That's a pretty undeniable point, and the fact that you're response is to instead say I'm calling Trump a traitor is, well, interesting.



You keep saying that his "friendship" (which does not exist - they don't spend time together) means that Trumps was compromised by the Russians. What else does that mean?

And what capitulation did Trump lead?

And, if Trump could be counted on to capitulate, why didn't Putin launch his war into Ukraine when he knew the US would do nothing?


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> You're just flatly lying about NATO and spnding.
> 
> He specifically said that if Germany (et al) didn't pay their way, the US shouldn't bother with the alliance either.





Trump said:


> NATO was set up at a different time. NATO was set up when we were a richer country. We’re not a rich country anymore. We’re borrowing, we’re borrowing all of this money...NATO is costing us a fortune and yes, we’re protecting Europe with NATO but we’re spending a lot of money. Number one, I think the distribution of costs has to be changed. I think NATO as a concept is good, but it is not as good as it was when it first evolved.



Does that sound like an accurate paraphrase of the quote?


----------



## Drew

LostTheTone said:


> You're just flatly lying about NATO and spnding.
> 
> He specifically said that if Germany (et al) didn't pay their way, the US shouldn't bother with the alliance either.


There's a certain level of civility that is required to participate in this forum. I'd say you might want to rethink your tone here. 

Since you missed the link I included, I guess: 









Trump Discussed Pulling U.S. From NATO, Aides Say Amid New Concerns Over Russia (Published 2019)


The president’s repeatedly stated desire in private to withdraw from the alliance has raised concerns among officials who fear he may revisit the threat.




www.nytimes.com







> Senior administration officials told The New York Times that several times over the course of 2018, Mr. Trump privately said he wanted to withdraw from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Current and former officials who support the alliance said they feared Mr. Trump could return to his threat as allied military spending continued to lag behind the goals the president had set.
> In the days around a tumultuous NATO summit meeting last summer, they said, Mr. Trump told his top national security officials that he did not see the point of the military alliance, which he presented as a drain on the United States.


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Does that sound like an accurate paraphrase of the quote?


 
Yes.

It sounds, as I said, that Trump felt that the European nations needed to share the costs of NATO. I don't know how else that can be read.


----------



## LostTheTone

Drew said:


> There's a certain level of civility that is required to participate in this forum. I'd say you might want to rethink your tone here.
> 
> Since you missed the link I included, I guess:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump Discussed Pulling U.S. From NATO, Aides Say Amid New Concerns Over Russia (Published 2019)
> 
> 
> The president’s repeatedly stated desire in private to withdraw from the alliance has raised concerns among officials who fear he may revisit the threat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com



Read what you quoted.

1. Unnamed source.
2. The core problem was that other NATO members weren't paying their way.
3. Trump was not interested in an alliance where the US paid in when those they would be called upon to defend were not even willing to meet their agreed sending.

You seem to think I didn't read this stuff at the time.

I am just literally repeating back to you what this unnamed source was saying. You on the other hand are claiming that Trump was definitely going to leave NATO because he was compromised by Russia.


----------



## bostjan

Drew said:


> There's a certain level of civility that is required to participate in this forum. I'd say you might want to rethink your tone here.
> 
> Since you missed the link I included, I guess:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump Discussed Pulling U.S. From NATO, Aides Say Amid New Concerns Over Russia (Published 2019)
> 
> 
> The president’s repeatedly stated desire in private to withdraw from the alliance has raised concerns among officials who fear he may revisit the threat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


Trump's spokespeople did later say that this story was not accurate, that Trump was fully committed to NATO, blah blah blah. What he was actually thinking, we may never know.

Trump has several direct quotes from both Tweets and press conferences, regarding NATO. A lot of what he said as "clarification" didn't really scan along with the words he originally said, so perhaps he was conflicted about it.

At least by the time the 2020 election was happening, he had seemed to have "clarified" (read that as "walked back on") his threats to leave NATO.


----------



## Drew

LostTheTone said:


> Yes.
> 
> It sounds, as I said, that Trump felt that the European nations needed to share the costs of NATO. I don't know how else that can be read.


It seems like enough people disagree with you that...

1) there's a long entry about Donald Trump in the "Withdrawal from NATO" Wikipedia page under US: 








Withdrawal from NATO - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org




2) The House of Representatives passed a law barring Trump from pulling the US out of NATO in 2019, for fear he might actually try, and 
3) He campaigned on pulling the US out of NATO in 2016, and aids are claiming he had intended to go ahead and do so in 2021 if he had been re-elected. 

If you don't know how else that can be read, well, I'm not sure what to tell you here.


----------



## Drew

LostTheTone said:


> I am just literally repeating back to you what this unnamed source was saying. You on the other hand are claiming that Trump was definitely going to leave NATO because he was compromised by Russia.


No, I'm claiming there's a very real chance that, based on what Trump was saying early on in Russia's attacks on Ukraine, Trump might have backed Ukraine in his invasion, especially as he hd personal reasons to dislike Zelenskyy. YOU're the one interpreting that as "Trump definitely would have left NATO." 

As it happens, there are Trump White House aids who are claiming Trump did, in fact, plan on leaving NATO, if he wan a second term, which was news to me until a few moments ago. My earlier comment that you're paraphrasing as "Trump would definitely have left NATO" wasn't that, however, it was that I think we can't say for sure which side of this war Trump would have been on.


----------



## LostTheTone

Drew said:


> It seems like enough people disagree with you that...
> 
> 1) there's a long entry about Donald Trump in the "Withdrawal from NATO" Wikipedia page under US:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Withdrawal from NATO - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2) The House of Representatives passed a law barring Trump from pulling the US out of NATO in 2019, for fear he might actually try, and
> 3) He campaigned on pulling the US out of NATO in 2016, and aids are claiming he had intended to go ahead and do so in 2021 if he had been re-elected.
> 
> If you don't know how else that can be read, well, I'm not sure what to tell you here.



Well if it says so on Wikipedia then I'm sure there is no possibility it could be wrong...


----------



## nickgray

Adieu said:


> Sadly, that is the extent of the Russian protest movement.



Yeah, people need to understand that the entire Russian "opposition" consists of IT workers, artists, writers, hipsters, etc. The rest of Russia doesn't really give a shit - they're either apolitical or they're happily gobbling up the propaganda. This is the end result of such attitude, and this has been the status quo for years.

_Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me._


----------



## LostTheTone

Drew said:


> No, I'm claiming there's a very real chance that, based on what Trump was saying early on in Russia's attacks on Ukraine, Trump might have backed Ukraine in his invasion, especially as he hd personal reasons to dislike Zelenskyy. YOU're the one interpreting that as "Trump definitely would have left NATO."
> 
> As it happens, there are Trump White House aids who are claiming Trump did, in fact, plan on leaving NATO, if he wan a second term, which was news to me until a few moments ago. My earlier comment that you're paraphrasing as "Trump would definitely have left NATO" wasn't that, however, it was that I think we can't say for sure which side of this war Trump would have been on.



Sorry, I'm gunna mute ya.


----------



## Drew

LostTheTone said:


> Well if it says so on Wikipedia then I'm sure there is no possibility it could be wrong...


Last defense of the hopeless. 









NATO Support Act (2019 - H.R. 676)


To reiterate the support of the Congress of the United States for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and for other purposes.




www.govtrack.us





If only there was some way to independently verify these things.


----------



## Drew

LostTheTone said:


> Sorry, I'm gunna mute ya.


I'll do the same, then. Less drivel to wade through in this thread, since you clearly have no clue what the fuck you're talking about and have no intent of even trying to remain civil, I doubt I'm going to miss anything of value.


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Trump's spokespeople did later say that this story was not accurate, that Trump was fully committed to NATO, blah blah blah. What he was actually thinking, we may never know.
> 
> Trump has several direct quotes from both Tweets and press conferences, regarding NATO. A lot of what he said as "clarification" didn't really scan along with the words he originally said, so perhaps he was conflicted about it.
> 
> At least by the time the 2020 election was happening, he had seemed to have "clarified" (read that as "walked back on") his threats to leave NATO.



Indeed.

And in any case, the starting point for all this was accusations that Trump was covertly controlled by the Russians, which then slowly turned into Trump being stroppy with NATO of his own free will, which then turned into Trump rolling back on his strop, but then that he might have "backed Russia" whatever that means.

I'm happy enough to have a bantery discussion about whether Trump would be better or worse than Biden under these circumstances, but as soon as someone aggressively tells me to "watch my tone" while constantly moving the goalposts then I'm done with this subject because it's clearly going nowhere.


----------



## LostTheTone

nickgray said:


> Yeah, people need to understand that the entire Russian "opposition" consists of IT workers, artists, writers, hipsters, etc. The rest of Russia doesn't really give a shit - they're either apolitical or they're happily gobbling up the propaganda. This is the end result of such attitude, and this has been the status quo for years.
> 
> _Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me._



You can't underestimate the fear though.

We forget too easily that Russia has never really been a free country, and that there is a long social memory of what used to (and to some extent still does) happen to people who challenge the Russian government. 

The propaganda is a real thing of course, but I think that a lot of people are performatively apolitical or nationalistic. Because they know what happens to people who aren't. 

That's one thing that's left out of the poem - It's not just people keeping their head down for their own sake. It's people who look from the guy next door being arrested, then looking back to their children, and asking just how brave they can afford to be. It's one thing to fight for your kids, its another thing to uselessly die when your protest makes little difference.

In the west we kinda believe that "they can't kill us all" so if loads of us did rise up, we would surely succeed! But... The Russians would certainly make a spirited attempt to kill them all. 

When the Russian Revolution was just starting to happen, the thing that swung it was that Russian troops quietly refused to put down the protests/riots. They could have machinegunned them all though, and stuff like that happened in Europe around that time. 

I don't blame normal Russians with families for trying to keep their heads down and saying "Oh I dont pay attention to politics".


----------



## Adieu

nickgray said:


> Yeah, people need to understand that the entire Russian "opposition" consists of IT workers, artists, writers, hipsters, etc. The rest of Russia doesn't really give a shit - they're either apolitical or they're happily gobbling up the propaganda. This is the end result of such attitude, and this has been the status quo for years.
> 
> _Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me._



Indeed.

There used to be some more intimidating characters - commies, nationalists, Muslims, wingnuts, etc. - but those got crushed hard, bought, driven into emigration, or scared into submission.

A bunch of defiant opinion leaders also died convenient and mysterious deaths.

By the looks of it, they even killed a half-forgotten aging RAPPER with novichok.


----------



## Adieu

Wow, Russia even managed to lose a VDV division (airborne infantry) *general*, KIA. That's their supposedly high-end ground forces, something like USMC.

Confirmed kill.

The incompetence is staggering.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Wow, Russia even managed to lose a VDV division (airborne infantry) *general*, KIA. That's their supposedly high-end ground forces, something like USMC.
> 
> Confirmed kil.
> 
> The incompetence is staggering.



I heard that they've had three senior officers capped by snipers - It's hard to say whether its incompetence or whether this is just how things are going to be in Ukraine.

They might have been poncing around in the open and laughing at inadequate marksmanship... Or Ukrainian snipers could be quietly laying in wait as they move through the city. 

Big fucking thumbs up to whoever fired that shot though. 

Bet he'll never have to buy another beer in his life.


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> Wow, Russia even managed to lose a VDV division (airborne infantry) *general*, KIA. That's their supposedly high-end ground forces, something like USMC.
> 
> Confirmed kil.
> 
> The incompetence is staggering.


Special Forces, veteran of 5 wars, 14 medals, 47 years old (young for a general)...

Killed March 1st.


----------



## Adieu

Huh, awards for more wars than they ever admitted to being in... Putin's career attack dog

GJ Ukraine!


----------



## StevenC

LostTheTone said:


> Well if it says so on Wikipedia then I'm sure there is no possibility it could be wrong...


There's a literal Russia troll on this thread slut shaming Ukraine and this is the dumbest thing I've read today.


----------



## BMFan30

Drew said:


> This thread is now 40 pages longer than it was when you replied to me. You expect me to read 40 pages on the off chance that maybe you've changed your mind, before I tell you you're wrong?
> 
> One of the risks of talking about American politics, when you don't follow American politics and don't really understand the views of the people you're defending, is that a LOT of people are going to tell you that you're wrong. If you don't want people telling you, days later, you're wrong, after you've realized yourself you're wrong, maybe keep that in mind the next time you're going to weigh in on something that - by your own admission - you don't really know anything about.


No I expected you to care as much as you appeared to care when you replied about this... So naturally people that care like me have read every single reply about this. Now go back to your Yankee comfort.

You keep going on and on when I've replied to every person in this bridade yet you go on and on. The same logic applies to you when you reply about war and it's history that you don't understand... You say days later when I replied and addressed I was wrong right away. Keep trying... go back to pizza eating.

Again you keep going on and on when you actually don't understand a lick of shit about what's going on in Ukraine. Join that troll ItWillDo, you keep talking about old news I adressed like you said and have to keep re-adressing to people like yourself... Focus on the task at hand, not some old dumb shit from pages ago that doesn't actually affect the task at hand... That's why your people have a military base in every country, more than any other country but have done as much or less than any country when you have the means to do the most. Pussies as much as Russians.


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> Lmao this is such a garbage take and I really suspect and hope it's just your own vitriol, but if the local news are spreading such statements than they're trying to cause more harm than good.
> 
> As for the nuclear panic, it was a desperate attempt to get NATO involved as the plant manager confirmed there is nothing to worry about and that nuclear plants are to large extent built to survive bombing/fires/earthquakes/...





Is this my own vitriol, troll? They are putting near invisible wires for kids and civilians to trip an explosive on an apartment block so putting explosives into toys is farfetched for you troll bag?

Nato has already changed their tone from 'we wont' get involved' to 'we are ready for conflict in the last days even on yank news' can you get a life you troll? How long do you think before you are forced to abandon your account because your shame has joined into one with Russia? If I was you I'd let the shame scoot you off the forum because you're an embarrassment.


----------



## Drew

BMFan30 said:


> You keep going on and on when I've replied to every person in this bridade yet you go on and on. The same logic applies to you when you reply about war and it's history that you don't understand... You say days later when I replied and addressed I was wrong right away. Keep trying... go back to pizza eating.


I don't really care, at the end of the day, what you think about America or the American military, and I don't know what part of the world you're from...

...but I 100% draw the line at any criticism of pizza.


----------



## BMFan30

Drew said:


> I don't really care, at the end of the day, what you think about America or the American military, and I don't know what part of the world you're from...
> 
> ...but I 100% draw the line at any criticism of pizza.


From Donesk, Ukraine and I've lost a family member out there so your bullshit isn't going to fly with me like it hasn't with your troll buddy "Itwilldo"
Draw your line on pizza and don't give a fuck about my people dying. That's your choice... So by that accoung maybe scoot the fuck out the thread for people to discuss this because they do care you yank.


----------



## BMFan30

Nato changed their tone when a nuclear reactor was hit and the firemen who wanted to distinguish the fire were shot at. This reactor powers more than Ukraine but other parts of Europe so Nato has changed their tone within the last day.


----------



## Drew

BMFan30 said:


> From Donesk, Ukraine and I've lost a family member out there so your bullshit isn't going to fly with me like it hasn't with your troll buddy "Itwilldo"
> Draw your line on pizza and don't give a fuck about my people dying. That's your choice... So by that accoung maybe scoot the fuck out the thread for people to discuss this because they do care you yank.


I'm sorry to hear about your family member.

The situation is a fucking mess, there are no good answers here that don't come without risks of further escalation, but my non-expert opinion is that once Putin started shelling one of your nuclear power plants, and then started shooting at the firefighters putting it out, he crossed a line that is going to make it increasingly hard for some sort of NATO response to _not_ occur... but, I also get that if in a week's time there are NATO troops on the ground or NATO aircraft providing your army air cover, it's likely going to feel like too little too late. In the meantime, while your whole fucking country has proven to be unbelievably heroic in the past nine days, I also get that that's small recompense to the dead, and that you're probably a little sick of hearing how heroic your resistance has been, while no one's committing troops to back you up and while even the sort of coordinated sanction response we've seen is going to take time to make itself fully felt.

I have no clue who ItWillDo is, but if he's one of the probable-Russian-Troll-Farm nutjobs who have evidently found their way to this thread, then I want him out of here, too.


----------



## jaxadam

Hot damn man DraftKings can’t even keep up with the over/under on who’s getting the banhammer in this thread.


----------



## BMFan30

tedtan said:


> I realize we haven’t handled war criminals properly in the past, but that doesn’t mean that we are doomed to repeat the past. The past is there so we can learn from it so that we don’t repeat those past mistakes. And while I don’t hold much hope that the western governments will take this approach, it is still important to set the precedent moving forward.


I really hope that's true but I've gained more hope that help will come to aid Ukraine in the last day more than any other days due to Russians causing a fire at the Nuclear reactor which affects more than just Ukrainians.

I know many don't want a 3rd World War but that will still happen wether Ukraine is flatted to a desert or not. I just don't think it's wise to wait for almost everyone to die who hasn't escaped Ukraine so far to make the ineviatble happen.

Is the west' future really something they want when Putin has already threatened them with nuclear weapons? If nato stands up to Russia then they have no chance. Right now? It's not certain how many more people will die in Ukraine but it IS certain.


----------



## BMFan30

nightflameauto said:


> Yeah, where we're at now it doesn't feel like there's much the west can do to stop the bleeding short-term. Internal actors taking down Putin and his regime are about our best shot.
> 
> Read an interesting take in a comment on another site I frequent. Their theory was that Putin started this not as an attempt at unification, but as a punishment against those who broke the old USSR apart. In that person's head, Putin literally wants to punish ALL of Russia for allowing that dissolution to happen in the first place. And his end-goal is to kill off as many "bad faith actors" as he can both in Ukraine and Russia.
> 
> Interesting theory, and would sorta/kinda fit what appears to be a nearly incompetent start on the surface.


That's why Putin is threatening and putting his own people in jail but as soon as Russians stop tucking their tail between their ass then progress might start happening. There isn't enough jail space or enough police out there to put everyone behind bars, it's just sad cowardly Russians will film a 75 year old grandmother going to jail instead of letting hundreds of Russians handling 6 policemen surrounded by them like the cowards they are.

Give them a few more weeks to a month under the sanctions as their resources start to run out and you will see their tone change. That's why Russian news networks block out the truth and tell their own people that everything will be fine under sanctions even though it will take years for them to run out. 

Soon everyone will hate Russia in whole instead of just their dictators for being such cowards. In Ukraine they aren't ashamed to literally throw their crooked leaders into a dirty trash can for their words. But in Russia they are pussies that bluff.


----------



## Randy




----------



## BMFan30

Randy said:


> To be clear, there are zero good options right now and even less options that don't have a significant chance of mass extinction.


Exactly what I've been saying for pages, there's no good options no matter what... WW3 will be started by Putin no matter what anyone does or lack thereof. Inactivity and destroyign Ukraine will start it either way or letting Nato butt in now will have the same result but will at the very least stop some bloodshed in Ukraine...


----------



## BMFan30

sleewell said:


> it makes no sense to me why they were firing on that nuclear power plant yesterday for a sustained period of time. they want to take over Ukraine so why on earth would you want to start off with nuclear disaster?
> 
> all I can think of is just straight up gross incompetence which quite frankly is terrifying when it comes to nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants.
> 
> 
> it would be really great if all sides didn't have nukes and we could just invade russia and wipe putin off the map. he cant even organize a proper invasion of Ukraine, I bet the US would destroy him in less than a day.


Yes the US have modern weapons, not the shitbits Russians are using that Ukraine siezes very slowly, if they are lucky. This is why I want Nato's help so badly because the end of the world is approaching Ukraine so rapidly.


----------



## BMFan30

bostjan said:


> If Russia has some sort of EMP weapon (which they almost certainly have and maybe know how to use), and NATO pulls out their computer-assisted tactical weapons for an all-out war, the whole thing could get super messy.
> 
> I could see Russia somehow winning WW3 simply because they're missiles and stuff are guided by mechanical timers and pulleys and NATO/UK/USA/everyoneelse's stuff is controlled by EPROMs and computers, and Russia somehow figures out a way to make Windows DARPA edition into a brick.
> 
> I'm not saying it's the most likely outcome of such a scenario, but it's a possibility of which I think we ought to be cognizant.


Russia is no match for Nato, they are behind the times in terms of Miltary compared to say The US.


----------



## BMFan30

LostTheTone said:


> No, he wasn't.
> 
> Someone gave the full quote a few pages back.
> 
> He said (paraphrased) "Putin is a smart guy, he has been playing Biden like a drum".
> 
> And if you believe that Russia covertly controlled the US president, but also that they didn't take that opportunity to launch their war... I don't know what to tell you.


Trump was literally saying he was smart and referring to the war there like it was real estate while Ukrainians were dying. So it was a week ago. He then changed his stance to "its not that Putin is smart, its that American politicians are dumb" when no one cheered for him earlier but this time they all cheered because Biden can't walk up a flight of stairs or wipe his own ass properly.

I can't fucking believe I used to think Trump was someone to admire due to his right wing stance... Which aparently means fuck all anymore since right wing politics haven't played into his cowardly game.


----------



## BMFan30

Randy said:


>



Yes that's how scared and cowardly they are in Russia, they don't even want to see the bloodshed their "president" has caused. If they all rebelled then they would learn that there are more of civilians than there are of police and authority out there. 

I give them 3 weeks to change their tone as they realize everything they have is thanks to all of the imports that are no longer coming in and that their news have been lying to them...

The problem with Russians is that much like most Americans they eat up mainstream news like it's Alpha and Omega out there so none of them ever search for additional or opposing information. They thing Putin is God. Of course not to speak of all Russian citizens because many have stood up to that cunt and for good reason.


----------



## BMFan30

Drew said:


> I'm sorry to hear about your family member.
> 
> The situation is a fucking mess, there are no good answers here that don't come without risks of further escalation, but my non-expert opinion is that once Putin started shelling one of your nuclear power plants, and then started shooting at the firefighters putting it out, he crossed a line that is going to make it increasingly hard for some sort of NATO response to _not_ occur... but, I also get that if in a week's time there are NATO troops on the ground or NATO aircraft providing your army air cover, it's likely going to feel like too little too late. In the meantime, while your whole fucking country has proven to be unbelievably heroic in the past nine days, I also get that that's small recompense to the dead, and that you're probably a little sick of hearing how heroic your resistance has been, while no one's committing troops to back you up and while even the sort of coordinated sanction response we've seen is going to take time to make itself fully felt.
> 
> I have no clue who ItWillDo is, but if he's one of the probable-Russian-Troll-Farm nutjobs who have evidently found their way to this thread, then I want him out of here, too.


Thank you even if it doesn't change anything but that's why I'm for going with the bad choice now rather than later. Later means all of me people die, now means some will be saved but if Putin is threatening Americans now then he will do it again and probably go through with it because he has proven to have no sense and reason already. He's insane.


----------



## BMFan30

Day 9 of Invasion:


----------



## Randy

BMFan30 said:


> Yes that's how scared and cowardly they are in Russia, they don't even want to see the bloodshed their "president" has caused. If they all rebelled then they would learn that there are more of civilians than there are of police and authority out there.
> 
> I give them 3 weeks to change their tone as they realize everything they have is thanks to all of the imports that are no longer coming in and that their news have been lying to them...
> 
> The problem with Russians is that much like most Americans they eat up mainstream news like it's Alpha and Omega out there so none of them ever search for additional or opposing information. They thing Putin is God. Of course not to speak of all Russian citizens because many have stood up to that cunt and for good reason.


Something that crossed my mind is, considering the state of the media in that country, how many of these people in these interviews think it's a setup and if they say the wrong thing they're going to the gulag?


----------



## Adieu

Btw, right-wing guys who want to applaud one of their own, stop wanking to Trump and grow a boner for Lindsey Graham instead.

That guy is tweeting suggestions for Russian elites to murder Putin.

On the off chance it works, I'm sure he'll use the fact to absolutely blast and bury Trump and will then become President.

Wouldn't it be hella ironic if Lindsey Graham actually manages to rid the world of Putin, literally, AND America of Trump, politically, with a TWEET???






Lindsey Graham, useful azzhole, God Bless Him... wars sure make for strange bedfellows


----------



## thebeesknees22

Adieu said:


> Btw, right-wing guys who want to applaud one of their own, stop wanking to Trump and grow a boner for Lindsey Graham instead.
> 
> That guy is tweeting suggestions for Russian elites to murder Putin.
> 
> On the off chance it works, I'm sure he'll use the fact to absolutely blast and bury Trump and will then become President.
> 
> Wouldn't it be hella ironic if Lindsey Graham actually manages to rid the world of Putin, literally, AND America of Trump, politically, with a TWEET???
> 
> 
> View attachment 104152
> 
> 
> 
> Lindsey Graham, useful azzhole, God Bless Him... wars sure make for strange bedfellows



As much as he makes a good point here, Graham is a vile piece of shit. The world would be better off if he crawled off in whatever hole he came from. 

edit: but i think that of most right wingers these days so take my opinion with a grain of salt.


----------



## Adieu

Holy sh!t another epic fail


Remember this clown? Sticker on his chest says "they'll [all just] croak and we'll go to heaven"





Guess who's a POW chanting "F*ck Putin" from a military hospital bed now?


----------



## Flappydoodle

LostTheTone said:


> Yeah, but Russia is still shelling a nuclear plant.
> 
> And when I see anyone from outside Ukraine, sitting safe at home, saying they are "not amused" by Ukraine "misleading" about this, I see someone who has lost the fucking plot.
> 
> It really doesn't matter whether or not a nuclear disaster is likely, shelling a nuclear reactor is a really terrible idea. The fact that Ukraine is playing this literal war crime up to attract attention is neither here nor there.
> 
> It sounds like someone who is safe from the conflict is saying "Pfft, there's not going to be a meltdown you babies, so stop complaining and let the shells fall on you".


Problem is, the massive exaggeration is like boy who cried wolf. It undermines your credibility and sense of urgency.

Obviously Russia using explosives anywhere near a nuclear power plant is reckless and has been rightfully condemned by everybody. But calling it six Chernobyls or an almost meltdown is pretty stupid and excessive fearmongering. The fire was at a storage shed far away from the reactors, and to my understanding only one reactor actually has nuclear fuel in it. 

Problem is that everybody is talking a bunch of shit right now. Putin says everything is going to plan when it obviously isn’t. Ukraine is allegedly killing thousands of Russians per day according to them, which seems implausible.


----------



## Flappydoodle

And no point was the US remotely close to pulling out of NATO. Don’t be silly. 



Adieu said:


> ALMOST everything.
> 
> Except actual troops. Or even thinly veiled bullshit rebadged "volunteer" troops, at least as of now.
> 
> Although that MiG donation that was in the news a couple days back might well come with unofficial loaner pilots.





Adieu said:


> Stall the war in Ukraine with endless monetary support and military kit, to be supplied to locals, foreign volunteers, and foreign "volunteers", while throwing billions and the world's best propagandists and insurgency specialists at overthrowing Putin's regime from within



So… full-blown proxy war fought inside Ukraine with their civilians in the middle and their cities turned to rubble? That’s very ugly and extremely dangerous. 

And actively trying to overthrow a leader is an act of war. So no, you can’t do that. 

Blinken was asked about this today: “Asked if the US would seek a change in Moscow's leadership to bring an end to the invasion, he replied: "We don't seek that, and in any event it's not up to us. The Russian people need to decide their leadership."”


----------



## Adieu

Yup... we're totally getting a President Graham once somebody caps Putin.

Oh well, that's a concern for another day.


----------



## 4Eyes

Flappydoodle said:


> to my understanding only one reactor actually has nuclear fuel in it.


One of the six reactors was shut down prior to attack, because of fuel change, other four were shutdown, but it will take something like 72 hours or so to stop controlled chain reaction completely, that's why they keep last reactor running at limited capacity to power cooling systems for other reactors till they stop producing any power. So fuel is there and yes, they would have to be really evil if they wanted to destroy it and cause nuclear catastrophe, but it's too close to RU, so most probably not.

Btw they are heading to second largest nuclear plant in UKR


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Btw, right-wing guys who want to applaud one of their own, stop wanking to Trump and grow a boner for Lindsey Graham instead.
> 
> That guy is tweeting suggestions for Russian elites to murder Putin.
> 
> On the off chance it works, I'm sure he'll use the fact to absolutely blast and bury Trump and will then become President.
> 
> Wouldn't it be hella ironic if Lindsey Graham actually manages to rid the world of Putin, literally, AND America of Trump, politically, with a TWEET???
> 
> 
> View attachment 104152
> 
> 
> 
> Lindsey Graham, useful azzhole, God Bless Him... wars sure make for strange bedfellows



I decline to get a boner for Lindsay Graham, but I do approve of this message. And I'm genuinely disappointed that anyone has summed up some performative outrage about Grahams comments, and that now he's been walking it back. A prominent US Senator actually told the truth for once, and all his peers were outraged.

To be clear - I'm not American, and don't have any party loyalty there, or even here in the UK. I'm libertarian, bordering on anarchist. I make a specific choice to not vote, which will continue until there are candidates that share my values. I have never found one though, at home or abroad. Weirdly enough anarchists are not attracted to public office. 

When I talk about this kind of politics it's simply with a memory of just how bad American foreign policy was under "business as usual". Very earnest people telling us every day how the US wanted peace, even as cruise missiles whistled past. 

I don't have a problem with military interventionism at all - I think we should take our lead from Trotsky on this; if we believe that democracy, pluralism and secularism are good values then we should use force to defend them and even to further them. As far as I'm concerned the Ukrainians are our brothers and it's shameful that we haven't acted. I know why we haven't, but I don't care.

When it comes to Trump, I do think his move away from historic American diplomacy was working. I know not everyone agrees, and that's fine. But I do find it strange that the same people who marched with me against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are today huge fans of the "business as usual" foreign policy that took us into those pointless wars. 

I also think it is a mistake to think that this invasion couldn't have been avoided. I mean, it was entirely possible for Ukraine to lay off seeking NATO membership. Maybe having an (allegedly) pro-Russian leader in America would make Ukraine feel that NATO wasn't going to want them anyway.

And I do strongly feel that Biden saying he stands in solidarity with the Iranian people who are being invaded isn't the kind of statement that is going to deter further aggression.


----------



## LostTheTone

Flappydoodle said:


> So… full-blown proxy war fought inside Ukraine with their civilians in the middle and their cities turned to rubble? That’s very ugly and extremely dangerous.
> 
> And actively trying to overthrow a leader is an act of war. So no, you can’t do that.
> 
> Blinken was asked about this today: “Asked if the US would seek a change in Moscow's leadership to bring an end to the invasion, he replied: "We don't seek that, and in any event it's not up to us. The Russian people need to decide their leadership."”



You are right that all of these things are bad. But equally, the only way Putin is leaving office is feet first. So if we want a switch in Russian government, that means that Putin gets hung from a lamppost. Maybe government officials shouldn't be cavalier about it but... Fuck it, when did such concerns ever stop us murdering foreign leaders.

As for a proxy war, as long as the Ukrainians want to fight for their freedom I'm not going to feel bad about helping them to do so. I do understand the idea that surrendering would end some immediate harm, but the Ukrainians clearly do not want to surrender. And the only people who can surrender are also the supposed "nazis" who Russia are 100% going to execute.

And surrendering to Russia is not an easy win. A puppet government would be in the model of Russia or Belarus, with protesting illegal and no elections. It wouldn't be a temporary thing, it would be for a generation at least.

So is it better to fight today for your freedom? Or watch your children grow up under tyranny? Ukraine is already on fire, and a Russian victory means the sanctions stay in place. Who will rebuild the homes? 

I do honestly believe that the Ukrainians only real option is to fight, no matter how unlikely it is that they might win. And if they want to fight, we should at a minimum be supporting them on a "one man, one stinger" basis, or ideally "one man, one stinger, three javelins and six rifles" basis.


----------



## Adieu

It's never been about NATO.

It's always been about Putin's dreams of legacy. His axe to grind with NATO is that membership in it makes it harder and more dangerous to attempt to annex those countries.

He's invading Ukraine to steal their land because he doesn't want to go down in history as just the guy who stole more shit than anybody else in history...and YES, he totally doesn't see the fundamental irony there.

Stealing *for* the empire is somehow supposed to wash him of the sins of stealing *from* the empire.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> It's never been about NATO.



I know that's how you read the situation, and of course we can talk about how that would work instead, but there isn't a way to combine both "it is about NATO" and "it isn't about NATO" into the same analysis.

If it isn't about NATO, or at least there was no way that Russia could be placated vis a vis NATO, then I think the case for intervention is simpler, and if anything more compelling. If Russia is simply engaged in piracy, that can't be allowed to stand no matter what. If there is no high drama of competing interests, then we should flatly say no, and have no qualms at all about sending every weapon we have at hand. We should even be organising proper international volunteer forces. In this reading, the war in Ukraine is not a proxy war, it is just a matter of right and wrong. Even if Ukraine loses, they are still in the right entirely.

If it is about NATO, that I think is the scenario where the US president matters, and where the war could be prevented (or ended) by NATO without Ukraine surrendering. In this reading, it makes sense that Russia were not so worried about Ukraine in NATO when Trump was talking NATO down. It makes sense that the recommitment to NATO by Biden, and indeed statements from Kamala about Ukraine joining would be very inflamatory. In this case, NATO could end the war by signing some new agreement regarding the future of Ukraine, perhaps committing Ukraine to legal neutrality for 20 years. And in that case, it would be wise not to get too involved on ground, but then it would also be wise to solve this before Russia invaded. This is why I harp on about the "business as usual" policy from the US, because the knee jerk reaction to never ever give an inch and always to push up tension is such a dreadful idea.

But the problem is that I don't know if I find either reading completely convincing. I find parts of them convincing, but not the whole. 

I find it hard to believe that Putin would be acting this way just to say he conquered Ukraine - I also find it hard to believe that Putin really cares about NATO so very much. At least Crimea had a military objective that would help in posturing against Turkey.

It makes me wonder whether there is some truth to the idea that Putin is sick or has some other reason why he can't wait to start a war.


----------



## StevenC

Former National Security Advisor John Bolton says 'Putin was waiting' for Trump to withdraw the United States from NATO in his second term


Bolton, who once worked for Trump, also said the former president's "main interest" in Ukraine was trying to "find Hillary Clinton's computer server."




www.businessinsider.com


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> I know that's how you read the situation, and of course we can talk about how that would work instead, but there isn't a way to combine both "it is about NATO" and "it isn't about NATO" into the same analysis.
> 
> If it isn't about NATO, or at least there was no way that Russia could be placated vis a vis NATO, then I think the case for intervention is simpler, and if anything more compelling. If Russia is simply engaged in piracy, that can't be allowed to stand no matter what. If there is no high drama of competing interests, then we should flatly say no, and have no qualms at all about sending every weapon we have at hand. We should even be organising proper international volunteer forces. In this reading, the war in Ukraine is not a proxy war, it is just a matter of right and wrong. Even if Ukraine loses, they are still in the right entirely.
> 
> If it is about NATO, that I think is the scenario where the US president matters, and where the war could be prevented (or ended) by NATO without Ukraine surrendering. In this reading, it makes sense that Russia were not so worried about Ukraine in NATO when Trump was talking NATO down. It makes sense that the recommitment to NATO by Biden, and indeed statements from Kamala about Ukraine joining would be very inflamatory. In this case, NATO could end the war by signing some new agreement regarding the future of Ukraine, perhaps committing Ukraine to legal neutrality for 20 years. And in that case, it would be wise not to get too involved on ground, but then it would also be wise to solve this before Russia invaded. This is why I harp on about the "business as usual" policy from the US, because the knee jerk reaction to never ever give an inch and always to push up tension is such a dreadful idea.
> 
> But the problem is that I don't know if I find either reading completely convincing. I find parts of them convincing, but not the whole.
> 
> I find it hard to believe that Putin would be acting this way just to say he conquered Ukraine - I also find it hard to believe that Putin really cares about NATO so very much. At least Crimea had a military objective that would help in posturing against Turkey.
> 
> It makes me wonder whether there is some truth to the idea that Putin is sick or has some other reason why he can't wait to start a war.



You either don't understand or don't wanna understand

This is his f*cking HOLY LAND JERUSALEM in his world crusade.

Kyiv is the literal CENTER OF THEIR CIVILIZATION for Russian culture per the nationalist history nuts.

It ain't a small prize or a backward Eastern European country, it is *THE* prize. Winning anything or even everything else without it is pretty meaningless.

He has drank deep of the Cup of Imperial Russian Bullshit and this is his ultimate truth.


----------



## Metropolis

President of Finland Sauli Niinistö and Joe Biden met yesterday and they disccussed about altered situation in Europe. Since then Finland and Sweden have sent an application to be a major non NATO ally. Opinions about joining NATO are more on the positive side right now.

Putin already has Belarus, and will probably get Ukraine and Kiev, or he will fall. There's no other outcome from this. Or there is, but possibility of them is smaller.


----------



## Adieu

PS for anyone who thinks the dragon might be satisfied with that sacrifice, though, sadly for you lot, there's always Constantinople now known as Istanbul, former center of Orthodox Christianity and current HQ of The Ancient Foe, or maybe Bulgaria, birthplace of Cyrillic literacy for likely further ambitions

Also, Poland and Sweden because they pissed off the ancestors something fierce, and Finland because in his mind that place doesn't really exist outside of a historical misunderstanding or three. And Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, because proper Russian Emperors are supposed to rule those.

But Kyiv is still a founding must. Can't be no proper Slavic Empire without Kyiv.


----------



## Metropolis

I think Putin has more twisted fantasies about USSR than the old russian empire. Something about being in under the same cultural influence and language. Finland is way too european and western to be a part of it anymore.


----------



## Adieu

Metropolis said:


> I think Putin has more twisted fantasies about USSR than the old russian empire. Something about being in under the same cultural influence and language. Finland is way too european and western to be a part of it anymore.



You'd be surprised.

The gnomish villain surrounds himself with Orthodox priests and toxic nationalists, which are like THE two ultimate taboos of a proper Soviet.

And his entire vibe is 100% wannabe Tsar and 0% General Secretary.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> You either don't understand or don't wanna understand
> 
> This is his f*cking HOLY LAND JERUSALEM in his world crusade.
> 
> Kyiv is the literal CENTER OF THEIR CIVILIZATION for Russian culture per the nationalist history nuts.
> 
> It ain't a small prize or a backward Eastern European country, it is *THE* prize. Winning anything or even everything else without it is pretty meaningless.
> 
> He has drank deep of the Cup of Imperial Russian Bullshit and this is his ultimate truth.



Yes, I know that's what you think.

But my point really was that if you are right, the discussion of US presidents and international politics is not at all relevant.

But this thread is also full of people telling me that Trump is somehow to blame or NATO is somehow to blame or whatever. And that's fine.

But these are different lines of thought, and I can't discuss both of them at the same time. 

I'm happy to go with your reading that Putin is an imperialist, but if that is the discussion then I can't be doing with people constantly telling me that I'm wrong about Trump.


----------



## oversteve

Some more know-how on vehicle protection from 2nd strongest army of the world



And here's a high precision weapon used to destroy solely military infrastructure (actually unguided bomb fab 500 from 1960s, luckily these few didn't explode)


----------



## Crungy

That's a scary sight, _possibly_ inert bombs just laying around.

What the hell were they doing with wood on the trucks?


----------



## Randy

Speaking of Finland


----------



## nickgray

Crungy said:


> What the hell were they doing with wood on the trucks?



Composite armor.


----------



## oversteve

Randy said:


> Speaking of Finland



That's one example of how sanctions are already doing what they should, many out-of-country sources of income and money transfers blocked for IT specialists so they are moving out of Russia


----------



## oversteve

Crungy said:


> What the hell were they doing with wood on the trucks?


They already tried adding some grill on top of tanks to protect them from Javelins (obviously unsuccessfull) so these are probably some efforts to protect the engines of trucks from what they've got at hand


----------



## oversteve

Oh btw Russian models banned from OnlyFans


----------



## 4Eyes

oversteve said:


> Oh btw Russian models banned from OnlyFans


This madness needs to stop, now!


----------



## narad

Crungy said:


> What the hell were they doing with wood on the trucks?



Sneak+3


----------



## devastone

Crungy said:


> What the hell were they doing with wood on the trucks?



Camouflage


----------



## Adieu

Crungy said:


> That's a scary sight, _possibly_ inert bombs just laying around.
> 
> What the hell were they doing with wood on the trucks?



Presumably hillbilly armor or a prehistoric brush guard for their radiators


----------



## Randy




----------



## possumkiller

The wood on the trucks is supposed to be added protection. These cabs are not armored. You can kill the crew with rifle fire or even pistol fire if you're close enough. We rolled without armored cabs in 2003. When they started encountering IEDs, they had us put sandbags in the floorboards. Some units started welding on their own home made armor from steel plates.

On my second deployment in 2005, I got taken off the fuel truck and put into the gunner hatch of a hummer. We inherited them from the unit we relieved and they had the home made ghetto armor as well.

Eventually we got 1151s which were newly built as armored hummers. The fuel trucks got armored cabs and pump housings as well as rubber coverings on the main cargo tank that made them self sealing from small arms fire or shrapnel (a technology used on aircraft since the beginning of WW2 that somehow nobody thought could be useful on a fuel truck until 2005). 

The armor is good against small arms fire and indirect explosions. Like, you could roll through a small to medium IED as it exploded and be ok but if it went off under you or had a shaped charge, you were fucked. I've seen tests if the armored windshields take .50BMG hits with no problem (apart from no longer having any visibility). I've seen it take a 5.56mm to the back side with no problem when a dip shit had an ND inside the cab of the truck. 

The cages over the top is to keep people from tossing grenades into the hatch. We had those in Iraq and Afghanistan as well.


----------



## Randy




----------



## Spaced Out Ace

oversteve said:


> Oh btw Russian models banned from OnlyFans


Oh, no! How are we going to view naughty Russian bimbos now?! Lol


----------



## oversteve

One more f*up for Putin recording some chroma key footage from his bunker and Zelensky trolling him


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> One more f*up for Putin recording some chroma key footage from his bunker and Zelensky trolling him




Video Unavailable

The fired stewardesses crap?


----------



## ItWillDo

BMFan30 said:


> Is this my own vitriol, troll? They are putting near invisible wires for kids and civilians to trip an explosive on an apartment block so putting explosives into toys is farfetched for you troll bag?
> 
> Nato has already changed their tone from 'we wont' get involved' to 'we are ready for conflict in the last days even on yank news' can you get a life you troll? How long do you think before you are forced to abandon your account because your shame has joined into one with Russia? If I was you I'd let the shame scoot you off the forum because you're an embarrassment.



How is that even evidence? First of all, there is no indication at all that was placed/left behind by Russian troops as it looks more like crappy militia work, second the argument was about toys being filled with explosives for children, not boobytraps.

Aside from that, what would even remotely give you the impression NATO is prepared to get involved? If anything, the opposite has been proven clear the past few days. Especially now that your dear fascist Azov Bataljon has been jeopardising the ceasefire in the humanitarian corridor. You can only play the "RuSsIaN sAbOtEuRs" card for so many times before plausibility disappears.

Either way, take peace with whatever you want to believe as the masks are falling off anyway. If you truly want to believe in the narrative that babushkas are taking down UAV's with cucumber jars, Russians are placing IEDs for kids and eating the elderly, have it your way.


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> Video Unavailable
> 
> The fired stewardesses crap?


fixed, probably fb video was private
yup, with a little addition in the end ))


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> Especially now that your dear fascist Azov Bataljon has been jeopardising the ceasefire in the humanitarian corridor.


Again that is according to 'extremely credible' Russian newsmakers, are you trying to look at some other sources at all? 

Acroding to the mayor of Mariupol 50 busses were prepared for evacuation, russian 'liberators' started shelling them and in the end there only 20 busses left and no-one managed to evacuate.

Also before you try to question the credibility of pro-Ukrainian sources should I remind you how Russia fulfilled their obligations on 'green corridor' from Ilovaisk in 2014?


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> fixed, probably fb video was private
> yup, with a little addition in the end ))



Good ol' Zelensky is a one-man superweapon.

I half-expect him to just give Putin a stroke brought on by impotent fury.


----------



## ItWillDo

oversteve said:


> Again that is according to 'extremely credible' Russian newsmakers, are you trying to look at some other sources at all?
> 
> Acroding to the mayor of Mariupol 50 busses were prepared for evacuation, russian 'liberators' started shelling them and in the end there only 20 busses left and no-one managed to evacuate.
> 
> Also before you try to question the credibility of pro-Ukrainian sources should I remind you how Russia fulfilled their obligations on 'green corridor' from Ilovaisk in 2014?


I'm currently trying to use 'extremely credible' Ukranian newsmakers. You know, the same people who brought you "Ghost of Kiev", "Cat that hunts snipers by tracking their laser optics", "Zelenskyy survives 483489th assassination attempt" & "Lady takes down UAV with cucumber jar". But propaganda tastes a tad different when it doesn't fit your personal bias.


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> I'm currently trying to use 'extremely credible' Ukranian newsmakers. You know, the same people who brought you "Ghost of Kiev", "Cat that hunts snipers by tracking their laser optics", "Zelenskyy survives 483489th assassination attempt" & "Lady takes down UAV with cucumber jar". But propaganda tastes a tad different when it doesn't fit your personal bias.


Would you kindly give me a link to that 'extremely credible' Ukranian newsmaker telling about Azov jeopardising the ceasefire? Does it have a .ru domain by any chance?


----------



## tedtan

ItWillDo said:


> I'm currently trying to use 'extremely credible' Ukranian newsmakers. You know, the same people who brought you "Ghost of Kiev", "Cat that hunts snipers by tracking their laser optics", "Zelenskyy survives 483489th assassination attempt" & "Lady takes down UAV with cucumber jar". But propaganda tastes a tad different when it doesn't fit your personal bias.


----------



## Adieu

ItWillDo said:


> I'm currently trying to use 'extremely credible' Ukranian newsmakers. You know, the same people who brought you "Ghost of Kiev", "Cat that hunts snipers by tracking their laser optics", "Zelenskyy survives 483489th assassination attempt" & "Lady takes down UAV with cucumber jar". But propaganda tastes a tad different when it doesn't fit your personal bias.



Dude, listen to Granny Nadia.




She don't mess around. Don't know about cucumber jars or what, but people like that will always find a way.

PS handmade sign "Bitches, F*CK OFF outta Ukraine and OUR VILLAGE! -Granny Nadia"


----------



## nickgray




----------



## ItWillDo

oversteve said:


> Would you kindly give me a link to that 'extremely credible' Ukranian newsmaker telling about Azov jeopardising the ceasefire? Does it have a .ru domain by any chance?











War In Ukraine Day 10: Civilian Evacuation Failed, Russia Gained Tactical Successes, Holding Strategic Pause (18+)


The tenth day of the conflict was marked by several milestone events. First of all, the Russian side attempted to...




southfront.org





The Ukrainian part was a joke of course, but have a Southfront link.


----------



## nickgray

ItWillDo said:


> but have a Southfront link.



Lol, the domain is registered in Russia 





__





ICANN Lookup


The ICANN registration data lookup tool gives you the ability to look up the current registration data for domain names and Internet number resources.




lookup.icann.org





So... how does Putin taste?


----------



## ItWillDo

nickgray said:


> Lol, the domain is registered in Russia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ICANN Lookup
> 
> 
> The ICANN registration data lookup tool gives you the ability to look up the current registration data for domain names and Internet number resources.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lookup.icann.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So... how does Putin taste?


They've been for years as reporting on US war crimes doesn't make you very popular. As said before, you choose the narrative you deem fit.

And good joke, totally hasn't already been played out here. Starting to taste like victory by the way.


----------



## Adieu

Nope, never heard of them.

Some RT-affiliated pet "Western experts"?


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> They've been for years as reporting on US war crimes doesn't make you very popular. As said before, you choose the narrative you deem fit.
> 
> And good joke, totally hasn't already been played out here. Starting to taste like victory by the way.


Bombing civilians tastes like victory? Are you out of you mind? 

That's basically like me asking you "do you eat sh*t?" and you instead of denying it say "yup, it's tasty"...


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Good ol' Zelensky is a one-man superweapon.
> 
> I half-expect him to just give Putin a stroke brought on by impotent fury.



Oh yeah, Zelensky has been amazing throughout this.

And you really can't underestimate just how important strong leadership is here. I think its fair to say that the Ukrainians are only defeated when they feel defeated. That could have happened on day 1 if Zelensky hadn't just stood up and said "Fuck this noise, get the ordinance". And here we are now.


----------



## narad

ItWillDo said:


> Starting to taste like victory by the way.


----------



## bostjan

ItWillDo said:


> War In Ukraine Day 10: Civilian Evacuation Failed, Russia Gained Tactical Successes, Holding Strategic Pause (18+)
> 
> 
> The tenth day of the conflict was marked by several milestone events. First of all, the Russian side attempted to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> southfront.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Ukrainian part was a joke of course, but have a Southfront link.


News site named after a division of the Red Army, based in Russia, financially backed by the Russian government.

I'm sure you believe that checks out, but good luck convincing anyone that you posted a link to an extremely credible source from within the Ukraine! It's bullshit like that which will get people to ignore you even if you make a meritted argument.


----------



## Randy

Analysis: Trump has been on Putin's side in Ukraine's long struggle against Russian aggression


Americans rarely pay much attention to international events. Busy lives leave little time for distant events with unfamiliar protagonists.




www.cnn.com


----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


> Analysis: Trump has been on Putin's side in Ukraine's long struggle against Russian aggression
> 
> 
> Americans rarely pay much attention to international events. Busy lives leave little time for distant events with unfamiliar protagonists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com



Well if a news agency as balanced and non-partisan as CNN says Trump is a bad guy, it must definitely be true, right?


----------



## MaxOfMetal

LostTheTone said:


> Well if a news agency as balanced and non-partisan as CNN says Trump is a bad guy, it must definitely be true, right?



Is anything specific in that article objectively false?

A news source can be biased in their coverage and tone _without making things up_. Which is an important distinction between an outlet like CNN and actual state sponsored propaganda like RT.

The linked article isn't purely an opinion piece. It features direct quotes from first hand sources and further links to additional sources.


----------



## Randy

LostTheTone said:


> Well if a news agency as balanced and non-partisan as CNN says Trump is a bad guy, it must definitely be true, right?


An objective or inquisitive person would read the article and analyze the facts within point by point. CNNs conclusions don't need to be your (rhetorical) conclusions.

There's a lot of "I see who made this therefore I'm not going to bother reading it" going on in this thread, which is fucking lazy.


----------



## LostTheTone

MaxOfMetal said:


> Is anything specific in that article objectively false?
> 
> A news source can be biased in their coverage and tone _without making things up_. Which is an important distinction between an outlet like CNN and actual state sponsored propaganda like RT.



Didn't you read what I said?

I said I fully trust CNN to be a impartial news source on this topic.

The fact you respond weirdly defensively to that is on you.


----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


> An objective or inquisitive person would read the article and analyze the facts within point by point. CNNs conclusions don't need to be your (rhetorical) conclusions.
> 
> There's a lot of "I see who made this therefore I'm not going to bother reading it" going on in this thread, which is fucking lazy.



Again, I said I trust them.


----------



## MaxOfMetal

LostTheTone said:


> Didn't you read what I said?
> 
> I said I fully trust CNN to be a impartial news source on this topic.
> 
> The fact you respond weirdly defensively to that is on you.



You're full of shit.

If you think anyone buys that you're as lost as homeboy claiming victory. 

You used a question mark.


----------



## LostTheTone

MaxOfMetal said:


> You're full of shit.
> 
> If you think anyone buys that you're as lost as homeboy claiming victory.



You can't take yes for an answer mate.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

So much cringe it's like Trump claiming sarcasm when the stupid thing he said would go over like a lead balloon.


----------



## LostTheTone

Dineley said:


> So much cringe it's like Trump claiming sarcasm when the stupid thing he said would go over like a lead balloon.



I'm not claiming sarcasm.

The opposite - I'm saying that I believe CNN.

And the people who are saying that CNN are correct can't accept that, and are flocking anyway to keep demanding I agree with them harder.

Weird reaction, honestly.


----------



## MaxOfMetal

_"The lady doth protest too much, methinks."_





__





Failure removes music from Spotify


Imagining is trivial, outlining solid political and economic plans is harder, and then implementing solid political and economic plans that would benefit the majority but remove some power from those that have the most power is basically impossible without bringing out the guillotines, sure...




www.sevenstring.org





_"CNN has no credibility" _

Full. Of. Shit.


----------



## narad

LostTheTone said:


> I'm not claiming sarcasm.
> 
> The opposite - I'm saying that I believe CNN.
> 
> And the people who are saying that CNN are correct can't accept that, and are flocking anyway to keep demanding I agree with them harder.
> 
> Weird reaction, honestly.



And I for one totally believe you. Trump is a bad guy.


----------



## LostTheTone

narad said:


> And I for one totally believe you. Trump is a bad guy.



Oh indeed. 

I've had my mind completely changed by this thread. Now I know that Trump is the worst. 

So since we all agree, can we stop posting random bullshit about Trump into this thread about Ukraine?


----------



## narad

LostTheTone said:


> Oh indeed.
> 
> I've had my mind completely changed by this thread. Now I know that Trump is the worst.
> 
> So since we all agree, can we stop posting random bullshit about Trump into this thread about Ukraine?



That's where we must disagree, because there are still some dolts out there that need to be reminded of how/when Trump has been on the wrong side of these issues. You would have thought that kissing Russia's ass would have been poor policy in any decade -- certainly that's not the Reagan way to do things -- but just years ago it was actually pretty status quo for republicans to be on board with it. Turns out Putin was a bad guy, too! Again, things we know now because of CNN, but I can't help but think there were also warning signs back then. Ah, nah, that's crazy talk.


----------



## LostTheTone

narad said:


> That's where we must disagree, because there are still some dolts out there that need to be reminded of how/when Trump has been on the wrong side of these issues. You would have thought that kissing Russia's ass would have been poor policy in any decade -- certainly that's not the Reagan way to do things -- but just years ago it was actually pretty status quo for republicans to be on board with it. Turns out Putin was a bad guy, too! Again, things we know now because of CNN, but I can't help but think there were also warning signs back then. Ah, nah, that's crazy talk.



So, you feel compelled to just keep posting "By the way guys, Trump is literally the worst" every now and again into literally every thread just to make sure no-one who has a contrary opinion is hanging around?

That sounds like it might be straight trolling.


----------



## Randy

LostTheTone said:


> Oh indeed.
> 
> I've had my mind completely changed by this thread. Now I know that Trump is the worst.
> 
> So since we all agree, can we stop posting random bullshit about Trump into this thread about Ukraine?


Well if you forget the Trump stuff for a minute, the rest of the stuff outlined in the article (and just, like, commonly known things over time) show the timeline of basically a corrupt Russian puppet government in Ukraine that was ousted not that long ago and basically the fact Putin decided if he couldn't control the country from within, then he'd do it through force. Which has been an ongoing process, ever since.

If you wanna stick your fingers in your ears about the Trump part fine but the point is that Viktor Yanukovych was ousted and is living in exile in Russia, and all indications are that if Putin topples the Ukrainian government, that's who theyre looking to reinstall. Viktor Yanukovych also happens to be a client of Paul Manafort. You can stick your fingers in your ears for that part too I guess.


----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


> Well if you forget the Trump stuff for a minute, the rest of the stuff outlined in the article (and just, like, commonly known things over time) show the timeline of basically a corrupt Russian puppet government in Ukraine that was ousted not that long ago and basically the fact Putin decided if he couldn't control the country from within, them he'd do it though force. Which has been an ongoing process, ever since.
> 
> If you wanna stick your fingers in your ears about the Trump part fine but the point is that Viktor Yanukovych was ousted and is living in exile in Russia, and all indications are that if Putin topples the Ukrainian government, that's who theyre looking to reinstall. Viktor Yanukovych also happens to be a client of Paul Manafort. You can stick your fingers in your ears for that part too I guess.



Yes... I said I agree with the story.

That appears to be a correct assessment of the facts.

Do you have any particular part of that which you'd like to discuss in greater depth?


----------



## narad

LostTheTone said:


> So, you feel compelled to just keep posting "By the way guys, Trump is literally the worst" every now and again into literally every thread just to make sure no-one who has a contrary opinion is hanging around?
> 
> That sounds like it might be straight trolling.


Nah, more like, in light of current events, fully appreciate the extent of the wrongness in a way only possible in retrospect, via this link <actual article written by real journalists with sources and everything>


----------



## LostTheTone

narad said:


> Nah, more like, in light of current events, fully appreciate the extent of the wrongness in a way only possible in retrospect, via this link <actual article written by real journalists with sources and everything>



Ah, so you are committed to just harping on about years old arguments forever more and never once letting those you perceive as having been in the wrong forget about it?

That sounds very sane, and very healthy.

Fortunately I have come around to your way of thinking, and of course I was thousands of miles away during those old arguments anyway.

I now read <real article> every day and find <real journalist> to the smartest guy in media, so you know that I'm always going to agree with you on everything now. So there really is no need to try and constantly expose the wrongness of anything. In fact, since I agree with you, if I were to admit I was wrong then I would sadly be also saying you were wrong, and that seems counter productive.


----------



## Randy

LostTheTone said:


> Yes... I said I agree with the story.
> 
> That appears to be a correct assessment of the facts.
> 
> Do you have any particular part of that which you'd like to discuss in greater depth?


A relevant discussion IMO, because Ukraine needs all the support from the West that they can get in this conflict, in the rebuilding and in protecting their borders going forward. 

There's a significant pro-Putin element here in the United States (far-right) that have some voice in the main stream. Considering we have mid-term elections (which can flip our legislature) and we have Presidential elections in just two years (which, some people believe one candidate is a Russian sympathizer) , I think there's concern about the US maintaining their commitment to Ukraine. I think we can all agree the battle, rebuild and reinforcement timeline of this conflict will go beyond two years.


----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


> A relevant discussion IMO, because Ukraine needs all the support from the West that they can get in this conflict, in the rebuilding and in protecting their borders going forward.
> 
> There's a significant pro-Putin element here in the United States (far-right) that have some voice in the main stream. Considering we have mid-term elections (which can flip our legislature) and we have Presidential elections in just two years (which, some people believe one candidate is a Russian sympathizer) , I think there's concern about the US maintaining their commitment to Ukraine. I think we can all agree the battle, rebuild and reinforcement timeline of this conflict will go beyond two years.



Yes, I agree that this is a relevant part to consider but honestly I don't think either the mid-terms or the presidential election will have any impact on the policy towards Ukraine now.

Assuming that Ukraine still exists as an independent state then the only policy that will be acceptable to the American electorate is "send them cash and weapons". It would be an issue somewhat like Israel. Yes there are lots of views, but both establishment parties largely agree and don't want to talk about it too much. I have seen Republicans being too outspoken in defense of Ukraine, but none who have said that they actually support Russia.

While I'm sure we all know that Trump is an FSB agent; either the American public does not agree, or if they do agree then Trump simply won't run. There are other options in the party - Cruz and DeSantis particularly. If Ukraine and Russia are issues in the air, the GoP will choose candidates who aren't linked there.


----------



## narad

LostTheTone said:


> Ah, so you are committed to just harping on about years old arguments forever more and never once letting those you perceive as having been in the wrong forget about it?
> 
> That sounds very sane, and very healthy.



That's why we study history. People still harp on about strategic mistakes in WWII. The questions is simply whether they're relevant to the current discourse. Since the context is Russia, Ukraine, and how other nations are reacting, it seems relevant enough to me.


----------



## Randy

LostTheTone said:


> Yes, I agree that this is a relevant part to consider but honestly I don't think either the mid-terms or the presidential election will have any impact on the policy towards Ukraine now.
> 
> Assuming that Ukraine still exists as an independent state then the only policy that will be acceptable to the American electorate is "send them cash and weapons". It would be an issue somewhat like Israel. Yes there are lots of views, but both establishment parties largely agree and don't want to talk about it too much. I have seen Republicans being too outspoken in defense of Ukraine, but none who have said that they actually support Russia.
> 
> While I'm sure we all know that Trump is an FSB agent; either the American public does not agree, or if they do agree then Trump simply won't run. There are other options in the party - Cruz and DeSantis particularly. If Ukraine and Russia are issues in the air, the GoP will choose candidates who aren't linked there.


You're probably right about that. I don't think obscure attitudes toward Ukraine/Russia are party-wide, it's more a matter of "who". I'm no Ted Cruz fan but he's been consistent on his attitude toward Russia, as have _most _of his colleagues.

Still, everything needs to be done to make sure some people have no influence on policy going forward on this.



> Let’s start with Greene. Over the weekend, she appeared at the America First Political Action Conference alongside its white nationalist organizer, Nick Fuentes. Before Greene’s remarks, Fuentes asked the audience to give “a round of applause” for Russia during its brutal invasion of Ukraine, which prompted a chant of “Putin” from the crowd in support of Moscow’s leader.











How Ukraine split the GOP







www.politico.com


----------



## LostTheTone

narad said:


> That's why we study history. People still harp on about strategic mistakes in WWII. The questions is simply whether they're relevant to the current discourse. Since the context is Russia, Ukraine, and how other nations are reacting, it seems relevant enough to me.



I'm sure that they are really holding conferences where they give deeply researched presentations about how @RandomForumDickeah6969 was wrong about Trumps tax plan.


----------



## narad

LostTheTone said:


> I'm sure that they are really holding conferences where they give deeply researched presentations about how @RandomForumDickeah6969 was wrong about Trumps tax plan.


I could easily see Trump's position on Russia discussed in some lead-up context to the current engagement, taught in some year 2058 high school maybe-WWIII unit. Obviously different from your example which would not be relevant to anything, but is on the other hand not being discussed in this thread either.


----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


> You're probably right about that. I don't think obscure attitudes toward Ukraine/Russia are party-wide, it's more a matter of "who". I'm no Ted Cruz fan but he's been consistent on his attitude toward Russia, as have _most _of his colleagues.
> 
> Still, everything needs to be done to make sure some people have no influence on policy going forward on this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Ukraine split the GOP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com



Well, the problem is that the people with a long track record against Russia are the same people who salivated at the idea of the Patriot Act and the war on terror and/or drugs. Of course, that doesn't rule out someone like Cruz from winning, the moment he grew a beard I felt like he was preparing for a proper run... But fuuuuck I don't want more neo-cons in power.

Thing to remember about Taylor-Green (and any others) is that congresspeople don't actually have much power or influence. There's loooooads of them, and the new arrivals are at the bottom of their party pecking order. That's largely why the most junior members make so much noise, because they can't really influence anything working with the system. People who have real influence shut up because yelling in public means you'll go back to being on the outside.

The fact that Green is a foghorn indicates that she is a no-one.


----------



## LostTheTone

narad said:


> I could easily see Trump's position on Russia discussed in some lead-up context to the current engagement, taught in some year 2058 high school maybe-WWIII unit. Obviously different from your example which would not be relevant to anything, but is on the other hand not being discussed in this thread either.



You did say that you were posting things to rub the noses of other forum members in it, right?

And you think this is the same thing as academic historians?


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> Well if a news agency as balanced and non-partisan as CNN says Trump is a bad guy, it must definitely be true, right?



Wait, was anyone still confused about this?

I thought the dispute could be described as:

USA left: He's an asshole
USA right: He's OUR asshole
Russia: *facepalm* no, he's OUR asshole


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> Well, the problem is that the people with a long track record against Russia are the same people who salivated at the idea of the Patriot Act and the war on terror and/or drugs. Of course, that doesn't rule out someone like Cruz from winning, the moment he grew a beard I felt like he was preparing for a proper run... But fuuuuck I don't want more neo-cons in power.
> 
> Thing to remember about Taylor-Green (and any others) is that congresspeople don't actually have much power or influence. There's loooooads of them, and the new arrivals are at the bottom of their party pecking order. That's largely why the most junior members make so much noise, because they can't really influence anything working with the system. People who have real influence shut up because yelling in public means you'll go back to being on the outside.
> 
> The fact that Green is a foghorn indicates that she is a no-one.



Don't worry, Cruz can't win. His wing of his side is too racist to fully embrace him.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Don't worry, Cruz can't win. His wing of his side is too racist to fully embrace him.



No, Cruz probably can't win because he doesn't have the charisma. He is very measured and very clear, but he is a policy minded guy, not someone who can generate energy or excitement. He would be a great VP candidate alongside someone who was more of a showman.

And, I'm afraid, the only people who care about Cruz's ethnicity are people who are not GOP members. Can you imagine being a legit racist in a party that includes almost all religious Jews, most religious Latinos and a lot of Cubanos? 

If nothing else - Who else are the racists going to vote for? For Biden II? Or for DeSantis? Almost certainly not for Rand Paul.


----------



## Randy

I'm expecting a disastrous K. Harris v Desantis 2024 race. I say "disastrous" because nobody in her own party wants her but it'll be another arranged marriage and I'm no Desantis fan. 

If the Republican Party wants to start looking like they're not a clown show, they should be tapping someone like Charlie Baker.


----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> I'm expecting a disastrous K. Harris v Desantis 2024 race. I say "disastrous" because nobody in her own party wants her but it'll be another arranged marriage and I'm no Desantis fan.
> 
> If the Republican Party wants to start looking like they're not a clown show, they should be tapping someone like Charlie Baker.



Nah. It'll be Graham.

That guy is clearly maneuvering to milk Putin's inevitable downfall AND any long drawn-out standoff or conflict.

We're heading back to an era of foreign policy hawks.


----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


> I'm expecting a disastrous K. Harris v Desantis 2024 race. I say "disastrous" because nobody in her own party wants her but it'll be another arranged marriage and I'm no Desantis fan.
> 
> If the Republican Party wants to start looking like they're not a clown show, they should be tapping someone like Charlie Baker.



Yeah, I think that's the smart money for the candidates.

I don't think Kamala can possibly win though. She hasn't exactly covered herself in glory since she became VP, and wasn't even popular in her own party before that. And it really doesn't help that she'd be inheriting it off Biden. Sure, if Biden dies in office that would fly, but doesn't look good to anyone to be the VP taking over from a one term guy who decided not to run again.

One day Tulsi, my darling... One day they will let you run.


----------



## Randy

Code:


https://www.instagram.com/tv/CawqxwVDS-Q/?utm_medium=copy_link


----------



## Xaios

Randy said:


>



Link is busted.


----------



## Randy

Xaios said:


> Link is busted.


The embed isn't working but I think the link works? Lemme try just pasting.


----------



## Randy




----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


>




Oof.

Man, Fox has been a proper disgrace on all of this stuff. I know that they love just reporting the opposite of whatever "the libs" are saying but this stuff is bordering on unhinged. 

It's one thing to spin things for a conservative audience, or to say that there are complexities to this situation that the US shouldn't get involved with. Hell, I can even understand going along with the Russian claims about the breakaway bits of Ukraine, or even parroting stuff about how Russia was always going to react to Ukraine trying to join NATO. You can say all of that, while still saying "...but this invasion is wrong". 

It's a whole different thing for them to be downplaying this, as if Ukraine is a country that we've never heard of and this massive invasion is something that we shouldn't worry about too much. 

Like... It's front page news every day. It's a big deal. It's a bloody awful thing. And honestly I had hoped for a bit more, and for a bit more unity on this kind of issues. 

We can all argue about what could or should be done, but I'd have hoped that shelling civilians nextdoor to Poland would be something we would all agree was a bad thing.


----------



## tedtan

Randy said:


>



How did ItWillDo get on Fox?


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> How is that even evidence? First of all, there is no indication at all that was placed/left behind by Russian troops as it looks more like crappy militia work, second the argument was about toys being filled with explosives for children, not boobytraps.
> 
> Aside from that, what would even remotely give you the impression NATO is prepared to get involved? If anything, the opposite has been proven clear the past few days. Especially now that your dear fascist Azov Bataljon has been jeopardising the ceasefire in the humanitarian corridor. You can only play the "RuSsIaN sAbOtEuRs" card for so many times before plausibility disappears.
> 
> Either way, take peace with whatever you want to believe as the masks are falling off anyway. If you truly want to believe in the narrative that babushkas are taking down UAV's with cucumber jars, Russians are placing IEDs for kids and eating the elderly, have it your way.


LOL you're dumber than bricks, the Russian soldiers are so desperate... as are you with your shitbrick responses.

You keep citing Azov Batallion which is a fraction Russian, yet Putin is blind, deaf and retarded to neo Nazi's in his own land sending leader "Utkin" of Wagner Group to denazify Ukrainians. You can't make this shit up.

Who violated temporary ceasfire is Russian soldiers minutes after Putin has agreed to it then violated it minutes later. There are plenty of sources for you to see other than the little I've posted below.





Here is Russians voilating ceasfire 2 years ago again so there should have been no faith he will hold his word that fascist Putin and his war crimes:


The only mask that's falling off is yours and the Russian military as well as Putin you embarrassing fuck.


----------



## BMFan30

Randy said:


> Something that crossed my mind is, considering the state of the media in that country, how many of these people in these interviews think it's a setup and if they say the wrong thing they're going to the gulag?


That's because it's the same risk as their teenage sons/soldiers that have been put in the oven instead of a body to be buried, German 40s style is imposed on the civilians of Russia for standing up for real justice. They simply just haven't yet caught up to the sanctions that threaten the Russian civilians comfort yet but soon the Russian people will catch on and do mass protests because they will realize there is more civilians than there is authority or prison space to lock them all up.

The risk is real out there, there is nothing stopping Putin from occupying his own streets like Hitler and imposing a martial law on his own people for peaceful protests.

To be clear I'm against all the scrutiny that Russian people have gotten from escaping a crooked leader like Putin or a similar regime then be crucified for it in any other country like UK or America since those Russians are against it but pay the price anyways. It's heartbreaking from any side even if Ukraine is paying a higher price, but still those good Russians are not at fault.

I guess if those countries don't have a conflict locally like Ukraine VS Russian war then they will make it themselves like they don't have a life of their own. I'm extremely against the chasing of good Russians that are against it and did everything they could to get away from crooked regimes.


----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


>




On the bright side, useful idiot Lindsey Graham is still tweeting for regime change in Russia. Again and again.

Let's maybe put aside our differences for the moment and encourage those conservatives who aren't willing to be the Kremlin USA branch? Write to him to get air defences for Ukraine.


----------



## BMFan30

Flappydoodle said:


> Problem is, the massive exaggeration is like boy who cried wolf. It undermines your credibility and sense of urgency.
> 
> Obviously Russia using explosives anywhere near a nuclear power plant is reckless and has been rightfully condemned by everybody. But calling it six Chernobyls or an almost meltdown is pretty stupid and excessive fearmongering. The fire was at a storage shed far away from the reactors, and to my understanding only one reactor actually has nuclear fuel in it.
> 
> Problem is that everybody is talking a bunch of shit right now. Putin says everything is going to plan when it obviously isn’t. Ukraine is allegedly killing thousands of Russians per day according to them, which seems implausible.


That nuclear reactor powers more than just Ukraine but other European countries so it's not fear mongering to say it will have radiation levels that ere 10x as dangerous as Chernobyl. It's a real fear because that explosion would have affected the Russian soldiers shooting at it. It's like Putin coming through on his word of Nuclear Weapons. 

Take it as you will because I don't believe you're the a troll like ItWillDo but it's a real risk regardless. The firemen that went to try to extinguish the fire were shot at but they have managed to put the flames out in the end so the relief is real for everyone out there. Trust me you don't want a reactor that big to blow up anywhere near your local region when I say it.


----------



## BMFan30

Crungy said:


> That's a scary sight, _possibly_ inert bombs just laying around.
> 
> What the hell were they doing with wood on the trucks?


Russia is heavily relying on railways which have been shut done to some extent, then the Russians have resorted to bringing supplies like gas to tanks on trucks. Russians don't have enough tanks, which is where Ukrainian molotovs come into place since those trucks don't have the armor that tanks have to protect them. Many fuel/resource supplies have been blown up and the 40 mile long convoy has been stalled because Ukrainians blew their own bridge voiding their entry.

View this video to get a grasp of how the David (Ukraine) VS Goliath (Russia) war has been going. Russia has the infantry and sheer numbers but Ukraine has the logistics.

"Mass of Infantry wins battles but logistics win wars"
This is how I've been able to wipe my 8 day long tears for my relatives and country in the last 11 days and have more hope for Ukraine:


----------



## Randy

LostTheTone said:


> Oof.
> 
> Man, Fox has been a proper disgrace on all of this stuff. I know that they love just reporting the opposite of whatever "the libs" are saying but this stuff is bordering on unhinged.
> 
> It's one thing to spin things for a conservative audience, or to say that there are complexities to this situation that the US shouldn't get involved with. Hell, I can even understand going along with the Russian claims about the breakaway bits of Ukraine, or even parroting stuff about how Russia was always going to react to Ukraine trying to join NATO. You can say all of that, while still saying "...but this invasion is wrong".
> 
> It's a whole different thing for them to be downplaying this, as if Ukraine is a country that we've never heard of and this massive invasion is something that we shouldn't worry about too much.
> 
> Like... It's front page news every day. It's a big deal. It's a bloody awful thing. And honestly I had hoped for a bit more, and for a bit more unity on this kind of issues.
> 
> We can all argue about what could or should be done, but I'd have hoped that shelling civilians nextdoor to Poland would be something we would all agree was a bad thing.


Honestly, some credit to the host for pushing back and making the guy commit to what he was saying. 

I think having people on that read the Russian propaganda playbook line-and-verse is dangerous but if the guy is there, get it out there with his face on it. Cutting him off wouldn't have had the same impact as letting him say it, then debunking and spreading it. I wouldn't have him back though.


----------



## Randy

More background on good ol' Douglas Macgregor



> *2014 Russian annexation of Crimea*
> 
> In 2014, after Russia annex Crimea and was engaged in a conflict with Ukraine over its eastern parts, Macgregor appeared on Russian state-owned network RT where he called for the annexation of the Donbas and said residents of the region "are in fact Russians, not Ukrainians, and at the same time, you have Ukrainians in the west and in the north, who are not Russians.[19][33]


----------



## Adieu

I get the lofty goals of freedom of press, but do we have some sort of mechanism for punishing people who knowingly aid and abet bad actors?


----------



## Randy




----------



## DrewH

BMFan30 said:


> Russia is heavily relying on railways which have been shut done to some extent, then the Russians have resorted to bringing supplies like gas to tanks on trucks. Russians don't have enough tanks, which is where Ukrainian molotovs come into place since those trucks don't have the armor that tanks have to protect them. Many fuel/resource supplies have been blown up and the 40 mile long convoy has been stalled because Ukrainians blew their own bridge voiding their entry.
> 
> View this video to get a grasp of how the David (Ukraine) VS Goliath (Russia) war has been going. Russia has the infantry and sheer numbers but Ukraine has the logistics.
> 
> "Mass of Infantry wins battles but logistics win wars"
> This is how I've been able to wipe my 8 day long tears for my relatives and country in the last 11 days and have more hope for Ukraine:




That vid is well done. Logistics does win wars. However, the bigger issue for Russia is with their overall strategy in all of this. I've read more books than I can count on various wars and when I look at what Russia is doing, I have to wonder if the generals were hitting the vodka a bit too much during the planning phase. These are the 2 blatant failures of Russian planning so far.

1) They did this at the beginning of mud season. Really? This is mobile operations planning 101. You plan for a time of the year where the ground is suitable for your vehicles. Even the Germans knew this in 40 and 41. You wait until the ground is hard. 

2) There is no rhyme or reason to the Russian plan of attack for their ground operations. 4 Fronts? Who does that??? Looking at a map of the troop movements looks like someone had a seizure while drawing it up with arrows going in all sorts of directions. It would have been smarter for Russia to concentrate their forces more and roll the country up from east to west. It makes logistics easier for a country that clearly is logistics challenged. Plus, the whole Fixating on Kiev thing is very outdated military thinking that goes back 100's of years that basically if you took the capitol, you won the war. 

We can all be happy that Russia is THIS inept. It gives the Ukrainians a shot. I'm one of the few I know that is for mobilizing NATO and booting Russia out of Ukraine. Calculated risk, but if we made it clear we weren't crossing into Russia, I'd find it hard to believe that Vlady would launch nukes.


----------



## Adieu

DrewH said:


> That vid is well done. Logistics does win wars. However, the bigger issue for Russia is with their overall strategy in all of this. I've read more books than I can count on various wars and when I look at what Russia is doing, I have to wonder if the generals were hitting the vodka a bit too much during the planning phase. These are the 2 blatant failures of Russian planning so far.
> 
> 1) They did this at the beginning of mud season. Really? This is mobile operations planning 101. You plan for a time of the year where the ground is suitable for your vehicles. Even the Germans knew this in 40 and 41. You wait until the ground is hard.
> 
> 2) There is no rhyme or reason to the Russian plan of attack for their ground operations. 4 Fronts? Who does that??? Looking at a map of the troop movements looks like someone had a seizure while drawing it up with arrows going in all sorts of directions. It would have been smarter for Russia to concentrate their forces more and roll the country up from east to west. It makes logistics easier for a country that clearly is logistics challenged. Plus, the whole Fixating on Kiev thing is very outdated military thinking that goes back 100's of years that basically if you took the capitol, you won the war.
> 
> We can all be happy that Russia is THIS inept. It gives the Ukrainians a shot. I'm one of the few I know that is for mobilizing NATO and booting Russia out of Ukraine. Calculated risk, but if we made it clear we weren't crossing into Russia, I'd find it hard to believe that Vlady would launch nukes.



In their minds, this was all 100% logical

They THOUGHT they were rolling in unopposed, squatting essentially-undefended territory and digging in during peak mud season so they don't get blitzed out by NATO

Calculation was that democracies can react quickly (sometimes), but if forced to mull an idea for a couple months, will probably choose to do nothing and just "accept the inevitable"

INSTEAD... they're stuck playing the role they predicted for NATO troops


----------



## BMFan30

DrewH said:


> That vid is well done. Logistics does win wars. However, the bigger issue for Russia is with their overall strategy in all of this. I've read more books than I can count on various wars and when I look at what Russia is doing, I have to wonder if the generals were hitting the vodka a bit too much during the planning phase. These are the 2 blatant failures of Russian planning so far.


Genocide and Hitler ambitions is my only reasoning for them firing at Ukrainian civilians is my only reasoning for any of this; to wipe Ukraine out of history altogether like Hitler tried with the Jewish people.



DrewH said:


> 1) They did this at the beginning of mud season. Really? This is mobile operations planning 101. You plan for a time of the year where the ground is suitable for your vehicles. Even the Germans knew this in 40 and 41. You wait until the ground is hard.


Exactly, at least Hitler hit the people with an announcement in Summer time. Putler hit Ukraine in the middle of Winter unannounced for the civilians to wake up confused.

Even after the bombing was evident, many thought it was just the continuation of war instead of the start of one. You have to understand Russian leaders are not bright, they option to expose their Achilles Heel to expose both their strengths and weaknesses all in one. That's why you have Russian tanks stuck in a knees height of mud without any fuel, food or other resources. Shit out of luck.



DrewH said:


> 2) There is no rhyme or reason to the Russian plan of attack for their ground operations. 4 Fronts? Who does that??? Looking at a map of the troop movements looks like someone had a seizure while drawing it up with arrows going in all sorts of directions. It would have been smarter for Russia to concentrate their forces more and roll the country up from east to west. It makes logistics easier for a country that clearly is logistics challenged. Plus, the whole Fixating on Kiev thing is very outdated military thinking that goes back 100's of years that basically if you took the capitol, you won the war.


Hey have a bundle of hay and too much vodka occupying their brains, it's why you see tracks along their bases wasting scarce fuel, not knowing which way they should go. They are disorganized and desperate. They think if they capture Kyiv then they can roll out a puppet government, governing the remaining people stuck in Ukraine.

They also put a huge bet/gamble on capturing Ukraine within a couple of days or a few which proved to be a giant failure for them since the civilians including women took a up arms, welded tank stoppers, sandbags and constructed molotovs ripping up the clothes they should have worn but made molotovs instead. They even stomped up or kicked over the food of Russians, not only because it was probably expired since 2015 like the Russian soldiers food but to make a statement of their courage.



DrewH said:


> We can all be happy that Russia is THIS inept. It gives the Ukrainians a shot. I'm one of the few I know that is for mobilizing NATO and booting Russia out of Ukraine. Calculated risk, but if we made it clear we weren't crossing into Russia, I'd find it hard to believe that Vlady would launch nukes.


Absolutely, Slava Ukraini! Even though Ukraine is huge need of closing up the sky with a no fly zone. They are still doing a decent job of closing it on their own thanks to Nato and other countries that have donated modern military weapons to protect themselves with from the ground.

Maybe and I mean only maybe since Ukrainian airforce was already no match for Russians to begin with but Ukrainians could have possibly been smart enough to stand a chance if Russia didn't bomb their airbase early on which is where the Russian logistics start and end.


----------



## Randy

"jokes"


----------



## scratchNdentPrestige




----------



## BMFan30

Randy said:


> "jokes"



Trump is such a disgrace, I used to root for him because he was right wing but now I know right to him means to wipe his own ass more properly than Biden can do it.


----------



## Hollowway

Apologies if this has been covered already, but is there a solution in which Putin pulls out of Ukraine, does not take it over, and doesn’t look like a loser in the process? My thinking is that Putin would see retreat as weak and emasculating, and he’d rather start WWIII than do it. But if there was a way for him to pull back, and look like a winner, to save face, then they could push for that. Its like with Trump losing the election - the only way he can save face is to say that he DID win in, but it was stolen. But has there been any solution like that floated for Putin, where he can come out feeling a winner?


----------



## BMFan30

Hollowway said:


> Apologies if this has been covered already, but is there a solution in which Putin pulls out of Ukraine, does not take it over, and doesn’t look like a loser in the process?


Not to Putler it doesn't, unfortunately. To him it's like a parent that made a threat against their kid and didn't come through on it. It appears to make him look weak in his mind. He's trying to lap up Hitler.



Hollowway said:


> My thinking is that Putin would see retreat as weak and emasculating, and he’d rather start WWIII than do it.


Exactly that. He is already taunting Nato by trying to blow up Nuclear Plants in Ukraine which to me is an extension of his threat of Nuclear Weapons to the west. He wants to throw everyone into ancient times where we only have a handful of people, a tree and a rock to our names.



Hollowway said:


> But if there was a way for him to pull back, and look like a winner, to save face, then they could push for that.


He already tried to save face by agreeing to Humanitarian Corridors which he minutes later violated himself despite agreeing to it like he has already done in the past. Anything Putin says he will do, you can bet he will do the opposite. He's become a puppet of himself which is predicting his every move based on the opposite statement. I would never advise my relatives to try to flee based on his agreements which have been already violated by his military opening fire on women and kids.



Hollowway said:


> Its like with Trump losing the election - the only way he can save face is to say that he DID win in, but it was stolen. But has there been any solution like that floated for Putin, where he can come out feeling a winner?


Basically this is the extent of his mainstream news that's followed and brainwashed by anyone still not inegrated into normal society that still follows his news networks no matter what other country they have lived in for 20 years, they still follow RT and other similar news networks.

I've spoken to relatives in Russia that parrot what he says which I've hung up on instantly because they follow the Russian equivalent of CNN over there and never look for any alternative news and more certaintly don't look at social media of Ukrainians uploading real footage of their homes being bombed by shameless Russian military since they have been left behind by their own Russian people and lied to desperately trying to fend for themselves with no resources, fuel or food.

Having said that I only feel bad for the people that eat up his propaganda because they simply just don't know any better until time will evidently prove otherwise when the lack of their comfort catches up to them where they will find themselves in the USSR against their will without any other European countries surrounding them who pump Russians full of resources leaving Russians without a finger to lift or care about since most imports come from elsewhere other than Russia so they will have to resort to real hard labor which they are not used to.


----------



## Adieu

Hollowway said:


> Apologies if this has been covered already, but is there a solution in which Putin pulls out of Ukraine, does not take it over, and doesn’t look like a loser in the process? My thinking is that Putin would see retreat as weak and emasculating, and he’d rather start WWIII than do it. But if there was a way for him to pull back, and look like a winner, to save face, then they could push for that. Its like with Trump losing the election - the only way he can save face is to say that he DID win in, but it was stolen. But has there been any solution like that floated for Putin, where he can come out feeling a winner?



Sure

We bribe the bunker to swap out his report folders, which tell him that he won.

The homicidal gnome doesn't actually know how to use the internet and never leaves his bunker to interact with real people. Like, seriously.

PS the odd thing here is that it isn't as surreal as it would seem. Based on the crap he spews, his reports are ALREADY from an absolutely alternate reality, composed by medieval-logic messengers who expect "good" news to bring rewards and "bad" news to be cause to kill the messenger


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> Sure
> 
> We bribe the bunker to swap out his report folders, which tell him that he won.
> 
> The homicidal gnome doesn't actually know how to use the internet and never leaves his bunker to interact with real people. Like, seriously.


LOL I was shocked to find out he uses printed out transcripts and has never used social media himself. He even used a green screen when meeting with a fleet of women recently, which I think is unnecessary in of itself but he did it anyways to "prove" he is unafraid. LOL It's just so laughable, he mirrors his teenage soldier POW's born after the year 2,000 on camera drooping snot over their balls below them.

Ukrainian civilians show such bravery by stepping in front of tanks, military trucks and even throwing punches or cursing out armed Russian soldiers while Putin fucks himself in the ass with his own tail. He's so shook.

Putin is such a pussy, he is nothing compared to the bravery of Zelenski who has no shame or fear being out in his bombed capital. Or his female leader counterparts which have taken up arms themselves.

You will never find a Russian citizen putting a dirty, stinking trash can over a Russian leader's head like the Ukrainians have literally done to their crooked leader, driving them out of their towns in such shame.






It's not like in America, at all... Ukraine just doesn't play that shit.


----------



## narad

I know it's a sort of rule to not talk shit about other online guitar communities (so I mostly just do it in passing ;-)), but anyone want to guess what side of the issue Rig-talk is on? Almost entirely on the Russian propaganda side. Dem/Rep divides I understand, those sides are just mostly part of American life, but blows my mind that a huge demographic of Americans would eat up a Russian narrative so readily.


----------



## High Plains Drifter

I mean we seen so many times the depths that large groups of people will sink to in order for them to feel justified in their absorption of misinformation... with covid, with trump, the invasion of Ukraine, etc. Whether it's religious beliefs, phobias, conspiracy theories... the insanity just doesn't end. I'll never be surprised of anything that anyone does for the rest of my life. Just in the last four years we've seen and heard some of the most unimaginable shit coming from our leaders as well as citizens. People will believe any fucking thing and even if they don't, they don't actually have to... whatever makes them feel good.


----------



## Randy

narad said:


> I know it's a sort of rule to not talk shit about other online guitar communities (so I mostly just do it in passing ;-)), but anyone want to guess what side of the issue Rig-talk is on? Almost entirely on the Russian propaganda side. Dem/Rep divides I understand, those sides are just mostly part of American life, but blows my mind that a huge demographic of Americans would eat up a Russian narrative so readily.


Honestly, it's unhealthy to even engage with that shit even as sick curiousity. Reading people applauding a dictator invading a country and murdering civilians is shit that will rot your brain, for real.

Reminder that the Nazi Party had a very healthy representation in the United States in the lead up to WWII. You're always going to have people with zero morals that are naive at best and evil at worst that fall for backing the strong man.


----------



## narad

Randy said:


> Honestly, it's unhealthy to even engage with that shit even as sick curiously. Reading people applauding a dictator invading a country and murdering civilians is shit that will rot your brain, for real.
> 
> Reminder that the Nazi Party had a very healthy representation in the United States in the lead up to WWII. You're always going to have people with zero morals that are naive at best and evil at worst that fall for backing the strong man.



I'm a bit out of the loop on US TV, but from the links posted here, it doesn't even seem like FOX and other right-leaning outlets are pushing it though, right? Like FOX pushed the fake election hacking stuff for forever, but from what I'm generally seeing, it seems like they drew the line at ~the war is not happening / the Ukrainians are Nazis. Which would then imply these people switched to getting their news solely from social media? That's a scary thought. My dad's been towing a 50/50 line between FOX and zerohedge for years, which keeps him somewhat reasonable, but I've never expected him/don't expect him to go all in on the internet sources.


----------



## Randy

narad said:


> I'm a bit out of the loop on US TV, but from the links posted here, it doesn't even seem like FOX and other right-leaning outlets are pushing it though, right? Like FOX pushed the fake election hacking stuff for forever, but from what I'm generally seeing, it seems like they drew the line at ~the war is not happening / the Ukrainians are Nazis. Which would then imply these people switched to getting their news solely from social media? That's a scary thought. My dad's been towing a 50/50 line between FOX and zerohedge for years, which keeps him somewhat reasonable, but I've never expected him/don't expect him to go all in on the internet sources.


Dems are all of a single mind on this (Ukraine good, Putin bad), and 75% of the Republican Party are either neocons or have scruples, so they're in favor of helping Ukraine. Actually if you watch Fox News, most of the Republicans on there are complaining Biden isn't doing enough, he should have greater sanctions, Marco Rubio says stop buying Russian oil right now, Lindsey Graham says assassinate Putin, etc. So no, Fox News and the Republican Party as a whole are NOT pushing the Russian propaganda line.

These Putinist people stateside are two things, they're contrarians and they want to be "right". When 95% of people are rooting for the underdog, they're that 5% cheering on watching them getting their brains beaten in because they get to be "right" and in the minority that supported it. Win win, affirmations abound. 

It's a bottomless pit of misery even paying mind to it.


----------



## spudmunkey




----------



## Hollowway

At what point do you think the US gets involved? It sounds like the line in the sand is NATO, and if a NATO country is attacked, then we all go in. But with the reluctance of the west to give Putin an excuse to go nuclear, I’m wondering what that line might actually be. Like, they already have that one WNBA player - what if they hold more Americans there? What if they attack the NATO country planes/ships/trucks providing weapons to Ukraine? I’m trying to figure out what the conversation is right now, and how far they’ll let Putin go before they say eff it, we’re going in. 

Secondly, what are the odds that the CIA/MI-6, etc have people in Russia trying to kill Putin? Maybe I’ve been watching to many movies, but I’m picturing a “none of this is sanctioned. If you’re caught, we cannot help you,” conversation going on at the highest levels of a few countries.


----------



## Adieu

I expect that if things somehow swing in Putin's favor, we end up with a Free City of Lviv endlessly resupplied through Poland, Putin threatening to attack targets in Poland as "legitimate" (probably with the words "for aiding and abetting terrorist insurgents"), and we'd be right back to the imminent standoff

Alternatively, if Ukraine chases the invaders back close to the RF borders, Putin starts swinging the nuclear dick or some other such crap, and NATO would still be forced to move forces into Ukraine to dissuade Putin from nuking her


----------



## LostTheTone

Hollowway said:


> Secondly, what are the odds that the CIA/MI-6, etc have people in Russia trying to kill Putin? Maybe I’ve been watching to many movies, but I’m picturing a “none of this is sanctioned. If you’re caught, we cannot help you,” conversation going on at the highest levels of a few countries.



It's probably a good chance. They wouldn't be doing their jobs if they weren't considering it. There is some non-zero chance that Putin has gone rogue, and isn't even really supported by his commanders, and if that's the case a quiet stab in the night would be a good way to end it.

But sadly they don't do exploding cigars anymore. It's something more like they find someone who is already going to try and kill Putin, and then covertly manipulate the situation so that when they try there is curiously no-one in the way to stop them.


----------



## Flappydoodle

BMFan30 said:


> That nuclear reactor powers more than just Ukraine but other European countries so it's not fear mongering to say it will have radiation levels that ere 10x as dangerous as Chernobyl. It's a real fear because that explosion would have affected the Russian soldiers shooting at it. It's like Putin coming through on his word of Nuclear Weapons.
> 
> Take it as you will because I don't believe you're the a troll like ItWillDo but it's a real risk regardless. The firemen that went to try to extinguish the fire were shot at but they have managed to put the flames out in the end so the relief is real for everyone out there. Trust me you don't want a reactor that big to blow up anywhere near your local region when I say it.



I actually did some more research into this. And again, I'm not downplaying the absolutely stupidity and irresponsibility of Russia using high explosives at a nuclear power plant. That has been condemned, rightfully, by almost everybody.

So out of 6 reactors, only 1 was actually active. And this type of reactor literally cannot go up in a Chernobyl style boom. Chernobyl had a meltdown and then burned with a graphite fire for several days. It was the fire that did the real damage spreading contamination in smoke and dust for hundreds of miles. This reactor in Ukraine has no graphite and cannot melt down by design. Even if Russia hit the roof of the actual reactor with a bunker-busting bomb, you would have a radiation leak, not a meltdown. Obviously still extremely bad and we want to avoid it, but it not be anywhere near the scale or severity of Chernobyl. 

My point is, there is a LOT of "fake news" out there. You've got one side claiming a special military operation and no targeting of civilians and you've got the other basically calling for WW3 (no fly zone) and promoting "six Chernobyls". The six Chernobyls thing is far away enough from truth that I am comfortable calling it fear-mongering bullshit. Problem is, it's very harmful. That kind of exaggeration scares the shit out of people, and also manipulates them into making uninformed decisions which are not based on facts. And as I mentioned earlier, "boy who cried wolf" syndrome if you do it too often.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> I expect that if things somehow swing in Putin's favor, we end up with a Free City of Lviv endlessly resupplied through Poland, Putin threatening to attack targets in Poland as "legitimate" (probably with the words "for aiding and abetting terrorist insurgents"), and we'd be right back to the imminent standoff



I think there is a good chance of this. 

As long as Zelensky lives, I don't think the Ukrainians will stop fighting. And the Poles are being bros already. 

I genuinely don't think that the Russians could manage to stretch to another siege of another city after Kiev. Even now they are struggling to put their hardware in the right place. For Lviv, the Ukrainians will have the opportunity to destroy roads and bridges and leave dudes behind them to attack supply lines.

Something to keep in mind - A US armoured division uses up like 500,000 gallons of fuel per day, or 1500 tonnes. The big fuel tankers we see on the road at home carry between 5,000 and 10,000 gallons. So each division needs a convoy of 50 to 100 fuel tankers running out to them every single day just to keep moving and fighting. This is not plausible when they don't have real air superiority, or when they leave behind people who hate them. The only way to protect those convoys is to escort them with other fuel using assets, which then cannot be used on the ground.


----------



## Flappydoodle

DrewH said:


> That vid is well done. Logistics does win wars. However, the bigger issue for Russia is with their overall strategy in all of this. I've read more books than I can count on various wars and when I look at what Russia is doing, I have to wonder if the generals were hitting the vodka a bit too much during the planning phase. These are the 2 blatant failures of Russian planning so far.
> 
> 1) They did this at the beginning of mud season. Really? This is mobile operations planning 101. You plan for a time of the year where the ground is suitable for your vehicles. Even the Germans knew this in 40 and 41. You wait until the ground is hard.
> 
> 2) There is no rhyme or reason to the Russian plan of attack for their ground operations. 4 Fronts? Who does that??? Looking at a map of the troop movements looks like someone had a seizure while drawing it up with arrows going in all sorts of directions. It would have been smarter for Russia to concentrate their forces more and roll the country up from east to west. It makes logistics easier for a country that clearly is logistics challenged. Plus, the whole Fixating on Kiev thing is very outdated military thinking that goes back 100's of years that basically if you took the capitol, you won the war.
> 
> We can all be happy that Russia is THIS inept. It gives the Ukrainians a shot. I'm one of the few I know that is for mobilizing NATO and booting Russia out of Ukraine. Calculated risk, but if we made it clear we weren't crossing into Russia, I'd find it hard to believe that Vlady would launch nukes.



I think they expected a quick surrender. Once the tanks were coming, they thought people would just say "ok" and accept it. 

However, as shown many times before in Russian history, they will overcome it by increasing the violence. They're definitely targeting civilians on purpose now. Shutting off power during winter. Cutting water supplies. Plus the random, widespread artillery barrages. They are trying to put the squeeze on people, use civilians as hostages, and force a surrender. They're hoping Zelensky (and the west) will see the civilians getting killed and surrender, thus saving a lot of lives.



Adieu said:


> Sure
> 
> We bribe the bunker to swap out his report folders, which tell him that he won.
> 
> The homicidal gnome doesn't actually know how to use the internet and never leaves his bunker to interact with real people. Like, seriously.
> 
> PS the odd thing here is that it isn't as surreal as it would seem. Based on the crap he spews, his reports are ALREADY from an absolutely alternate reality, composed by medieval-logic messengers who expect "good" news to bring rewards and "bad" news to be cause to kill the messenger



Putin is surrounded by loyalists and hawks. Some of them openly want to nuke the west and destroy NATO. Dude has had 20 years to appoint exactly who he wants into those positions. I don't think anybody will get to him like this.

I don't think anybody except maybe MI6 and CIA really knows what is in his reports. Maybe they don't even know. I'm genuinely curious whether he's actually mislead, or whether they're telling him the truth and he ignores it.



Hollowway said:


> At what point do you think the US gets involved? It sounds like the line in the sand is NATO, and if a NATO country is attacked, then we all go in. But with the reluctance of the west to give Putin an excuse to go nuclear, I’m wondering what that line might actually be. Like, they already have that one WNBA player - what if they hold more Americans there? What if they attack the NATO country planes/ships/trucks providing weapons to Ukraine? I’m trying to figure out what the conversation is right now, and how far they’ll let Putin go before they say eff it, we’re going in.
> 
> Secondly, what are the odds that the CIA/MI-6, etc have people in Russia trying to kill Putin? Maybe I’ve been watching to many movies, but I’m picturing a “none of this is sanctioned. If you’re caught, we cannot help you,” conversation going on at the highest levels of a few countries.


That is precisely why those re-supplies end at the Polish border. Putin can't attack anywhere in Poland.

And (hopefully) nobody will say "fuck it, we're going in" because nobody wants WW3.

Unfortunately I think what will happen is proxy war. Lots of Ukrainian casualties. Russian economy being strangled. People in Russia becoming angry. Hopefully it leads him to lose interest and back away. We'll probably give him Crimea as a token gesture so he feels like he got a win.


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> I think there is a good chance of this.
> 
> As long as Zelensky lives, I don't think the Ukrainians will stop fighting. And the Poles are being bros already.
> 
> I genuinely don't think that the Russians could manage to stretch to another siege of another city after Kiev. Even now they are struggling to put their hardware in the right place. For Lviv, the Ukrainians will have the opportunity to destroy roads and bridges and leave dudes behind them to attack supply lines.
> 
> Something to keep in mind - A US armoured division uses up like 500,000 gallons of fuel per day, or 1500 tonnes. The big fuel tankers we see on the road at home carry between 5,000 and 10,000 gallons. So each division needs a convoy of 50 to 100 fuel tankers running out to them every single day just to keep moving and fighting. This is not plausible when they don't have real air superiority, or when they leave behind people who hate them. The only way to protect those convoys is to escort them with other fuel using assets, which then cannot be used on the ground.



The Zelensky assumption is a Putin-style misreading of the situation.

If Putin dies, this thing ends, true.

However, Zelensky's death or capture would evoke rage, not submission. Moscow would probably end up with a new equine statue in place of a razed Lenin Mausoleum.


----------



## LostTheTone

Flappydoodle said:


> Unfortunately I think what will happen is proxy war. Lots of Ukrainian casualties. Russian economy being strangled. People in Russia becoming angry. Hopefully it leads him to lose interest and back away. We'll probably give him Crimea as a token gesture so he feels like he got a win.



I think this is correct - In some respects this conflict is Vietnam in reverse (from the western perspective). 

As has been seen time and time again in the 20th century, you just can't win a war if the local population don't want you to win it. Even when you are deliberately trying to do nation building and suchlike, the war will go on. The old Soviets couldn't even really conquer places properly. Look at Afghanistan (admittedly a tough target). They did eventually get the Chechens to lay down, but that was a region of Russia, not an external nation.

No way can Russia keep the forces in place in Ukraine to actually subdue it. So what happens? More fighting forever.


----------



## ItWillDo

BMFan30 said:


> LOL you're dumber than bricks, the Russian soldiers are so desperate... as are you with your shitbrick responses.
> 
> You keep citing Azov Batallion which is a fraction Russian, yet Putin is blind, deaf and retarded to neo Nazi's in his own land sending leader "Utkin" of Wagner Group to denazify Ukrainians. You can't make this shit up.
> 
> Who violated temporary ceasfire is Russian soldiers minutes after Putin has agreed to it then violated it minutes later. There are plenty of sources for you to see other than the little I've posted below.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is Russians voilating ceasfire 2 years ago again so there should have been no faith he will hold his word that fascist Putin and his war crimes:
> 
> 
> The only mask that's falling off is yours and the Russian military as well as Putin you embarrassing fuck.



Why so aggravated? I'm not the one lying to you. Not sure to which extent you have to cope to think they would go through the effort of creating a humanitarian corridor only to start shelling it while their Battalion is leading the operation in the midst of it. Not to mention "an unknown entity" opened fire and shot the Battalion leader to death, but these were probably also some Russian saboteur insurgents creating a false flag, or maybe Russia now shells Kalashnikovs which open fire on impact because their supply lines are so sad and economy so poor that they ran out of mortars.

Let me whisper you a little secret, the reason why the humanitarian corridors are being jeopardised, is because cities like Mariupol are completely surrounded and there is absolutely no way out for combatants. And considering the fascist militants stationed there would never surrender, they are using the innocent civilians as a shield. Russia has nothing to gain from starting a siege there as it controls the neighbouring areas anyway. The only one who has something to gain from the city & civilians remaining locked down are the militants remaining there.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> The Zelensky assumption is a Putin-style misreading of the situation.
> 
> If Putin dies, this thing ends, true.
> 
> However, Zelensky's death or capture would evoke rage, not submission. Moscow would probably end up with a new equine statue in place of a razed Lenin Mausoleum.



That's not what I'm saying - Zelensky has hugely boosted the Ukrainians, and as long as his government exists to organise and focus resistance then Ukraine will not be defeated. 

If his government falls (regardless of who is alive or dead) then that will signal the end of an organised effort to oppose Russia. 

It doesn't matter how mad the Ukrainians are, the free government of Ukraine is necessary to distribute foreign weapons and so forth. That's the critical factor, and why it matters that the Zelensky government has held together.


----------



## Adieu

ItWillDo said:


> Why so aggravated? I'm not the one lying to you. Not sure to which extent you have to cope to think they would go through the effort of creating a humanitarian corridor only to start shelling it while their Battalion is leading the operation in the midst of it. Not to mention "an unknown entity" opened fire and shot the Battalion leader to death, but these were probably also some Russian saboteur insurgents creating a false flag, or maybe Russia now shells Kalashnikovs which open fire on impact because their supply lines are so sad and economy so poor that they ran out of mortars.
> 
> Let me whisper you a little secret, the reason why the humanitarian corridors are being jeopardised, is because cities like Mariupol are completely surrounded and there is absolutely no way out for combatants. And considering the fascist militants stationed there would never surrender, they are using the innocent civilians as a shield. Russia has nothing to gain from starting a siege there as it controls the neighbouring areas anyway. The only one who has something to gain from the city & civilians remaining locked down are the militants remaining there.



People defending sovereign soil against foreign aggression with weapons received from a democratically elected government ain't "militants", you 150rur sellout


----------



## possumkiller

I wonder if all the NATO support is because many of the top NATO countries know that some of their politicians are taking Russian money and want to work on getting Russian influence out of western politics. Also, the change of tune of the Republicans is almost like they want Putin dead as much as Epstein needed to be dead.


----------



## oversteve

LostTheTone said:


> That's not what I'm saying - Zelensky has hugely boosted the Ukrainians, and as long as his government exists to organise and focus resistance then Ukraine will not be defeated.
> 
> If his government falls (regardless of who is alive or dead) then that will signal the end of an organised effort to oppose Russia.
> 
> It doesn't matter how mad the Ukrainians are, the free government of Ukraine is necessary to distribute foreign weapons and so forth. That's the critical factor, and why it matters that the Zelensky government has held together.


While I do agree that Zelensky is currently boosting the morale of the people significantly it's not like that he is organizing all the effort to fight himself. He and his party did lots of silly stuff prior to invasion and becuase of his ambition and stupidity army develepment was basically halted since early 2020. Also majority of people already expected him to flee from Ukraine if the invasion starts so him staying is like a pleasant bonus. It's quite possible that he wanted to get away but some patriotic authorities are holding him by the balls  

I guess the biggest credit should be given to the guys form Ministry of defence and foreighn affairs like Zaluzhny, Reznikov, Kuleba etc.


----------



## LostTheTone

possumkiller said:


> I wonder if all the NATO support is because many of the top NATO countries know that some of their politicians are taking Russian money and want to work on getting Russian influence out of western politics. Also, the change of tune of the Republicans is almost like they want Putin dead as much as Epstein needed to be dead.



Almost certainly not - Think about it in realistic terms. The whole of the West has risen up to impose sanctions and send support. Probably the greatest military support thus far is from Britain, who have the most Russian money swishing about. And while I don't expect our parliament to properly close the book on oligarchs, they are enacting sanctions and drawing up new laws on the subject. A new round of defense spending is on the cards here too, taking Britain further above the NATO minimum. Our PM is trying very hard to lead the opposition to Russia; YMMV how successful you think that might be; but Britain do not seem to be acting in a manner suggesting that Russia is in any way controlling our response. 

Other nations like Germany who might be seen as being under Russias thumb due to energy supplies have (to their significant credit) cancelled their gas pipeline and pushed up their military budget. 

In any case, "Russian influence" is not the job of the armed forces. It is the job of the intelligence services. 

Also; it is really aggravating to see "The Republican are bad because they support Putin! No, wait, now they are bad because they want to kill Putin!" in this manner. Just... Come on, lets try to keep things in the realms of sanity.


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> Why so aggravated? I'm not the one lying to you. Not sure to which extent you have to cope to think they would go through the effort of creating a humanitarian corridor only to start shelling it while their Battalion is leading the operation in the midst of it. Not to mention "an unknown entity" opened fire and shot the Battalion leader to death, but these were probably also some Russian saboteur insurgents creating a false flag, or maybe Russia now shells Kalashnikovs which open fire on impact because their supply lines are so sad and economy so poor that they ran out of mortars.
> 
> Let me whisper you a little secret, the reason why the humanitarian corridors are being jeopardised, is because cities like Mariupol are completely surrounded and there is absolutely no way out for combatants. And considering the fascist militants stationed there would never surrender, they are using the innocent civilians as a shield. Russia has nothing to gain from starting a siege there as it controls the neighbouring areas anyway. The only one who has something to gain from the city & civilians remaining locked down are the militants remaining there.


They shelled green corridors in Chechnya, they did the same here in Ukraine in 2014, and they are doing it now again. 

Of course you'll find that it's some Ukrainian "nazis" wrongdoings if you continue to eat sh*t from sources directly affected by Russian propaganda. But it seems like you are doing it deliberately


----------



## LostTheTone

oversteve said:


> While I do agree that Zelensky is currently boosting the morale of the people significantly it's not like that he is organizing all the effort to fight himself. He and his party did lots of silly stuff prior to invasion and becuase of his ambition and stupidity army develepment was basically halted since early 2020. Also majority of people already expected him to flee from Ukraine if the invasion starts so him staying is like a pleasant bonus. It's quite possible that he wanted to get away but some patriotic authorities are holding him by the balls
> 
> I guess the biggest credit should be given to the guys form Ministry of defence and foreighn affairs like Zaluzhny, Reznikov, Kuleba etc.



Right - But when I say Zelensky, I mean "the Zelensky government" as much as the man himself. He is the figurehead, not the administrator, and he has done his part very well. He has imposed his personality on the conflict. The fact that he isn't a military man is part of all this. He's an actor; you wouldn't expect him to be a stoic, unshakable leader in war time. But he has risen to the occasion, and inspired others to do so too. 

A change in leadership... Well, who knows? I have no idea how well regarded his deputy is. I'm sure the Ukrainian officials would continue to be as professional. But it is hard to imagine a new president managing to live up to him. It would be a change, certainly.


----------



## ItWillDo

Adieu said:


> People defending sovereign soil against foreign aggression with weapons received from a democratically elected government ain't "militants", you 150rur sellout


Unless the Oxford Dictionary changed the definition in support of Ukraine, that is almost quite literally the definition of militants.


oversteve said:


> They shelled green corridors in Chechnya, they did the same here in Ukraine in 2014, and they are doing it now again.
> 
> Of course you'll find that it's some Ukrainian "nazis" wrongdoings if you continue to eat sh*t from sources directly affected by Russian propaganda. But it seems like you are doing it deliberately








Damn, forgot logic doesn't count, propaganda is one-sided and NATO doesn't engage in such matters. Carry on!


----------



## Adieu

He's been an unexpected bonus pillar of strength and a constant source of propaganda wins and diplomatic successes

However, he's a great asset, not some sole foundation.


----------



## Adieu

ItWillDo said:


> Unless the Oxford Dictionary changed the definition in support of Ukraine, that is almost quite literally the definition of militants.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Damn, forgot logic doesn't count, propaganda is one-sided and NATO doesn't engage in such matters. Carry on!



Hey Kremlin!

Any news on when your boss finally marries his brown Alina in a modest bunker ceremony and solemnly offs himself?


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> Damn, forgot logic doesn't count, propaganda is one-sided and NATO doesn't engage in such matters. Carry on!


How about trying to find some logic first in efforts to occupy 40kk country with 150-200k troops and at the same time destroying Russian economy?

Russian logic senseless and merciless 

p.s. is it tasty?


----------



## ItWillDo

oversteve said:


> How about trying to find some logic first in efforts to occupy 40kk country with 150-200k troops and at the same time destroying Russian economy?
> 
> Russian logic senseless and merciless
> 
> p.s. is it tasty?


Also been through this TL;DR - If you kick a bear, don't be surprised when it mauls you.


----------



## LostTheTone

ItWillDo said:


> Also been through this TL;DR - If you kick a bear, don't be surprised when it mauls you.



Bears who maul people get shot by the rangers.


----------



## ItWillDo

LostTheTone said:


> Bears who maul people get shot by the rangers.


In this case they provided a popgun and cheer from the sidelines though.


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> Also been through this TL;DR - If you kick a bear, don't be surprised when it mauls you.


----------



## narad

Learning a lot about zoology in this thread.


----------



## LostTheTone

narad said:


> Learning a lot about zoology in this thread.



Oh man, go look up honey badgers. They are the absolute best.


----------



## oversteve




----------



## StevenC

LostTheTone said:


> Our PM is trying very hard to lead the opposition to Russia;


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

etc


----------



## Flappydoodle

possumkiller said:


> I wonder if all the NATO support is because many of the top NATO countries know that some of their politicians are taking Russian money and want to work on getting Russian influence out of western politics. Also, the change of tune of the Republicans is almost like they want Putin dead as much as Epstein needed to be dead.


Don’t think so. In reality, everybody is taking money from everybody. Russia, Saudi, China, Israel etc. And look at all the foreign aid budgets of western countries. Lots of that is simply buying influence abroad. In reality, it’s probably one of the real upsides of globalisation, because tying your financial futures together means it’s harder for countries to be total dicks. 

And the Republican view of the Trump era has never been that Russia is all fine and awesome and we should be best buddies. It’s more like recognising them and treating them as a world power, trying to collaborate more etc. Things like the space station were great achievements and this sort of project reduces the chance for war. We also want to avoid pushing Russia into the hands of China. We don’t want them to unite against us, so keeping good ties with Russia is pretty sensible. At the same time, Trump cautioned Europe about lax defence spending, and about dependence on Russian gas and oil. 

Now, Putin kinda shit all over everything, and he’s threatening the whole ideology of democracy, collaboration, global investment etc. That’s why they’ve turned against him. He’s threatening the current world order which is actually working great for almost everybody. It’s why China is staying STFU. They benefit hugely from the current world order. The last thing they want is to rock the boat and draw a ton of negative attention.


----------



## Flappydoodle

StevenC said:


> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
> 
> etc


You can’t deny that Boris and the UK have been extremely tough on Russia. They’ve pushed for the hardest sanctions. They’re supplying the most weapons to Ukraine. Hell, Putin himself singled out the UK for condemnation. 

And personally, I’m comfortable with the British implementation of the individual sanctions. Freezing assets is fine by me. But seizing assets of people who are not proven guilty of anything is wrong. I don’t approve of government having that power. If those yachts etc are proceeds of crimes, then seizures should go through appropriate legal channels where you prove the money trail. Asset freezes while under investigation are fair, but literally taking stuff because they support Putin is wrong IMO.

And for Boris, it’s a welcome distraction from wine and cheese, and a chance to be a statesman! He does well at this sort of thing IMO.


----------



## LostTheTone

StevenC said:


> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
> 
> etc



Here is the Guardian's reporting from yesterday:

"Boris Johnson has pledged to send more defensive equipment and $100m to Ukraine to hold off Russian troops and mitigate financial pressures facing the country, but was accused of moving too slowly and timidly to clamp down on oligarchs’ dirty money in the UK.

Emergency legislation is due to be rushed through the House of Commons on Monday, intended to create a register of overseas ownership of UK land and property, reform unexplained wealth orders and make it easier to prosecute those involved in breaking sanctions.

The economic crime bill will be supported by opposition parties, but ministers were warned it would still give those suspected of money laundering a “get out of London free card” and contained loopholes that could let people disguise or liquidate their assets before the new powers come into effect."

What's your problem here? Is it the $100mil of cash? Or the thousands of missiles? Is it the emergency laws to tackle Russian money?

If you want to say that it's not enough, then sure, we can argue about that.

But @Flappydoodle is correct - Confiscating things without due process of law is simply wrong, and illegal. And it's not clear how exactly the government can actually make that happen. There is no legal mechanism for the government to demand money is transferred to them without a trial and a court ruling. There is no legal mechanism for the government to take ownership of property without remuneration.

And would you be happy to hand the power to this government to just take money from whoever they decide is a problem? Like say, you? Or me? Or anyone else they fancy?


----------



## LostTheTone

Flappydoodle said:


> It’s why China is staying STFU. They benefit hugely from the current world order. The last thing they want is to rock the boat and draw a ton of negative attention.



This part is particularly important. 

Part of me suspects that China is deliberately staying quiet and doing nothing (while buying Russian oil ofc) so that at some point they can offer to negotiate a peace deal instead of the US or NATO. That would be a huge flex for them, but they genuinely do have the gift of peace in their hands right now since they are helping Russia prop up its economy. 

And if China somehow miraculously managed to get a deal something like... The breakaway states are demilitarized, and Russia can control them, but Russia also recognizes that Ukraine is a legit state with a legit government that can join the EU or NATO (in 5 or 10 years)... That would be... Sensible, and return us to status quo ante on the world stage, except that China sees a real boost to their prestige.


----------



## 4Eyes

with 3rd round of negotiations between UA and RU approaching, RU formed their latest conditions, which finally doesn't mention any propaganda BS - they want Crimea, Donbass and neutrality of UA. it seems this is their plan how to stop it, "have their victory" without admitting they basically lost and they do not have resources to keep fighting any longer. I just wonder why they had to shell whole UA and shot civilians, women and children.


----------



## DrewH

LostTheTone said:


> This part is particularly important.
> 
> Part of me suspects that China is deliberately staying quiet and doing nothing (while buying Russian oil ofc) so that at some point they can offer to negotiate a peace deal instead of the US or NATO. That would be a huge flex for them, but they genuinely do have the gift of peace in their hands right now since they are helping Russia prop up its economy.
> 
> And if China somehow miraculously managed to get a deal something like... The breakaway states are demilitarized, and Russia can control them, but Russia also recognizes that Ukraine is a legit state with a legit government that can join the EU or NATO (in 5 or 10 years)... That would be... Sensible, and return us to status quo ante on the world stage, except that China sees a real boost to their prestige.



China has a delicate position. China needs to maintain their friendship with Russia, or they find themselves standing almost alone in the world. But, they can't risk alienating the west either. Sanctions against China in conjunction with relocating manufacturing to other parts of the world would more or less set them back 40 years. Thus why China will tip toe on that fence to maintain good relations with both sides. China has never been in the business of brokering deals. Historically, they are isolationists. They only deal with us and the rest of the world because they have to for their economy.


----------



## DrewH

4Eyes said:


> with 3rd round of negotiations between UA and RU approaching, RU formed their latest conditions, which finally doesn't mention any propaganda BS - they want Crimea, Donbass and neutrality of UA. it seems this is their plan how to stop it, "have their victory" without admitting they basically lost and they do not have resources to keep fighting any longer. I just wonder why they had to shell whole UA and shot civilians, women and children.


If I'm Ukraine, I take this and happily so.


----------



## oversteve

DrewH said:


> If I'm Ukraine, I take this and happily so.


Unfortunately accepting neutrality means they can strat that sh*t all over again any time they want. Also if I'm not mistaken they didn't drop the demilitarization requirement which brings even more concern


----------



## LostTheTone

DrewH said:


> China has a delicate position. China needs to maintain their friendship with Russia, or they find themselves standing almost alone in the world. But, they can't risk alienating the west either. Sanctions against China in conjunction with relocating manufacturing to other parts of the world would more or less set them back 40 years. Thus why China will tip toe on that fence to maintain good relations with both sides. China has never been in the business of brokering deals. Historically, they are isolationists. They only deal with us and the rest of the world because they have to for their economy.



That's why I suspect they might want a hand in brokering the deal though.

Because that would buy them a lot of credibility and good will with the West, without giving anything up towards Russia. 

The West will tolerate the CCP's internal tyranny as long as China acts like a modern state on the international stage. As long as China keeps their empire building purely economic, the West does not care, and China might well want something to point to to say that they are a proper member of the international communiuty.

I know its a long shot, but if Russia are going to make peace anyway (and they have to) then why not get a freebie diplomatic win for China too?


----------



## LostTheTone

oversteve said:


> Unfortunately accepting neutrality means they can strat that sh*t all over again any time they want. Also if I'm not mistaken they didn't drop the demilitarization requirement which brings even more concern



Agreed - How long would it take until the next province is suspiciously saying they want to be free of Ukraine and cuddle up to Russia? 

Ukraine can be neutral, but they cannot be demilitarized.


----------



## DrewH

oversteve said:


> Unfortunately accepting neutrality means they can strat that sh*t all over again any time they want. Also if I'm not mistaken they didn't drop the demilitarization requirement which brings even more concern



I haven't looked into the latest terms so wasn't aware of that. If this drags on and Russia feels the pinch even harder on the economic homefront, I suspect this would be dropped in a 4th round of talks. It's already getting more favorable for Ukraine. They just need to prolong this a bit longer and I think Russia is all too willing to just want to be out of it. I think that Russia's cash stockpile can only support this invasion for a month or so before the well runs dry. That's not even figuring a large occupation force which they have no shot at funding. I think at this point Russia knows it's done in this. They'll cause as much damage as they can in hopes of "breaking" Ukraine but they know that isn't likely. If Russia was convinced they could win, there are not talks of any kind.


----------



## DrewH

LostTheTone said:


> That's why I suspect they might want a hand in brokering the deal though.
> 
> Because that would buy them a lot of credibility and good will with the West, without giving anything up towards Russia.
> 
> The West will tolerate the CCP's internal tyranny as long as China acts like a modern state on the international stage. As long as China keeps their empire building purely economic, the West does not care, and China might well want something to point to to say that they are a proper member of the international communiuty.
> 
> I know its a long shot, but if Russia are going to make peace anyway (and they have to) then why not get a freebie diplomatic win for China too?



Certainly plausible. The Chinese may be morally bankrupt, but they are incredibly smart too. The rise of the Chinese economy and the planning that went into it is brilliance.


----------



## LostTheTone

DrewH said:


> I haven't looked into the latest terms so wasn't aware of that. If this drags on and Russia feels the pinch even harder on the economic homefront, I suspect this would be dropped in a 4th round of talks. It's already getting more favorable for Ukraine. They just need to prolong this a bit longer and I think Russia is all too willing to just want to be out of it. I think that Russia's cash stockpile can only support this invasion for a month or so before the well runs dry. That's not even figuring a large occupation force which they have no shot at funding. I think at this point Russia knows it's done in this. They'll cause as much damage as they can in hopes of "breaking" Ukraine but they know that isn't likely. If Russia was convinced they could win, there are not talks of any kind.



I tend to agree.

This would also explain why the Russian death column is still just sitting still, not actually encircling Kiev. If they are already just waiting to bail, then you wouldn't march into a meatgrinder to do it.


----------



## 4Eyes

DrewH said:


> If I'm Ukraine, I take this and happily so.


I wouldn't because those terms leave doors opened for another annexation or takeover of whole country, 2014 and now 2022 is proof that history would repeat again sooner or later


----------



## bostjan

1. This "peace agreement" Russia is seeking is a joke. They'll allow evac of Ukrainian people but only to either Russia or Belarus?! No promise of Ukrainian independence? It's incredibly one-sided and benefits Russia heavily. I doubt the talks will even allow any wiggle room toward anything remotely reasonable for Ukraine.

2. China is definitely taking notes about all of this. Just before Russia's invasion, China had significantly ramped up their flyovers of Taiwan. In case anyone wasn't aware, China had been routinely flying bombers over Taiwan- and not just once over, but circling around and around. If the West joins in a hot war with Russia, China will probably take Taiwan in something like an amphibious blitzkrieg. If the West doesn't jump in, China will probably still do something, but maybe just take a different approach.

3. China and Russia might have culturally very little in common, but economically, I don't see a possibility of China ever breaking from Russia. They might be playing their cards close to their chests at the moment, but I think that China will likely make it's decision how to proceed against Taiwan before the end of the summer.


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> 1. This "peace agreement" Russia is seeking is a joke. They'll allow evac of Ukrainian people but only to either Russia or Belarus?! No promise of Ukrainian independence? It's incredibly one-sided and benefits Russia heavily. I doubt the talks will even allow any wiggle room toward anything remotely reasonable for Ukraine.
> 
> 2. China is definitely taking notes about all of this. Just before Russia's invasion, China had significantly ramped up their flyovers of Taiwan. In case anyone wasn't aware, China had been routinely flying bombers over Taiwan- and not just once over, but circling around and around. If the West joins in a hot war with Russia, China will probably take Taiwan in something like an amphibious blitzkrieg. If the West doesn't jump in, China will probably still do something, but maybe just take a different approach.
> 
> 3. China and Russia might have culturally very little in common, but economically, I don't see a possibility of China ever breaking from Russia. They might be playing their cards close to their chests at the moment, but I think that China will likely make it's decision how to proceed against Taiwan before the end of the summer.



Agreed regarding the peace terms from Russia, although I do see scope for them to slowly move back until they are offering something sane.

Regarding Taiwan though, I don't think China will see this crisis as changing anything in that situation. Yeah, China are never ever going to stop loudly declaring that they want to invade, but all the things that normally stop them doing so (ie, The US 3rd and 7th fleets) are not even slightly impacted by the Ukrainian crisis.

While the Taiwan straight is relatively small, it is still 90miles of open water to traverse, and that is a major undertaking. There is no way that China can launch a surprise amphibious landing. They have to mass land, air and sea assets somewhere close, which means somewhere they can be seen by radar and recon satellites.I mean, Russia had to start massing forces on the border in December - That's when reports an invasion was being prepared made it to the press anyway. When you add in an amphibious operation, you need to be a lot more organised and there are far far fewer ships to carry guys ashore.

And an opposed landing is, effectively, an impossible military objective. We've all been a bit spoiled by movies about D-Day into thinking its a good idea, but D-Day was the biggest single military operation ever undertaken in the West, and included probably the biggest (and most successful) military deception in history, and also included a massive airborne invasion, and was supported by one of the largest concentrations of surface vessels ever, and they still tried to choose beaches that were not heavily defended. 

China, being sensible people, would have to do anything to not have an opposed landing, but that means winning air, sea and subsurface dominance. That means a war with the US, and probably some of the other Asian states. It only takes a couple of attack subs to survive to demolish a whole landing force. 

Its a fools errand if you ask me, and while China has become a bit less sane in recent time what with Xi becoming a Putin-like figure, a battleplan which begins with "defeat the worlds largest navy" is not really workable.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

“Kick Russia out of NATO.” — Patricia Arquette.

To quote Bugs Bunny, “what a maroon! What an ignoranimus.”


----------



## Xaios

Oh damn, the Ruble fell off another cliff today. Upon checking just now, it's at 0.006478 USD. Down by nearly a third compared to last week.


----------



## DrewH

LostTheTone said:


> Agreed regarding the peace terms from Russia, although I do see scope for them to slowly move back until they are offering something sane.
> 
> Regarding Taiwan though, I don't think China will see this crisis as changing anything in that situation. Yeah, China are never ever going to stop loudly declaring that they want to invade, but all the things that normally stop them doing so (ie, The US 3rd and 7th fleets) are not even slightly impacted by the Ukrainian crisis.
> 
> While the Taiwan straight is relatively small, it is still 90miles of open water to traverse, and that is a major undertaking. There is no way that China can launch a surprise amphibious landing. They have to mass land, air and sea assets somewhere close, which means somewhere they can be seen by radar and recon satellites.I mean, Russia had to start massing forces on the border in December - That's when reports an invasion was being prepared made it to the press anyway. When you add in an amphibious operation, you need to be a lot more organised and there are far far fewer ships to carry guys ashore.
> 
> And an opposed landing is, effectively, an impossible military objective. We've all been a bit spoiled by movies about D-Day into thinking its a good idea, but D-Day was the biggest single military operation ever undertaken in the West, and included probably the biggest (and most successful) military deception in history, and also included a massive airborne invasion, and was supported by one of the largest concentrations of surface vessels ever, and they still tried to choose beaches that were not heavily defended.
> 
> China, being sensible people, would have to do anything to not have an opposed landing, but that means winning air, sea and subsurface dominance. That means a war with the US, and probably some of the other Asian states. It only takes a couple of attack subs to survive to demolish a whole landing force.
> 
> Its a fools errand if you ask me, and while China has become a bit less sane in recent time what with Xi becoming a Putin-like figure, a battleplan which begins with "defeat the worlds largest navy" is not really workable.



China's military is as much a joke or even worse than Russia. Thus, they would never risk engaging the US in combat.


----------



## LostTheTone

DrewH said:


> China's military is as much a joke or even worse than Russia. Thus, they would never risk engaging the US in combat.



I believe that it is actually classified as a masturbatory aid for ailing dictators.


----------



## Randy




----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> Agreed regarding the peace terms from Russia, although I do see scope for them to slowly move back until they are offering something sane.
> 
> Regarding Taiwan though, I don't think China will see this crisis as changing anything in that situation. Yeah, China are never ever going to stop loudly declaring that they want to invade, but all the things that normally stop them doing so (ie, The US 3rd and 7th fleets) are not even slightly impacted by the Ukrainian crisis.
> 
> While the Taiwan straight is relatively small, it is still 90miles of open water to traverse, and that is a major undertaking. There is no way that China can launch a surprise amphibious landing. They have to mass land, air and sea assets somewhere close, which means somewhere they can be seen by radar and recon satellites.I mean, Russia had to start massing forces on the border in December - That's when reports an invasion was being prepared made it to the press anyway. When you add in an amphibious operation, you need to be a lot more organised and there are far far fewer ships to carry guys ashore.
> 
> And an opposed landing is, effectively, an impossible military objective. We've all been a bit spoiled by movies about D-Day into thinking its a good idea, but D-Day was the biggest single military operation ever undertaken in the West, and included probably the biggest (and most successful) military deception in history, and also included a massive airborne invasion, and was supported by one of the largest concentrations of surface vessels ever, and they still tried to choose beaches that were not heavily defended.
> 
> China, being sensible people, would have to do anything to not have an opposed landing, but that means winning air, sea and subsurface dominance. That means a war with the US, and probably some of the other Asian states. It only takes a couple of attack subs to survive to demolish a whole landing force.
> 
> Its a fools errand if you ask me, and while China has become a bit less sane in recent time what with Xi becoming a Putin-like figure, a battleplan which begins with "defeat the worlds largest navy" is not really workable.


Oh, I'd bet my bottom dollar China is watching how this goes and taking notes. Whether they jump at Taiwan or not is going to depend on how the rest of the world responds to this.

You know and I know that, if China tried to send boats full of troops to attack, it'd be stupid. But I am pretty uncertain whether China knows that. It wouldn't be as simple as jetskiing across the ocean. It'd probably start as one of those flyovers, except one time spy satellites go black (China has the technology to do that, at least for a few hours), and then the flyover bomber actually bombs radar and communication. Next, they fire long range missiles. Then they load up the boats. It'd all be effectively deterred if the USA or UK or a coalition of western powers does something in Ukraine to make China think twice, but they are more brainwashed by their own bullshit propaganda than the Russian government. China has the second largest navy in the world, and not by as much as most people think. If the USA has even part of its Navy circling around Europe, I could totally see China convincing themselves that they have a shot at Taiwan, even if their hardware isn't high enough quality to give them a real advantage. We are talking about a nation that fought a war against pigeons, and also a country that forced its people to smelt steel out of rocks with wood furnaces in their backyards (which, I shouldn't have to point out to any rational person, is impossible to do).

If you don't believe me, read up about China's recent military and space program investments and then tell me that these observations are unreasonable. Again, I'm not saying that they will successfully take Taiwan, but it sure does look like they are ready to try given the (perceived) opportunity.

Xi's battleplan isn't going to simply be "defeat the world's largest navy," it's going to be use the glory of China to outsmart the USA so that differences in strength no longer matter. Either that, or convince himself that China's military is stronger than it actually is. I'd give Putin a little more credit prior to this happening, but he grossly miscalculated the effectiveness of his strategy. Even so, there's a chance Ukraine might not survive this as a nation. Xi's sycophants are going to be feeding him even less reality-based odds, and Xi probably overestimates his power even more than Putin.

But I guess we'll see. I'd be happy to be wrong about all of this.



Spaced Out Ace said:


> “Kick Russia out of NATO.” — Patricia Arquette.
> 
> To quote Bugs Bunny, “what a maroon! What an ignoranimus.”



Great, kick them out of the EU, too! Kick them out of NAFTA! Kick them out of the Avengers! Kick them out of the Justice League! Yeah!


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> It'd probably start as one of those flyovers, except one time spy satellites go black (China has the technology to do that, at least for a few hours), and then the flyover bomber actually bombs radar and communication. Next, they fire long range missiles. Then they load up the boats.



There isn't one place to bomb though, and China doesn't have the kind of bombers you need to do a penetration raid. Their only real bombers are copies of TU-16s, which are 1950s vintage; subsonic, high altitude. They are good for nuclear attacks or standoff missile attacks, but they are dreadful for avoiding counter measures.

The B1 and B2 were designed for this role, and it really shows the difference. B2 is the stealth bomber, of course, and the B1 is very fast and very low altitude. 

Also any good anti air system is multi-layered. You have ground based radars, both for SAM and traffic control, then you have AWACS and individual aircraft radars, with satellites for recon rather than live data. Taiwan has modern SAMs too, that can target missiles as well as planes. And a modern air force.

There's a book called Red Storm Rising, which is about a possible NATO/USSR ground war - The way the US got the jump on the red star airforce was by launching a preemptive strike with stealth fighters against the USSR AWACS planes, then catching the fighters on the ground. That's a plan that could work, but China sure as hell doesn't have the capacity to do that stuff.


----------



## Andromalia

bostjan said:


> China will probably take Taiwan in something like an amphibious blitzkrieg


Those two words are sort of contradictory, an amphibious invasion requires a lot of preparations that are visible by satellite. Just remember what it took to attack Iraq while having bases available nearby.
I'm pretty sure at this point, seeing all the economic retaliation, the CCP isn't going to attempt anything anytime soon.


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> There isn't one place to bomb though, and China doesn't have the kind of bombers you need to do a penetration raid. Their only real bombers are copies of TU-16s, which are 1950s vintage; subsonic, high altitude. They are good for nuclear attacks or standoff missile attacks, but they are dreadful for avoiding counter measures.
> 
> The B1 and B2 were designed for this role, and it really shows the difference. B2 is the stealth bomber, of course, and the B1 is very fast and very low altitude.
> 
> Also any good anti air system is multi-layered. You have ground based radars, both for SAM and traffic control, then you have AWACS and individual aircraft radars, with satellites for recon rather than live data. Taiwan has modern SAMs too, that can target missiles as well as planes. And a modern air force.
> 
> There's a book called Red Storm Rising, which is about a possible NATO/USSR ground war - The way the US got the jump on the red star airforce was by launching a preemptive strike with stealth fighters against the USSR AWACS planes, then catching the fighters on the ground. That's a plan that could work, but China sure as hell doesn't have the capacity to do that stuff.


Right, but what does the radar tell you that it didn't tell you eight times yesterday when Chinese aircraft flew over your head (yes, it's been doing flyovers that often)? How the hell does the radar know this one is for real and the last 1500 flyovers were not?

Xian JH-7 would zip in and jam up radar and communication. They have plenty of those. They are designed specifically for such a purpose. Not sure what any of this has to do with B-1's and B-2's, but you do you.



Andromalia said:


> Those two words are sort of contradictory, an amphibious invasion requires a lot of preparations that are visible by satellite. Just remember what it took to attack Iraq while having bases available nearby.
> I'm pretty sure at this point, seeing all the economic retaliation, the CCP isn't going to attempt anything anytime soon.


I hope you're right.


----------



## Cyanide_Anima

If China were to attempt to take Taiwan and the west intervenes wouldn't sanctions on China result in a retaliation which could completely crush the economies of Canada and USA? Nearly everything here is MIC or Vietnam, Cambodia, etc. (which puppets of China). Even stuff that is MIA it has parts, chemicals, raw materials, etc. sources from China. If we were to get into a conflict with China they'd crush nearly all business like stores, manufacturing, and electronics here pretty quickly. America's government would cave in to at least some of China's demands (something like "STAY THE FURK OUTTA OUR MILITARY BIDNESS, MURICA") to save all the large companies here. I feel like the only places that would survive something like that would be McDonalds/Coca-Cola, Pepsi, and not much else.


----------



## Randy

Part of me says we've had it too good for too long


----------



## bostjan

Randy said:


> Part of me says we've had it too good for too long


I said it back in the older covid thread - there are just too many people.

More people means fewer resources per person. As nations that were already having a tougher time obtaining resources start to really struggle, they are going to get really aggressive and start invading. That's why Russia invading Ukraine won't be the end of Russia invading things. Also, watch as Russia takes over energy resources and everyone in Western Europe starts to panic about getting to heat their homes or drive their cars within the next year or two if a solution to the root of the problem isn't managed in the interim.

Here in the USA, we are the world's #1 producer of oil. But we *still* consume way too much. We can't be energy independent unless we cut back on consumption. It'll seem really painful, but considering places like Germany produce very little oil and yet need it to survive, it'll put them in a really tough spot unless they can leverage some sort of deal, like getting Norway into the EU or giving in to Russia or something else.

If we could find domestic sources of lithium and neodymium, we'd still have to figure out how to cheaply and safely remove those mineral resources from the Earth without destroying our environment, but the USA, China, and Russia, are probably the three best-suited places to survive a global resource struggle.


----------



## pondman

Randy said:


>



Wow !


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> Here is the Guardian's reporting from yesterday:
> 
> "Boris Johnson has pledged to send more defensive equipment and $100m to Ukraine to hold off Russian troops and mitigate financial pressures facing the country, but was accused of moving too slowly and timidly to clamp down on oligarchs’ dirty money in the UK.
> 
> Emergency legislation is due to be rushed through the House of Commons on Monday, intended to create a register of overseas ownership of UK land and property, reform unexplained wealth orders and make it easier to prosecute those involved in breaking sanctions.
> 
> The economic crime bill will be supported by opposition parties, but ministers were warned it would still give those suspected of money laundering a “get out of London free card” and contained loopholes that could let people disguise or liquidate their assets before the new powers come into effect."
> 
> What's your problem here? Is it the $100mil of cash? Or the thousands of missiles? Is it the emergency laws to tackle Russian money?
> 
> If you want to say that it's not enough, then sure, we can argue about that.
> 
> But @Flappydoodle is correct - Confiscating things without due process of law is simply wrong, and illegal. And it's not clear how exactly the government can actually make that happen. There is no legal mechanism for the government to demand money is transferred to them without a trial and a court ruling. There is no legal mechanism for the government to take ownership of property without remuneration.
> 
> And would you be happy to hand the power to this government to just take money from whoever they decide is a problem? Like say, you? Or me? Or anyone else they fancy?



Waaaaiiiit up

How come he's confiscating 100's of times MORE than he's sending?


----------



## pondman

Randy said:


> Part of me says we've had it too good for too long


I've been saying that to myself for the last ten years.


----------



## Adieu

China's DEFINITELY taking notes

And I'm pretty sure those notes say "incite revolution, win, INVITE troops after success"


----------



## 4Eyes

Randy said:


>



I guess he's dead already, not literally, but you know what I mean - regime will take care, that he won't tell real story, when he is back home.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> China's DEFINITELY taking notes
> 
> And I'm pretty sure those notes say "incite revolution, win, INVITE troops after success"



It's a less plausible claim that an island nation that is aggressively opposed to communism has border provinces that want to be part of communist China.

And seriously, this isn't some new development for Putin. This has been in black ops playbook since before the spanish civil war. If you want to destabilize a country, fund and support some lunatic fringe group, then use that as justification for some larger external group to show up and start a war.

The communists have done this all over the world, but the CIA have too. You know that literally the same thing happened when the Sicillians invited Pyrrhus of Epirus to invade them and "liberate" them from Carthaginian rule? Protestants and catholics both justified invasions of each other by supporting their brothers in the faith who were being oppressed. It is a classic subversion tactic.


----------



## AMOS

Russia is destined to become a big North Korea, reclusive and with very few allies. Putin can never return to normalcy.


----------



## Drew

bostjan said:


> 2. China is definitely taking notes about all of this. Just before Russia's invasion, China had significantly ramped up their flyovers of Taiwan. In case anyone wasn't aware, China had been routinely flying bombers over Taiwan- and not just once over, but circling around and around. If the West joins in a hot war with Russia, China will probably take Taiwan in something like an amphibious blitzkrieg. If the West doesn't jump in, China will probably still do something, but maybe just take a different approach.
> 
> 3. China and Russia might have culturally very little in common, but economically, I don't see a possibility of China ever breaking from Russia. They might be playing their cards close to their chests at the moment, but I think that China will likely make it's decision how to proceed against Taiwan before the end of the summer.


I mentioned this earlier on, but China and Russia released a joint statement shortly after the start of the Olympics supporting the other in carving out spheres of influence in their backyards, which I think was DEFINITELY a factor in Russia's decision to invade. Of course, semi-official Chinese state connected spokespeople in academia and semi-government roles were publicly saying they saw no chance this would actually come to war, and Xi has been awfully quiet since war broke out, abstaining from the UN vote sanctioning Russia, but also (unlike with Crimea in 2014) not signing any new trading agreements allowing them discounted access to oil in return from continuing to buy during a period were Russia is essentially unable to find buyers for their oil. Reading between the lines, China did NOT think Russia was going to sign that agreement and turn around and invade Ukraine, instead thiking the troop buildup was a negotiation ploy/maybe a subtle attempt to cause the Ukranian government to fold, and while they certainly have their eyes on Taiwan, I suspect they had something a lot more subtle in mind than full scale invasion, and if anything what Russia just did makes that harder now. 

Also, to revisit the subject of whether or not Russia would have done this with Trump in office... Most of us are American here, and as Americans we tend to take a very, how to say this, outsized view of the US's role in the world. A colleague sent me some pretty good foreign policy analysis this morning and reading it, it occurred to me that the semi-peaceful exchange of power from Trump to Biden in January 2021 was NOT the biggest foreign policy change, from Russia's eyes, in the world before this invasion. Trump stepped out of office more than a year ago. Angela Merkel, however, stepped down in December of 2021, less than two months before the invasion and less than one before Putin started flexing, and with Germany the largest buyer of Russian oil in the EU and Nordstream 2 running through Germany, this was by far the more impactful change for the Russians, a new, untested, and unproven German government and chancelor that Putin gambled (and lost) wouldn't have the nerve to stand up to him less than two months into his term.


----------



## Andromalia

bostjan said:


> Also, watch as Russia takes over energy resources and everyone in Western Europe starts to panic about getting to heat their homes or drive their cars within the next year or two if a solution to the root of the problem isn't managed in the interim.


Exposure to Russia varies wildly in western Europe. Germany depends on Russia for 50% of its energy needs, France is more like 20% because we didn't close all our nuclear plants in favor of coal. Germany was, overall, just sold to Russia by Schröder, who is still unashamedly reaping the dividends today.
On short term, it will likely add some tension in the EU, but long term it is likely a good thing: even germans talk now about new nuclear power plants.
Which are, incidentally, the best source of energy that is at the same time reasonably green and realistic to use and make plans on. We can't replace everything with nuclear power, but it certainly is a better alternative to coal, and a more realistic one than paving half the atlantic with windmills.
Also, although less practical and more expensive, France can get gas from North Africa, which Germany likely can't, or at least can't at the same time if supply is scarce.



> a new, untested, and unproven German government and chancelor that Putin gambled (and lost) wouldn't have the nerve to stand up to him less than two months into his term.


The german government isn't really standing up to him. They just have such a small minority on the matter that they couldn't get their way implemented. Germany is still dragging its feet in the matter of sanctions. But they have to be reminded that they can't be in the wrong side of the war. Again.


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> It's a less plausible claim that an island nation that is aggressively opposed to communism has border provinces that want to be part of communist China.


Not for China, it's not. Taiwan was part of China centuries ago. After China's communist revolution, the old government fled into exile there, which has been the case ever since.




LostTheTone said:


> And seriously, this isn't some new development for Putin. This has been in play black ops playbook since before the spanish civil war.



China's been tugging on Taiwan since the 13th century.

I think it sounds like you just haven't been paying attention to the Taiwan/China situation. There are tons of parallels with the Russia/Ukraine situation, China's just been, so far, far less aggressive.


----------



## Andromalia

bostjan said:


> After China's communist revolution, the old government fled into exile there, which has been the case ever since.


There is a case for Taiwan and China being one country... and their lawful governement being the one currently in Taiwan.


----------



## LostTheTone

Andromalia said:


> Exposure to Russia varies wildly in western Europe. Germany depends on Russia for 50% of its energy needs, France is more like 20% because we didn't close all our nuclear plants in favor of coal. Germany was, overall, just sold to Russia by Schröder, who is still unsashamedly reaping the dividends today.
> On short term, it will likely add some tension in the EU, but long term it is likely a good thing: even germans talk now about new nuclear power plants.
> Which are, incidentally, the best source of energy that is at the same time reasonably green and realistic to use and make plans on. We can't replace everything with nuclear power, but it certainly is a better alternative to coal, and a more realistic one than paving half the atlantic with windmills.
> Also, although less practical and more expensive, France can get gas from North Africa, which Germany likely can't, or at least can't at the same time if supply is scarce.



Indeed - Britain buys very little from Russia but will be announcing tomorrow that we are going to start fracking again at home to cover the short term gas heating needs while our new nuke plants come online, in tandem with more wind. 

The US are 100% going to end up doing more fracking and more drilling. Whatever they officially say about going green, fuel prices are up 40% from this time last year while domestic production is down. The voters simply won't stand for higher prices at home, and some of their money going to Russia. Since the US is being smacked very hard by inflation, rising real fuel costs will decimate a lot of businesses and that's just not sustainable.

Germany is of course deeply screwed but that's what they get for having their Green party in the government, who aggressively opposed nuclear power and so resulted in Germany going back to coal, and not even using modern gas or oil plants. I hope thier voters are paying attention.


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Not for China, it's not. Taiwan was part of China centuries ago. After China's communist revolution, the old government fled into exile there, which has been the case ever since.



Taiwan has never been part of communist china.

The CCP claim dominion over everything that made up China before the Japanese invasion, but the only reason anyone even pays lip service to this is because the CCP scream the house down. But it's been 70 years, and Taiwan is still no China. It is starting to sound like the claims that Spain and Italy are "muslim land" because once upon a time a previous muslim ruler conquered them the better part of a thousand years ago.


----------



## bostjan

Drew said:


> I mentioned this earlier on, but China and Russia released a joint statement shortly after the start of the Olympics supporting the other in carving out spheres of influence in their backyards, which I think was DEFINITELY a factor in Russia's decision to invade. Of course, semi-official Chinese state connected spokespeople in academia and semi-government roles were publicly saying they saw no chance this would actually come to war, and Xi has been awfully quiet since war broke out, abstaining from the UN vote sanctioning Russia, but also (unlike with Crimea in 2014) not signing any new trading agreements allowing them discounted access to oil in return from continuing to buy during a period were Russia is essentially unable to find buyers for their oil. Reading between the lines, China did NOT think Russia was going to sign that agreement and turn around and invade Ukraine, instead thiking the troop buildup was a negotiation ploy/maybe a subtle attempt to cause the Ukranian government to fold, and while they certainly have their eyes on Taiwan, I suspect they had something a lot more subtle in mind than full scale invasion, and if anything what Russia just did makes that harder now.
> 
> Also, to revisit the subject of whether or not Russia would have done this with Trump in office... Most of us are American here, and as Americans we tend to take a very, how to say this, outsized view of the US's role in the world. A colleague sent me some pretty good foreign policy analysis this morning and reading it, it occurred to me that the semi-peaceful exchange of power from Trump to Biden in January 2021 was NOT the biggest foreign policy change, from Russia's eyes, in the world before this invasion. Trump stepped out of office more than a year ago. Angela Merkel, however, stepped down in December of 2021, less than two months before the invasion and less than one before Putin started flexing, and with Germany the largest buyer of Russian oil in the EU and Nordstream 2 running through Germany, this was by far the more impactful change for the Russians, a new, untested, and unproven German government and chancelor that Putin gambled (and lost) wouldn't have the nerve to stand up to him less than two months into his term.




That's not juxtaposed with what I was saying, though. I'm not trying to hint at all that this is deliberately coordinated between China and Russia, but if this somehow ends up going heavily in Russia's favour, I fully expect China to learn from it and make a grab for Taiwan. Or, more dangerously, if China believes that this thing is going heavily in Russia's favour, they'll follow suit.



Andromalia said:


> Exposure to Russia varies wildly in western Europe. Germany depends on Russia for 50% of its energy needs, France is more like 20% because we didn't close all our nuclear plants in favor of coal. Germany was, overall, just sold to Russia by Schröder, who is still unashamedly reaping the dividends today.
> On short term, it will likely add some tension in the EU, but long term it is likely a good thing: even germans talk now about new nuclear power plants.
> Which are, incidentally, the best source of energy that is at the same time reasonably green and realistic to use and make plans on. We can't replace everything with nuclear power, but it certainly is a better alternative to coal, and a more realistic one than paving half the atlantic with windmills.
> Also, although less practical and more expensive, France can get gas from North Africa, which Germany likely can't, or at least can't at the same time if supply is scarce.
> 
> 
> The german government isn't really standing up to him. They just have such a small minority on the matter that they couldn't get their way implemented. Germany is still dragging its feet in the matter of sanctions. But they have to be reminded that they can't be in the wrong side of the war. Again.


The USA depends on Russian oil for something more like 5% or so, and we've already started to see close to a 20% increase in prices here, so hold onto your hats if Russia suddenly owns 20% of your energy. We could get our oil from South America here (I'm sure you could in France, too, seeing as how France is in South America and not just in Europe), but it's all very messy, since all of those countries are dealing with their own crap too.


----------



## LostTheTone

Andromalia said:


> There is a case for Taiwan and China being one country... and their lawful governement being the one currently in Taiwan.



Correct.

All the stuff that we in the west think of as chinese culture with the dragons and the kites and all that... That's Taiwanese culture. Or perhaps I should say it is pre-communist chinese culture. Within China they have done a huge amount of work to extirpate all non-communist culture. They don't even have the same language. Traditional Chinese is the alphabet of Taiwan.


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> Taiwan has never been part of communist china.
> 
> The CCP claim dominion over everything that made up China before the Japanese invasion, but the only reason anyone even pays lip service to this is because the CCP scream the house down. But it's been 70 years, and Taiwan is still no China. It is starting to sound like the claims that Spain and Italy are "muslim land" because once upon a time a previous muslim ruler conquered them the better part of a thousand years ago.


Umm, Communist China would 110% disagree.

They aren't correct, but they don't particularly care, nor have ever particularly cared which countries are independent, according to anyone's views other than Communist China.

Actually, Taiwan only has diplomatic relations with 14 other countries, simply because China threatens anyone who says Taiwan is a country.


----------



## tedtan

And now Russia is trying to recruit Syrian fighters to come help them out in Ukraine.


----------



## profwoot

I haven't looked into it in a long time -- is there anything communist about China other than the name of its ruling party? Is the CCP motivated by any communist ideology? I know the government runs the media and has a stake in various other industries, but unless they're distributing the profits it seems more fascist than communist. This was a hot topic in my youth but these days I mostly hear communism evoked only as a right-wing bugaboo.


----------



## nightflameauto

profwoot said:


> I haven't looked into it in a long time -- is there anything communist about China other than the name of its ruling party? Is the CCP motivated by any communist ideology? I know the government runs the media and has a stake in various other industries, but unless they're distributing the profits it seems more fascist than communist. This was a hot topic in my youth but these days I mostly hear communism evoked only as a right-wing bugaboo.


They have about as much in common with communism as the USA has with democracy.

So they flirt and tease, but aren't really.


----------



## ArtDecade

nightflameauto said:


> They have about as much in common with communism as the USA has with democracy.
> 
> So they flirt and tease, but aren't really.



To be fair, the US is a republic. Very few countries have actual democracies.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

I wonder if the American school, that was used to dispose of nuclear waste before it was sold, might feel about the idea that “nuclear energy is green.” Sorry, but nuclear energy is not the answer.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

Andromalia said:


> There is a case for Taiwan and China being one country... and their lawful governement being the one currently in Taiwan.


While that’s a lovely fantasy, it is a pipe dream and won’t happen. China would take over and the CCP would run it into the ground.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

bostjan said:


> Actually, Taiwan only has diplomatic relations with 14 other countries, simply because China threatens anyone who says Taiwan is a country.


Like John Cena, who apologized in Mandarin. I’ve lost quite a bit of respect for him over that, to be quite honest.


----------



## Randy

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Like John Cena, who apologized in Mandarin. I’ve lost quite a bit of respect for him over that, to be quite honest.


----------



## nightflameauto

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Like John Cena, who apologized in Mandarin. I’ve lost quite a bit of respect for him over that, to be quite honest.


The big surprise here is that somebody had respect for Cena to begin with.

OK, that's unfair. His comedy movies are almost tolerable.


----------



## Randy




----------



## oversteve

Randy said:


> View attachment 104242


That IDFK is Varg's car 
Actually Niva - a sad russian attemp at building 4x4


----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> View attachment 104242



IDFK Lol = Lada Niva, ~1970s civilian 4x4

It's something the equivalent of a backwater sheriff might have driven... 15 years ago


----------



## wheresthefbomb

I miss my old Isuzu Rodeo. RIP in pieces.


----------



## Flappydoodle

DrewH said:


> China has a delicate position. China needs to maintain their friendship with Russia, or they find themselves standing almost alone in the world. But, they can't risk alienating the west either. Sanctions against China in conjunction with relocating manufacturing to other parts of the world would more or less set them back 40 years. Thus why China will tip toe on that fence to maintain good relations with both sides. China has never been in the business of brokering deals. Historically, they are isolationists. They only deal with us and the rest of the world because they have to for their economy.



China benefits massively from the current state of the world.

We treat them well. They have major seats on every diplomatic avenue. We barely protest when they steal intellectual property. Their leaders all send their kids to Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, MIT etc. They get the best education possible, then go back to China to use it to help China. They flood the markets with their stuff, and we do nothing. We let them invest their money in the west, even owning our infrastructure. They are expanding, uncontested, in Africa. And now Covid, which they contained pretty quickly while the west suffers disaster after disaster, long-term health and mental problems, squeeze on our economies and healthcare systems etc.

China has ZERO incentive for a war because they are still growing every single day, just from the status quo.



bostjan said:


> 1. This "peace agreement" Russia is seeking is a joke. They'll allow evac of Ukrainian people but only to either Russia or Belarus?! No promise of Ukrainian independence? It's incredibly one-sided and benefits Russia heavily. I doubt the talks will even allow any wiggle room toward anything remotely reasonable for Ukraine.
> 
> 2. China is definitely taking notes about all of this. Just before Russia's invasion, China had significantly ramped up their flyovers of Taiwan. In case anyone wasn't aware, China had been routinely flying bombers over Taiwan- and not just once over, but circling around and around. If the West joins in a hot war with Russia, China will probably take Taiwan in something like an amphibious blitzkrieg. If the West doesn't jump in, China will probably still do something, but maybe just take a different approach.
> 
> 3. China and Russia might have culturally very little in common, but economically, I don't see a possibility of China ever breaking from Russia. They might be playing their cards close to their chests at the moment, but I think that China will likely make it's decision how to proceed against Taiwan before the end of the summer.



This is 100% false. China does not, and has never, flown bombers over Taiwan.

They tickle the very bottom or top corners of the Taiwan ADIZ, which is the aircraft identification zone. It is not Taiwanese territory, or Chinese territory. Merely a zone at which countries are like "hey, you're getting a bit close to our airspace and we're watching you. Please ID yourselves".

See one example flight path here: https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4465304

They dip into the space, then leave again. It's trolling, intimidation and testing reaction times. It also puts stress on Taiwanese air forces. Pilots get tired. Planes need to be refuelled, maintained and repaired due to more wear and tear. They need spare parts which cost lots of money and also need to be imported. That's why China does it.

Again, China has never sent military planes into Taiwanese "airspace", let alone flown over the island itself.



bostjan said:


> Oh, I'd bet my bottom dollar China is watching how this goes and taking notes. Whether they jump at Taiwan or not is going to depend on how the rest of the world responds to this.
> 
> You know and I know that, if China tried to send boats full of troops to attack, it'd be stupid. But I am pretty uncertain whether China knows that. It wouldn't be as simple as jetskiing across the ocean. It'd probably start as one of those flyovers, except one time spy satellites go black (China has the technology to do that, at least for a few hours), and then the flyover bomber actually bombs radar and communication. Next, they fire long range missiles. Then they load up the boats. It'd all be effectively deterred if the USA or UK or a coalition of western powers does something in Ukraine to make China think twice, but they are more brainwashed by their own bullshit propaganda than the Russian government. China has the second largest navy in the world, and not by as much as most people think. If the USA has even part of its Navy circling around Europe, I could totally see China convincing themselves that they have a shot at Taiwan, even if their hardware isn't high enough quality to give them a real advantage. We are talking about a nation that fought a war against pigeons, and also a country that forced its people to smelt steel out of rocks with wood furnaces in their backyards (which, I shouldn't have to point out to any rational person, is impossible to do).
> 
> If you don't believe me, read up about China's recent military and space program investments and then tell me that these observations are unreasonable. Again, I'm not saying that they will successfully take Taiwan, but it sure does look like they are ready to try given the (perceived) opportunity.
> 
> Xi's battleplan isn't going to simply be "defeat the world's largest navy," it's going to be use the glory of China to outsmart the USA so that differences in strength no longer matter. Either that, or convince himself that China's military is stronger than it actually is. I'd give Putin a little more credit prior to this happening, but he grossly miscalculated the effectiveness of his strategy. Even so, there's a chance Ukraine might not survive this as a nation. Xi's sycophants are going to be feeding him even less reality-based odds, and Xi probably overestimates his power even more than Putin.
> 
> But I guess we'll see. I'd be happy to be wrong about all of this.
> 
> 
> 
> Great, kick them out of the EU, too! Kick them out of NAFTA! Kick them out of the Avengers! Kick them out of the Justice League! Yeah!



For a start, just to re-iterate, there are no flyovers of Taiwan, ever.

Taiwan also has the latest US-made Patriot air defence and Aegis systems. No chance they don't see aerial attack coming.

And if China takes out American satellites, that's a direct attack and the start of WW3.

As you can see from Russia/Ukraine, it is also not that easy to take out all that military infrastructure in one swoop. Russia has launched more than 600 missiles, plus the crazy amount of artillery AND a land invasion. Yet Ukraine still has communications etc. The idea of China doing one sudden knockout attack on Taiwan is fantasy (fortunately).

And you're also incorrect about Xi. Internally, he is still very much on "probation", despite his fancy title as eternal leader, and there are plenty of people who would oust him if things get out of hand. As I posted above, China/Xi has zero incentive to rock the boat. The "prize" of taking Taiwan wouldn't be worth the enormous international backlash. Why do that when your economy is growing 7% per year?

Xi also is not the type of person to convince himself that they are stronger, or to be mislead by intelligence services. What you say about sycophants surrounding him is totally incorrect. China is very much still fact and reality-based and they are totally happy to play the long game. Xi does not appear to be an egotist like Putin, and I believe he is far smarter and has a very good grip on reality. From everything I have read, he does not live in a bubble. His own daughter went to Harvard, and most of the higher up politicians have studied abroad and very, very much understand western lifestyle, mindset and values.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Cyanide_Anima said:


> If China were to attempt to take Taiwan and the west intervenes wouldn't sanctions on China result in a retaliation which could completely crush the economies of Canada and USA? Nearly everything here is MIC or Vietnam, Cambodia, etc. (which puppets of China). Even stuff that is MIA it has parts, chemicals, raw materials, etc. sources from China. If we were to get into a conflict with China they'd crush nearly all business like stores, manufacturing, and electronics here pretty quickly. America's government would cave in to at least some of China's demands (something like "STAY THE FURK OUTTA OUR MILITARY BIDNESS, MURICA") to save all the large companies here. I feel like the only places that would survive something like that would be McDonalds/Coca-Cola, Pepsi, and not much else.



Yes they would. Which is reason number 542 why we shouldn't be so damn reliant on them


----------



## Adieu

Good news, Ukraine killed another Russian General!


----------



## narad

Adieu said:


> Good news, Ukraine killed another Russian General!



Russia: This is what victory tastes like?


----------



## LostTheTone

nightflameauto said:


> The big surprise here is that somebody had respect for Cena to begin with.
> 
> OK, that's unfair. His comedy movies are almost tolerable.



It's not Cena's fault he got booked to bury other people. According to literally everyone who has worked with him, Cena is a decent guy who always wants to work a good match, and he has like a cyborg ability to heal from injury.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

Not sure strategic or tactical value of these locations but fact they are doing more than just digging in and surviving is encouraging.


----------



## LostTheTone

profwoot said:


> I haven't looked into it in a long time -- is there anything communist about China other than the name of its ruling party? Is the CCP motivated by any communist ideology? I know the government runs the media and has a stake in various other industries, but unless they're distributing the profits it seems more fascist than communist. This was a hot topic in my youth but these days I mostly hear communism evoked only as a right-wing bugaboo.



In a technical sense there has never been a communist state - Marx is clear that communism is a classless, anarchist society. Clearly zero states have ever achieved that. At best they have managed to achieve step 2, which is some flavour of state ownership of everything. Weirdly, all the committed communists suddenly lose their urgency for moving towards utopia once they have ultimate power and luxury. 

This is what people are talking about when they say "communism has never been tried". That is of course technically correct, but somewhat misses the point. Despite many nations trying to become communist utopias, all of them have ended up becoming terrifying blood soaked nightmares.

When critics of communism (including me) use the word to refer to China, we are not really referring to the philosophical idea of communism which is probably impossible to achieve anyway. We are referring to "the system that occurs in nations that call themselves communist".

It should be noted that fascism is a form of socialism - And yes, China is much better described as fascist. Fascist states have a planned economy, but they do not own the means of production. They use government force to require private businesses to do whatever they are told, but they don't have to deal with running the minutae of every industry. Its way easier to just command existing businesses to do stuff whenever that is useful, and the state doesn't have to take on any risks or flail about trying to be innovative.

Fascism operates a parasite economy, rather than conquering the economy. Having seen what happens in socialism when you kill everyone who knows how to run a farm or manage a factory, the fascists decided to just subsume everyone into the state, not just the proletariat, and they keep in place the rewards of free market (well, party funny money anyway) for people who run the businesses that produce useful things for the state.

But fascism is not capitalism - It is a facade of capitalism but behind it there is the shadow of a noose. Capitalism is predicated on free exchanges. Fascism does allow for free exchange of goods that they don't care much about, but for things they do care about you do not have the right to refuse the state. 

It should be noted that the fascist theorists (Giovanni Gentile et al) were committed socialists, but they were also French and Italian romantics, not German idealists. They watched what happened in the USSR, including seeing that Lenin was quickly starting to introduce some market-like reforms to try and improve productivity. It was clear very quickly that if your only way to motivate people was brutal violence then you are doomed to have massive economic problems. 

This is where the fascist/socialist split happened - The fascists were already unhappy that marxism was so remorselessly "rationalist". It didn't allow for religion, or culture, or art, and it even destroyed historic symbols of the nation. Add to that an economy that (to paraphrase Trotsky) "just does not fucking work" and clearly they needed something else.

So instead they came up with a different approach. Instead of the kind of sans-coulottes reforms of demolishing literally everything and starting from year zero, the fascists would aim to keep the whole of the existing economy/state and just slot themselves in on top. There would still be the great institutions of state, there would still be a thousand years of history, there would still be great industrial concerns that were the pride of their nation.

In lots of respects, they aimed to do what the early Roman emperors did in taking over the republic. The emperor is on top, and will have you killed, but there are still senators and magistrates, there are still the same forums and temples, and the same structure of life. When the emperor asks, you have to say yes (or at least say no in a smart way) but you can still be rich and powerful in your own right. And they called this movement "fascism", after the "fasces", the bundle of bound sticks that was the symbol of a Roman magistrate.

The CCP took a round about way to end up here - They made the same mistakes as the USSR and had the same appalling death counts. But coming out of the far side of the cultural revolution, it was clear China had deep problems, even more so than the Russians, because China didn't have their own oil and gas. So they started to move towars this hybrid system, where companies would be allowed to start as private entities, but the state was always implicitly able to take control if they wanted to. These private companies though could seek foreign investment, and sell internationally without the stamp of the CCP on them. 

But the shift to being fascist is... Its not a big change as far as we in the west are concerned. They are still a brutal dictatorship. They are just the kind of brutal dictatorship we can do business with.

But this is sort of the end stage of socialism. Universal state ownership has failed everywhere. Eventually the USSR managed to make it somewhat work, but its big industries (petrochem and defense) never delivered any prosperity to their own people. Fascism at least has some trickle down effect, and allows the cash from those big state contracts to spread out. 

I know people dislike "trickle down" but it is not a coincidence that since China became fascist that it suddenly has a middle class, and consumer goods, and well stocked shelves.


----------



## nickgray

Amazing logic by Russia's foreign minister.

_FM #Lavrov: The goal of Russia’s special military operation is to stop any war that could take place on Ukrainian territory or that could start from there.
_
The arsonist says: the goal of special combustion operation is to prevent any fire that can take place in your house or could start from there.


----------



## LostTheTone

nickgray said:


> Amazing logic by Russia's foreign minister.
> 
> _FM #Lavrov: The goal of Russia’s special military operation is to stop any war that could take place on Ukrainian territory or that could start from there._
> 
> The arsonist says: the goal of special combustion operation is to prevent any fire that can take place in your house or could start from there.



It is funny, but remember that this claim is actually just a re-arrangement of the "it's all about NATO" claim - That this is a war to decide which side Ukraine would be on if there were to be a proper war. 

That is literally the same claim.


----------



## bostjan

Flappydoodle said:


> This is 100% false. China does not, and has never, flown bombers over Taiwan.











Infographic: Chinese Air Incursions Into Taiwanese Buffer Zone Spike


This chart shows the number of Chinese military aircraft entering Taiwan's air defense identification zone (2021-22).




www.statista.com





Sorry, I stand by everything I said. Since this isn't a thread about China, I'm not going to argue you point by point, but your link contradicts nothing I said. I made up the scenario, and was clear about what was speculation versus the facts I mentioned, which are all widely reported. If you don't believe the scenario, that's cool. This is Taiwanese airspace and there are bombers visiting it regularly. If you think they are not there or it is not Taiwan's airspace, check the link above. If you think China is doing this because they have nothing better to do than play a joke on Taiwan an average of 3 times a day, every day, then you are incrediblt naive.


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Infographic: Chinese Air Incursions Into Taiwanese Buffer Zone Spike
> 
> 
> This chart shows the number of Chinese military aircraft entering Taiwan's air defense identification zone (2021-22).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.statista.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, I stand by everything I said. Since this isn't a thread about China, I'm not going to argue you point by point, but your link contradicts nothing I said. I made up the scenario, and was clear about what was speculation versus the facts I mentioned, which are all widely reported. If you don't believe the scenario, that's cool. This is Taiwanese airspace and there are bombers visiting it regularly. If you think they are not there or it is not Taiwan's airspace, check the link above. If you think China is doing this because they have nothing better to do than play a joke on Taiwan an average of 3 times a day, every day, then you are incrediblt naive.



You are confusing the Taiwan ADIZ with Taiwan's sovereign airspace.

The ADIZ actually covers as much of mainland China as it does of Taiwan. Yes, for reals. Check it out . 

Check out this incident from 2015, where the Turks shot down a Russian fighter that violated their airspace for a few seconds while flying over Syria. The Russians pouted a bunch and claimed that their fighters definitely didn't go into Turkish airspace, but the Turks have a recording of all the warnings they gave over the course of 5 minutes or so on the mutually agreed emergency channel, as well as all their radar data. The Russians did throw a strop, but they kinda had to accept that Turkey was entitled to shoot them down. The Turks were being deliberately provocative, but they have a fundamental right to police their airspace.

I promise you, one million percent, that if China was flying nuclear bombers into Taiwan's airspace, Taiwan would be shooting them down.


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> You are confusing the Taiwan ADIZ with Taiwan's sovereign airspace.
> 
> The ADIZ actually covers as much of mainland China as it does of Taiwan. Yes, for reals. Check it out .
> 
> Check out this incident from 2015, where the Turks shot down a Russian fighter that violated their airspace for a few seconds while flying over Syria. The Russians pouted a bunch and claimed that their fighters definitely didn't go into Turkish airspace, but the Turks have a recording of all the warnings they gave over the course of 5 minutes or so on the mutually agreed emergency channel, as well as all their radar data. The Russians did throw a strop, but they kinda had to accept that Turkey was entitled to shoot them down. The Turks were being deliberately provocative, but they have a fundamental right to police their airspace.
> 
> I promise you, one million percent, that if China was flying nuclear bombers into Taiwan's airspace, Taiwan would be shooting them down.


Check out the link I posted. It clarifies beyond the point you are trying to make via obfuscation of semantics. Also look at the flight paths in question, they are on the absolute opposite end of the ADIZ than the part you are talking about. Also also, look at the list of the aircraft identified in the incursions - they are definitely not civilian aircraft, they are fighter jets, bombers, attack helicopters, radar jamming military reconnaissance jets, etc.

And yes, some of these incursions are done by aircraft capable of carrying nuclear bombs, although until now I had not pointed that out.

I'm not sure why so many of you are defending this act this way. Either go all in and say Taiwan is not a country and therefore has no sovereign airspace, like China says, or else look up the actual data.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

The amount of word play, goal posting, semantics, and just general jumping through hoops so many are going through to try and legitimize aggression from Russia and now China, all from people who seem to have nothing to gain from it but still just on here shilling as hard as possible. Like maybe just trying to be that contrarian voice or something but it's super weird. Like the guys making 40k a year defending billionaires and shit.


----------



## bostjan

Dineley said:


> The amount of word play, goal posting, semantics, and just general jumping through hoops so many are going through to try and legitimize aggression from Russia and now China, all from people who seem to have nothing to gain from it but still just on here shilling as hard as possible. Like maybe just trying to be that contrarian voice or something but it's super weird. Like the guys making 40k a year defending billionaires and shit.


Banking social credit in case western countries fall?


----------



## profwoot

I mean yeah, China are being assholes definitely. But if discussion is to be useful or informative we can also keep in mind that flying through Taiwan's ADIZ is different from flying directly over the island.


----------



## nightflameauto

LostTheTone said:


> It's not Cena's fault he got booked to bury other people. According to literally everyone who has worked with him, Cena is a decent guy who always wants to work a good match, and he has like a cyborg ability to heal from injury.


I have no doubt that he's a decent enough dude in real life, but playing a bad take on an already shitty gimmick really rubbed me the wrong way when he came in. The only thing he had going for him at all was the few times he went up against HHH you didn't have to expect him to lose every single time.

But that's enough about raslin'.

I'm starting to hear rumblings that China is a little not-so-happy about the extent of Russia's aggression in Ukraine. They apparently knew something was coming, but thought it was going to be the cakewalk Putin advertised. Could get really interesting if China decides to back off ties with Russia as well. I don't really think Russia can go on as a loner for very long. Certainly not with this war effort ongoing.


----------



## Randy

I believe Cena was the most requested (and most fulfilled) Make A Wish Foundation request of any celebrity.


----------



## Randy




----------



## LostTheTone

nightflameauto said:


> I have no doubt that he's a decent enough dude in real life, but playing a bad take on an already shitty gimmick really rubbed me the wrong way when he came in. The only thing he had going for him at all was the few times he went up against HHH you didn't have to expect him to lose every single time.
> 
> But that's enough about raslin'.
> 
> I'm starting to hear rumblings that China is a little not-so-happy about the extent of Russia's aggression in Ukraine. They apparently knew something was coming, but thought it was going to be the cakewalk Putin advertised. Could get really interesting if China decides to back off ties with Russia as well. I don't really think Russia can go on as a loner for very long. Certainly not with this war effort ongoing.



It doesn't surprise me that China might be getting unhappy. 

It's like if some gangster ask the mob boss if he can go and try to persuade some corrupt official to be their guy instead of some other crews'. And the boss says yes, because you know... A little suggestion that something bad might happen to this nice new car is all fun and games. But then the boss finds out that the gangster broke the guy's wife's knees, shot their dog and set fire to the rose bushes.


----------



## bostjan

profwoot said:


> I mean yeah, China are being assholes definitely. But if discussion is to be useful or informative we can also keep in mind that flying through Taiwan's ADIZ is different from flying directly over the island.



Ok, sure, but flying into forbidden airspace (which they are doing routinely, as I said and as I provided evidence of in link, also as others provided evidence of in their links arguing against me) with heavily armed military aircraft (which again is well reported and uncontested other than a few fringe people on this board) and over island territories (as reported in other links that were already posted) and doing it frequently and deliberately, is legally no different.



nightflameauto said:


> I have no doubt that he's a decent enough dude in real life, but playing a bad take on an already shitty gimmick really rubbed me the wrong way when he came in. The only thing he had going for him at all was the few times he went up against HHH you didn't have to expect him to lose every single time.
> 
> But that's enough about raslin'.
> 
> I'm starting to hear rumblings that China is a little not-so-happy about the extent of Russia's aggression in Ukraine. They apparently knew something was coming, but thought it was going to be the cakewalk Putin advertised. Could get really interesting if China decides to back off ties with Russia as well. I don't really think Russia can go on as a loner for very long. Certainly not with this war effort ongoing.



I don't know much about Cena's personal life. But there's a high likelihood that he had little choice but to apologize for referring to Taiwan as a country. You're talking about a guy who was bought and paid for by a faceless corporation to hype movies in China, moved to China, learned to speak Chinese in order to do this job, and then stumbled over his words during an interview in China and in the Chinese language. I'm sure he was pressured to apologize and that it is likely that few of us sitting at computers could internalize the depth of the pressure he faced to do so.

As far as Russia-China relations, do you have a source that relations are falling apart? All I see are statements that their diplomacy is stronger than ever. It seems to make sense that China ought to be pissed, though. I guess information during a war with a tense international situation is just really difficult to vet.


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Ok, sure, but flying into forbidden airspace (which they are doing routinely, as I said and as I provided evidence of in link, also as others provided evidence of in their links arguing against me) with heavily armed military aircraft (which again is well reported and uncontested other than a few fringe people on this board) and over island territories (as reported in other links that were already posted) and doing it frequently and deliberately, is legally no different.



"Forbidden" and "legally" are the problem words here.

The way these bomber fly-bys happen is that the aggressors fly as if they were going to enter your airspace. They force you to scramble fighters and cause a fuss and a panic. But then then just fly away and go somewhere else. The Russians do the same thing to us and the Swedes and Norwegians all the time. 

They are deliberately flying into airspace which Taiwan monitors, specifically to watch for Chinese planes. But this is not "forbidden" airspace. Planes fly through it all the time. Even chinese military planes, going about their daily business. Its not a problem. Its all very legal.

Taiwans airspace is like the walls of their castle. Thats the line where their actual military defenses start. But they don't want people just walking right up to them and crossing the moat, you feel me? It is outside their perimeter, but they don't have to wait until you are literally climbing the walls to get unhappy about it. 

The Chinese are dipping their toes into the moat. Two guys with a canoe, painted with the red star, show up next to the moat. So the Taiwanese muster the guards and load the crossbows and send some dudes out to tell them fuck right off. And they do. Because it's all a game. But Taiwan still has to keep telling them where to go.

This is all legal though. Taiwan are not ordering the Chinese out. They are saying "turn back or in another couple of miles we are going to shoot you down".


----------



## profwoot

bostjan said:


> Ok, sure, but flying into forbidden airspace (which they are doing routinely, as I said and as I provided evidence of in link, also as others provided evidence of in their links arguing against me) with heavily armed military aircraft (which again is well reported and uncontested other than a few fringe people on this board) and over island territories (as reported in other links that were already posted) and doing it frequently and deliberately, is legally no different.


So why is the ADIZ a thing if it's legally no different?

edit: nvm answered above


----------



## nightflameauto

bostjan said:


> Ok, sure, but flying into forbidden airspace (which they are doing routinely, as I said and as I provided evidence of in link, also as others provided evidence of in their links arguing against me) with heavily armed military aircraft (which again is well reported and uncontested other than a few fringe people on this board) and over island territories (as reported in other links that were already posted) and doing it frequently and deliberately, is legally no different.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know much about Cena's personal life. But there's a high likelihood that he had little choice but to apologize for referring to Taiwan as a country. You're talking about a guy who was bought and paid for by a faceless corporation to hype movies in China, moved to China, learned to speak Chinese in order to do this job, and then stumbled over his words during an interview in China and in the Chinese language. I'm sure he was pressured to apologize and that it is likely that few of us sitting at computers could internalize the depth of the pressure he faced to do so.
> 
> As far as Russia-China relations, do you have a source that relations are falling apart? All I see are statements that their diplomacy is stronger than ever. It seems to make sense that China ought to be pissed, though. I guess information during a war with a tense international situation is just really difficult to vet.


Here's one source that hit my inbox this morning:








China’s Russia Problem


Things were going very well for China, until the war in Ukraine.




www.nytimes.com





It doesn't seem like they're itching to slam Russia down, but the take-away is that they're considering which lines of communication and trade to leave open and which to shut down. Which is a lot different than most of what we've been hearing, that Xi and Putin are chummy and China and Russia are setting up their own little paradise of corruption.


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> "Forbidden" and "legally" are the problem words here.
> 
> The way these bomber fly-bys happen is that the aggressors fly as if they were going to enter your airspace. They force you to scramble fighters and cause a fuss and a panic. But then then just fly away and go somewhere else. The Russians do the same thing to us and the Swedes and Norwegians all the time.
> 
> They are deliberately flying into airspace which Taiwan monitors, specifically to watch for Chinese planes. But this is not "forbidden" airspace. Planes fly through it all the time. Even chinese military planes, going about their daily business. Its not a problem. Its all very legal.
> 
> Taiwans airspace is like the walls of their castle. Thats the line where their actual military defenses start. But they don't want people just walking right up to them and crossing the moat, you feel me? It is outside their perimeter, but they don't have to wait until you are literally climbing the walls to get unhappy about it.
> 
> The Chinese are dipping their toes into the moat. Two guys with a canoe, painted with the red star, show up next to the moat. So the Taiwanese muster the guards and load the crossbows and send some dudes out to tell them fuck right off. And they do. Because it's all a game. But Taiwan still has to keep telling them where to go.
> 
> This is all legal though. Taiwan are not ordering the Chinese out. They are saying "turn back or in another couple of miles we are going to shoot you down".


What are you trying to argue?!

It is forbidden to fly military aircraft through another country's airspace, AIDZ or otherwise, without requesting permission (according to the wikipedia article you posted, in fact). Yes, Russia does it to the USA and to the UK, whatever, here in the USA, we intercept their aircraft when they do it. It doesn't make it legal when other countries have done it before , whether or not they got away with it. Read the wikipedia link you posted or the links I posted for more information if you are confused about the legality of military flyovers, specifically in any nation's AIDZ.


----------



## IwantTacos

Randy said:


>




if this is winning I'm super interested in seeing what not winning looks like .


----------



## bostjan

nightflameauto said:


> Here's one source that hit my inbox this morning:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China’s Russia Problem
> 
> 
> Things were going very well for China, until the war in Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't seem like they're itching to slam Russia down, but the take-away is that they're considering which lines of communication and trade to leave open and which to shut down. Which is a lot different than most of what we've been hearing, that Xi and Putin are chummy and China and Russia are setting up their own little paradise of corruption.


Thanks.

I think I had read a similar article this morning with a different spin on it. Any talk about China's stance is at least somewhat speculative, since I'm not sure we typically trust what the Chinese government says, which is why them saying that their relationship with Russia is rock solid is easy to brush off. It might be possible that China's administration is itself figuring out whether to remain more neutral or become less neutral and lean in or away from whichever side. Probably, every option is on the table for them at this point. I still insist that they are watching how the international response to this goes and will play some effect on how the Chinese government views their own situation with Taiwan.

-----


Does anyone know why these generals are exposing themselves? Is it because communications are badly compromised? Maybe they are getting such vastly different reports from underlings than overlords that they just have to see for themselves? Or some other reason entirely?


----------



## High Plains Drifter

This question my get lost as this quickly moving thread is about and should imo remain about the invasion of Ukraine but does anyone here have any insight as to what we may be looking at in the US in regards to national average for fuel in the upcoming weeks/ months? Is $5 avg out of the realm of possibility? Higher?


----------



## Adieu

High Plains Drifter said:


> This question my get lost as this quickly moving thread is about and should imo remain about the invasion of Ukraine but does anyone here have any insight as to what we may be looking at in the US in regards to national average for fuel in the upcoming weeks/ months? Is $5 avg out of the realm of possibility? Higher?



$5.90 regular / $6.20 premium & diesel here in SoCal already

I was hearing some chatter about un-sanctioning Iran and Venezuela for being regular non-invasive run-of-the-mill assholes and comparatively tolerable in the here and now, maybe that'll help? Not sure how real or theoretical that is though


----------



## spudmunkey

High Plains Drifter said:


> This question my get lost as this quickly moving thread is about and should imo remain about the invasion of Ukraine but does anyone here have any insight as to what we may be looking at in the US in regards to national average for fuel in the upcoming weeks/ months? Is $5 avg out of the realm of possibility? Higher?


GasBuddy's projections top out at just about $4.25* national average*, and start declining in May, staying above $4 intil about October, $3.78 in December. That report was released this month, but not sure what *day* this month.

That also doesn't take into account any *aditional* opportunistic profit-rape...


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Does anyone know why these generals are exposing themselves? Is it because communications are badly compromised? Maybe they are getting such vastly different reports from underlings than overlords that they just have to see for themselves? Or some other reason entirely?



They are leading armies that are on campaign. They have to actually be there on the ground, and be in real time communication with the forces they lead. 

These dudes aren't colonels; they aren't saying "Ok, send C company over there". But they are doing the next one up from that - "Send the 22nd Tank Regiment through the pass". Sure, they aren't doing their own recon, but they need to be on the same closed radio network, so they can't sit too far back. 

I suspect (can't say for sure) that these guys have been caught out because their formations have basically stopped moving, and they have been spotted one way or another. Could be by locals, could be by radio direction finding. I strongly doubt they they are building proper command posts, but even if they did it's not like it would go unnoticed that Russia bulldozers were building bunkers.

In this kind of war there is plenty of Ukrainians all over everywhere. If youre a proper sniper team, is it that hard to slip through the lines?

And these dudes getting capped are proper fighting soldiers, who've been in Chechnya and Syria. They aren't poncing around like idiots, but they are sitting in places where there doesn't seem to be any Ukrainian resistance, and they sometimes just want to go outside and get some air and smoke a cigarette or whatever. They don't want to be hidden away, they want to meet their commanders and talk to them. 

And, well, this stuff happens. It's a war, and generals are valuable. Their own side can try to protect them, but the focus has to be on air and artillery attacks (part of NATO doctrine is to use those two to hit command posts whenever possible) and snipers are notoriously difficult to dissuade.


----------



## bostjan

Reports are saying that Zelensky is withdrawing the request to join NATO and is has said he is willing to compromise and discuss the breakaway of Donbas.



LostTheTone said:


> They are leading armies that are on campaign. They have to actually be there on the ground, and be in real time communication with the forces they lead.
> 
> These dudes aren't colonels; they aren't saying "Ok, send C company over there". But they are doing the next one up from that - "Send the 22nd Tank Regiment through the pass". Sure, they aren't doing their own recon, but they need to be on the same closed radio network, so they can't sit too far back.
> 
> I suspect (can't say for sure) that these guys have been caught out because their formations have basically stopped moving, and they have been spotted one way or another. Could be by locals, could be by radio direction finding. I strongly doubt they they are building proper command posts, but even if they did it's not like it would go unnoticed that Russia bulldozers were building bunkers.
> 
> In this kind of war there is plenty of Ukrainians all over everywhere. If youre a proper sniper team, is it that hard to slip through the lines?
> 
> And these dudes getting capped are proper fighting soldiers, who've been in Chechnya and Syria. They aren't poncing around like idiots, but they are sitting in places where there doesn't seem to be any Ukrainian resistance, and they sometimes just want to go outside and get some air and smoke a cigarette or whatever. They don't want to be hidden away, they want to meet their commanders and talk to them.
> 
> And, well, this stuff happens. It's a war, and generals are valuable. Their own side can try to protect them, but the focus has to be on air and artillery attacks (part of NATO doctrine is to use those two to hit command posts whenever possible) and snipers are notoriously difficult to dissuade.



These guys were like the UK equivalent to brigadiers; I know it happens, but I also know that those guys don't generally (no pun intended) get super close to the front lines, or even the garden-variety officers.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Reports are saying that Zelensky is withdrawing the request to join NATO and is has said he is willing to compromise and discuss the breakaway of Donbas.



Who's reporting this?


----------



## Jeffrey Bain

Not sure if you guys are familiar with Upwork but it's a huge freelancer website, probably biggest out there and they just ceased all operations in Russia. This will deal a huge personal blow to the people of Russia, no doubt. I know I personally work with a few freelancers from Russia and I gotta say I do feel badly for them. 

This is not to minimize what's going on in the Ukraine by any means; just another blow dealt to the people that are affected by this war.


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> Who's reporting this?


I saw it first on some shady Arabic news site, but then found the same report from AFP. Maybe it's a credible-ish news agency grabbed it from a less credible source?


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> I saw it first on some shady Arabic news site, but then found the same report from AFP. Maybe it's a credible-ish news agency grabbed it from a less credible source?



Seems suspect as of now, new round of sanctions just hit, Russian propaganda is screaming bloody nonsense about Ukrainian dirty bombs and biological warfare labs, etc.

I don't see either side being able to sell this

Zelensky tweeted thanks to Biden for sanctions and "striking the heart of Putin's war machine" and encouraged others to follow 28 mins ago.


----------



## AMOS

nightflameauto said:


> I have no doubt that he's a decent enough dude in real life, but playing a bad take on an already shitty gimmick really rubbed me the wrong way when he came in. The only thing he had going for him at all was the few times he went up against HHH you didn't have to expect him to lose every single time.
> 
> But that's enough about raslin'.
> 
> I'm starting to hear rumblings that China is a little not-so-happy about the extent of Russia's aggression in Ukraine. They apparently knew something was coming, but thought it was going to be the cakewalk Putin advertised. Could get really interesting if China decides to back off ties with Russia as well. I don't really think Russia can go on as a loner for very long. Certainly not with this war effort ongoing.


China's economy is too important to them, Putin is on some sort of vendetta so he no longer cares.


----------



## nightflameauto

Everything I'm finding says Zelensky is a little peeved with NATO for not enacting a no-fly zone in and around his country, but I haven't found anything saying he's withdrawing his desire to join.

It's entirely possibly this is being sold inside Russia as him withdrawing his bid. More than likely wishful thinking piled on his slight unhappiness over NATO's lack of military commitment to Ukraine.


----------



## AMOS

nightflameauto said:


> Everything I'm finding says Zelensky is a little peeved with NATO for not enacting a no-fly zone in and around his country, but I haven't found anything saying he's withdrawing his desire to join.
> 
> It's entirely possibly this is being sold inside Russia as him withdrawing his bid. More than likely wishful thinking piled on his slight unhappiness over NATO's lack of military commitment to Ukraine.


I think NATO would kick Russia's ass, but that doesn't mean they want a war with them. Ukraine can win if more countries supply them with modern weapons.


----------



## IwantTacos

Jeffrey Bain said:


> Not sure if you guys are familiar with Upwork but it's a huge freelancer website, probably biggest out there and they just ceased all operations in Russia. This will deal a huge personal blow to the people of Russia, no doubt. I know I personally work with a few freelancers from Russia and I gotta say I do feel badly for them.
> 
> This is not to minimize what's going on in the Ukraine by any means; just another blow dealt to the people that are affected by this war.



Russian tech economy is screwed big time. 

In my industry there is tons of art, animation, and programming that is outsourced to Russian studios. 

Ukraine studios too. But that’s fucked for a different reason.


----------



## Drew

bostjan said:


> That's not juxtaposed with what I was saying, though. I'm not trying to hint at all that this is deliberately coordinated between China and Russia, but if this somehow ends up going heavily in Russia's favour, I fully expect China to learn from it and make a grab for Taiwan. Or, more dangerously, if China believes that this thing is going heavily in Russia's favour, they'll follow suit.


Sorry if that wasn't clearer - I'm mostly saying here that I think China DID learn from what Russia did, while also noting that they pretty clearly didn't expect Russia to invade here. I think the liklihood of an overt move on Taiwan i quite a bit lower now, thanks to the international reaction to the Russian invasion, and I can't see Xi being too happy about that, either (though a covert move seems more his speed - at the end of the day, if China wants to replace the US global hegemony with a Chinese one, they kinda need the rest of the world to not _actively_ hate them)


----------



## Drew

bostjan said:


> Thanks.
> 
> I think I had read a similar article this morning with a different spin on it. Any talk about China's stance is at least somewhat speculative, since I'm not sure we typically trust what the Chinese government says, which is why them saying that their relationship with Russia is rock solid is easy to brush off. It might be possible that China's administration is itself figuring out whether to remain more neutral or become less neutral and lean in or away from whichever side. Probably, every option is on the table for them at this point. I still insist that they are watching how the international response to this goes and will play some effect on how the Chinese government views their own situation with Taiwan.


FWIW this is 100% consistent with what I'm seeing from people with expertise in Russian and Chinese foreign policy. 

1) Russia's invasion was a surprise to the Chinese - too many/ essentially all state-linked actors had been dismissive of the possibility that this would come to war. When China and Russia released their joint statement during the Olympics, this is not whaty Xi excpected Putin to do. 
2) China abstained on the UN vote on sanctions, rather than supported Russia. That was a bit of a surprise, and interpreted as subtle condemnation on their part. 
3) Public statements from China have been bland, neutral please for a peaceful resolution, rather than strong support from either side
4) After Crimea, China quickly swooped in to sign heavily discounted resource extraction deals, most notably securing a discounted source of oil for the next five years, when the West imposed (significantly lighter) sanctions on Russia, to ensure them a large buyer. While there's growing speculation that the Chinese are now thinking about doing that again, they've waited several weeks, which that alone shows some real discomfort on the part of a normally opportunistic nation. 

China's playing this very close to their chest right now, and I suspect that's in large part because they're not sure HOW to play this without on one hand hanging an increasingly important ally out to dry, and on the other being seen as supporting an international pariah.


----------



## LostTheTone

nightflameauto said:


> Everything I'm finding says Zelensky is a little peeved with NATO for not enacting a no-fly zone in and around his country, but I haven't found anything saying he's withdrawing his desire to join.
> 
> It's entirely possibly this is being sold inside Russia as him withdrawing his bid. More than likely wishful thinking piled on his slight unhappiness over NATO's lack of military commitment to Ukraine.



I can certainly see why Zelensky would be annoyed, but I'm sure he knows that it was always a pretty big ask that had little chance of happening.

Aside from anything else, a No Fly wouldn't actually help him that much. I understand that he wants basically anyone to join in the war properly, and holy shit I do too, but he needs an army not less Russian jets.


----------



## Wc707




----------



## oversteve

bostjan said:


> I saw it first on some shady Arabic news site, but then found the same report from AFP. Maybe it's a credible-ish news agency grabbed it from a less credible source?


The direction towards joining NATO is a paragraph in our constitution now, first of all Zelensky wouldn't be able to gather enough votes to remove it (he needs 2/3 or parliament) but even if he tries it now then 99% he'll be hung by the balls the next day by local people.

There are many shady and sleazy bastards in his party, one of them is taking part in the negotitations and he said something about it so I guess he might be that source.


----------



## Drew

Wc707 said:


> View attachment 104268


McDonalds, Coke, Pepsi, Starbucks... Paypal... Facebook... international banks and oil companies doing business in Russia are winding down their operations, often writing them off, and funds and ETFs tracking the Russian stock market are being wound down at essentially total losses (ADRs tracking Russian equities in London are down in the 95-99% range). SWIFT payment processing is anywhere from shut down to extremely difficult for Russian banks, as well, depending on the bank. 

I mean, this is looking a lot like the beginning of a paradigm shift. Russia is being cut out of the modern Western world. It's pretty crazy to watch, mechanically speaking,


----------



## bostjan

The thought crossed my mind a few times, but it never seemed appropriate to ask, and maybe it's still not....
Does anyone know what the situation is with Padalka?


----------



## MaxOfMetal

bostjan said:


> The thought crossed my mind a few times, but it never seemed appropriate to ask, and maybe it's still not....
> Does anyone know what the situation is with Padalka?



Yeah, he got a TON of orders from Rig Talk. 

j/k

I haven't heard of guitar hardware manufacturers pulling out of Russia, but I'm sure all the other sanctions and such are brutal. I would be fairly worried if I had an active build. 

It's unfortunate that regular folks are bearing the brunt of all this.


----------



## ramses

bostjan said:


> The thought crossed my mind a few times, but it never seemed appropriate to ask, and maybe it's still not....
> Does anyone know what the situation is with Padalka?



I follow him accross multiple websites.

He complained about the war, in a barely politically-correct manner (from Russian dictatorship point of view) — please keep in mind that he is in Russia, and he could be jailed for complaining. He basically stated that it is wrong and easy to destroy, so he is going to focus on building until this is over.

That happened before the Russian government banned all social media. Padalka is now isolated from the rest of the world, just like any other innocent Russian citizen.

I hope to buy a guitar from him once all this nonsense ends. He was brave enough to criticize the dictatorship he lives under. I respect that.

EDIT/APPEND:

Oops ... his statement was actually very strong, given the new draconian laws being approved by the dictatorship. Here it is:



> Wish people would stop destroying and get back to creating.
> I'm going to keep creating in the hope that after this disgusting mess is over there will be enough beauty in the world to inspire those in need of it.
> 
> #nowar


----------



## Flappydoodle

bostjan said:


> Check out the link I posted. It clarifies beyond the point you are trying to make via obfuscation of semantics. Also look at the flight paths in question, they are on the absolute opposite end of the ADIZ than the part you are talking about. Also also, look at the list of the aircraft identified in the incursions - they are definitely not civilian aircraft, they are fighter jets, bombers, attack helicopters, radar jamming military reconnaissance jets, etc.
> 
> And yes, some of these incursions are done by aircraft capable of carrying nuclear bombs, although until now I had not pointed that out.
> 
> I'm not sure why so many of you are defending this act this way. Either go all in and say Taiwan is not a country and therefore has no sovereign airspace, like China says, or else look up the actual data.


Eh?

There’s a huge difference

You said they fly bombers over Taiwan regularly. This is totally false. It is not just semantics. It is a completely different scenario.

They enter areas outside of Taiwanese airspace, but within an identification zone. Every nation has these zones. The areas China fly into are international waters. 

You can stand by everything you said if you want. But it is factually inaccurate. 

I’m not up-playing or downplaying Chinese threats. I’m just giving actual facts and refuting your false information. Chinese military planes do not enter Taiwan airspace. They do not fly over the island of Taiwan. Those are facts. 

And I spelled out the reasons why they do it. To cause annoyance and intimidation. If a Chinese bomber entered Taiwanese airspace, it risks being shot down. If it approaches the island itself it WILL be shot down. That’s why China has never done it.

And as I posted above, China has no good reason to start a huge war right now.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

I love how out of touch celebritwats say it is “worth paying more for food and services” if only to make Putin pay. “It’s only a few more bucks.” Yeah, only a few more after a year of out of control inflation.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Drew said:


> McDonalds, Coke, Pepsi, Starbucks... Paypal... Facebook... international banks and oil companies doing business in Russia are winding down their operations, often writing them off, and funds and ETFs tracking the Russian stock market are being wound down at essentially total losses (ADRs tracking Russian equities in London are down in the 95-99% range). SWIFT payment processing is anywhere from shut down to extremely difficult for Russian banks, as well, depending on the bank.
> 
> I mean, this is looking a lot like the beginning of a paradigm shift. Russia is being cut out of the modern Western world. It's pretty crazy to watch, mechanically speaking,


It is crazy. But unfortunately lots of those withdrawals have asterisk* attached

McDonlds will close restaurants. But they’ll still keep paying their 10,000+ employees. So who is really losing? Probably shareholders. The whole point was to put pressure on people to turn against Putin. Now they’re getting paid to sit at home lol. Clearly MCD doesn’t plan to close for long. 

Pepsi and Coke will withdraw some products. But not their most important, most profitable ones. 

Visa and MasterCard will cease some services. Russian cards won’t work abroad. Foreign cards won’t work in Russia. But Russian cards used into Russia will work just fine. 

Kinda sucks, but these companies love money and they’ll only take a stand until it hurts their profits.


----------



## Randy

Blatant lies


----------



## Flappydoodle

Spaced Out Ace said:


> I love how out of touch celebritwats say it is “worth paying more for food and services” if only to make Putin pay. “It’s only a few more bucks.” Yeah, only a few more after a year of out of control inflation.


I agree with what you’re saying. But at the same time, our western governments have no problems handing out or squandering billions of dollars on other nonsense. 

The survival of freedom, democracy and liberal ideology seems worth fighting for. You can’t expect a nation ‘at war’ to have zero compromises. 

Frankly, this is also a hell of a lesson for the west. Outsourcing and dependence on others has to end. Where do western countries mostly get oil and gas? Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Syria, Qatar. What a lovely list of countries. If there was EVER a time to double push for domestic production and renewable energy, it’s now. So yeah, we’re gonna pay a premium now, due to past inactivity and kicking the can down the road.


----------



## DiezelMonster

Randy said:


> Blatant lies



Yeah his pants are DEFINITELY on fire!


----------



## DiezelMonster

Flappydoodle said:


> I agree with what you’re saying. But at the same time, our western governments have no problems handing out or squandering billions of dollars on other nonsense.
> 
> The survival of freedom, democracy and liberal ideology seems worth fighting for. You can’t expect a nation ‘at war’ to have zero compromises.
> 
> Frankly, this is also a hell of a lesson for the west. Outsourcing and dependence on others has to end. Where do western countries mostly get oil and gas? Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Syria, Qatar. What a lovely list of countries. If there was EVER a time to double push for domestic production and renewable energy, it’s now. So yeah, we’re gonna pay a premium now, due to past inactivity and kicking the can down the road.


The trouble with domestic production is that we have to destroy the environment here at home, In Canada pipelines are being built on land that doesn't belong to the companies building them and it's heavily contested. So, WE as a society need to buckle up and figure out what we want to do. Do we continue our heavy dependence on fossil fules? Do we agree we may have hit PEAK oil in the 70s? Is that the other reason we have expanded our reach to these other countries, because oil production here is exhausted? The oil sands scenario in Alberta has dried up and was not an efficient means to get liquid dinosaur in the first place. Or, if our thirst cannot be quenched perhaps the continuation of our dominance brings us to where we are, precisely at the crux of the situation we are in.

Something has to give especially if we want to keep living like we have.


----------



## Randy

DiezelMonster said:


> The trouble with domestic production is that we have to destroy the environment here at home, In Canada pipelines are being built on land that doesn't belong to the companies building them and it's heavily contested. So, WE as a society need to buckle up and figure out what we want to do. Do we continue our heavy dependence on fossil fules? Do we agree we may have hit PEAK oil in the 70s? Is that the other reason we have expanded our reach to these other countries, because oil production here is exhausted? The oil sands scenario in Alberta has dried up and was not an efficient means to get liquid dinosaur in the first place. Or, if our thirst cannot be quenched perhaps the continuation of our dominance brings us to where we are, precisely at the crux of the situation we are in.
> 
> Something has to give especially if we want to keep living like we have.


Renewables and nuclear energy play a role, but you also have fuel efficiency standards that keep getting slashed every time the White House goes red, and the auto industry goes from saying "we back clean energy" to saying "MOAR HELLCATS!". 

Obama era rules would've required 54.5 mpg fuel efficiency by 2025.


----------



## Grindspine

DiezelMonster said:


> The trouble with domestic production is that we have to destroy the environment here at home, In Canada pipelines are being built on land that doesn't belong to the companies building them and it's heavily contested. So, WE as a society need to buckle up and figure out what we want to do. Do we continue our heavy dependence on fossil fules? Do we agree we may have hit PEAK oil in the 70s? Is that the other reason we have expanded our reach to these other countries, because oil production here is exhausted? The oil sands scenario in Alberta has dried up and was not an efficient means to get liquid dinosaur in the first place. Or, if our thirst cannot be quenched perhaps the continuation of our dominance brings us to where we are, precisely at the crux of the situation we are in.
> 
> Something has to give especially if we want to keep living like we have.


This would all be easier if people just stopped having kids.

Fewer children to demand things as they get older = more sustainable supply.

just sayin'

I posted an article several pages back in this thread about wheat & corn in Ukraine. It is looking more like those are strategic resources that Russia has in sight.


----------



## Adieu

ramses said:


> I follow him accross multiple websites.
> 
> He complained about the war, in a barely politically-correct manner (from Russian dictatorship point of view) — please keep in mind that he is in Russia, and he could be jailed for complaining. He basically stated that it is wrong and easy to destroy, so he is going to focus on building until this is over.
> 
> That happened before the Russian government banned all social media. Padalka is now isolated from the rest of the world, just like any other innocent Russian citizen.
> 
> I hope to buy a guitar from him once all this nonsense ends. He was brave enough to criticize the dictatorship he lives under. I respect that.
> 
> EDIT/APPEND:
> 
> Oops ... his statement was actually very strong, given the new draconian laws being approved by the dictatorship. Here it is:



Yup, nowar posts may well be severe FELONIES there, depending on their date and whether or not their local gestapo and courts decide to bother with taking dates of posts vs. dates of laws passed into account (precedent suggests they might ignore that, letter of the law be damned)


----------



## LostTheTone

DiezelMonster said:


> The trouble with domestic production is that we have to destroy the environment here at home, In Canada pipelines are being built on land that doesn't belong to the companies building them and it's heavily contested. So, WE as a society need to buckle up and figure out what we want to do. Do we continue our heavy dependence on fossil fules? Do we agree we may have hit PEAK oil in the 70s? Is that the other reason we have expanded our reach to these other countries, because oil production here is exhausted? The oil sands scenario in Alberta has dried up and was not an efficient means to get liquid dinosaur in the first place. Or, if our thirst cannot be quenched perhaps the continuation of our dominance brings us to where we are, precisely at the crux of the situation we are in.
> 
> Something has to give especially if we want to keep living like we have.



Domestic production (which in the UK means earthquakes in Lancashire) is still better than funding Russia and the Gulf states. And from where we are right now, we have no other option. I don't believe gas heating is as common in the US, but here it is the absolute standard. I agree that we should do something about that (for carbon emissions reasons) but that is a many year process. 

Of course Britain and the US have the relative luxury of being able to just go drill more, and it is a way harder question what countries like Germany do. But we are all on the slow march towards electric vehicles and all that anyway. Of course we're all going to keep investing in renewables and nuclear too. 

The only question is whether we send our money to Russia et al, who are shitty regimes that we only ever were friends with on sufferance, or develop domestic production so we can't be held to ransom until the green future arrives.


----------



## LostTheTone

Grindspine said:


> This would all be easier if people just stopped having kids.
> 
> Fewer children to demand things as they get older = more sustainable supply.
> 
> just sayin'
> 
> I posted an article several pages back in this thread about wheat & corn in Ukraine. It is looking more like those are strategic resources that Russia has in sight.



Don't know about your nation, but in the UK our population growth is more down to migration than births. 

And while wheat is a relevant global commodity, remember that crops can be planted elsewhere. At the previous prices, it wasn't worth it for most european farmers to grow wheat, but the prices are spiking and there will definitely be a shortfall this year so farmers in the EU will be thinking of switching their crops.


----------



## MaxOfMetal

Flappydoodle said:


> It is crazy. But unfortunately lots of those withdrawals have asterisk* attached
> 
> McDonlds will close restaurants. But they’ll still keep paying their 10,000+ employees. So who is really losing? Probably shareholders. The whole point was to put pressure on people to turn against Putin. Now they’re getting paid to sit at home lol. Clearly MCD doesn’t plan to close for long.
> 
> Pepsi and Coke will withdraw some products. But not their most important, most profitable ones.
> 
> Visa and MasterCard will cease some services. Russian cards won’t work abroad. Foreign cards won’t work in Russia. But Russian cards used into Russia will work just fine.
> 
> Kinda sucks, but these companies love money and they’ll only take a stand until it hurts their profits.



I'm actually pretty impressed, honestly. 

I was expecting a few social media posts asking for peace and unity that didn't even name Russia. 

I mean, we're just two weeks into this invasion and the Russian economy is crumbling, soon it won't be worthwhile for these companies to do any business there. I feel as long as there's public pressure they'll continue to wind down their Russian operations. 

It already sends a pretty strong message that they're willing to throw millions of dollars away, even if it's not a total pull out. 

Now, will the easily distracted West continue to put pressure on these companies? That remains to be seen.


----------



## LostTheTone

MaxOfMetal said:


> I'm actually pretty impressed, honestly.
> 
> I was expecting a few social media posts asking for peace and unity that didn't even name Russia.
> 
> I mean, we're just two weeks into this invasion and the Russian economy is crumbling, soon it won't be worthwhile for these companies to do any business there. I feel as long as there's public pressure they'll continue to wind down their Russian operations.
> 
> It already sends a pretty strong message that they're willing to throw millions of dollars away, even if it's not a total pull out.
> 
> Now, will the easily distracted West continue to put pressure on these companies? That remains to be seen.



I agree - I wasn't expecting much, especially from companies like McDonalds who can at least plausibly claim that they provide food to normal Russians (and so exempted from sanctions) and who try not to be political in public. 

And every business that pulls out from Russia does create real, visible pain. In the long term Russia can potentially build ersatz businesses, but every time they need to do that it hurts them. It's not like there are factories just waiting to pick up the short fall. There will be shortages, for a considerable time.

I don't know how believable the pictures are since they were on the Daily Mail, but it seems that stores in Russia are just running out of stuff.


----------



## Flappydoodle

DiezelMonster said:


> The trouble with domestic production is that we have to destroy the environment here at home, In Canada pipelines are being built on land that doesn't belong to the companies building them and it's heavily contested. So, WE as a society need to buckle up and figure out what we want to do. Do we continue our heavy dependence on fossil fules? Do we agree we may have hit PEAK oil in the 70s? Is that the other reason we have expanded our reach to these other countries, because oil production here is exhausted? The oil sands scenario in Alberta has dried up and was not an efficient means to get liquid dinosaur in the first place. Or, if our thirst cannot be quenched perhaps the continuation of our dominance brings us to where we are, precisely at the crux of the situation we are in.
> 
> Something has to give especially if we want to keep living like we have.



Totally agree that we need to move away from fossil fuels. I'm definitely not a leftist, and I'm surprised that this is still a left/right issue. No conservative politician has made a good conservative/patriotic case for going green. Trump was *kinda* half way there, at least wanting to increase domestic production so Saudi didn't have the USA by the balls. In reality, the sooner we can wean ourselves, the better for everybody.

Given US landmass, there's absolutely no excuse for not having nuclear and solar providing most energy needs. Electric cars too. Now we don't need anywhere close to the amount of oil.



LostTheTone said:


> Domestic production (which in the UK means earthquakes in Lancashire) is still better than funding Russia and the Gulf states. And from where we are right now, we have no other option. I don't believe gas heating is as common in the US, but here it is the absolute standard. I agree that we should do something about that (for carbon emissions reasons) but that is a many year process.
> 
> Of course Britain and the US have the relative luxury of being able to just go drill more, and it is a way harder question what countries like Germany do. But we are all on the slow march towards electric vehicles and all that anyway. Of course we're all going to keep investing in renewables and nuclear too.
> 
> The only question is whether we send our money to Russia et al, who are shitty regimes that we only ever were friends with on sufferance, or develop domestic production so we can't be held to ransom until the green future arrives.



Agreed. Germany could have kept their nuclear plants rather than closing them for stupid political reasons. It's crazy how much tables have turned and suddenly Europe is so shocked by things that were pretty obvious. Just two years ago they were LOL'ing at Trump telling them to increase military spending. 

End of the day, there's a solid national security argument for why you don't want to have to import from Russia, Saudi, Venezuela and Qatar. Hell, I just saw that Saudi won't even take Biden's phone calls now. They LOVE these higher prices.



MaxOfMetal said:


> I'm actually pretty impressed, honestly.
> 
> I was expecting a few social media posts asking for peace and unity that didn't even name Russia.
> 
> I mean, we're just two weeks into this invasion and the Russian economy is crumbling, soon it won't be worthwhile for these companies to do any business there. I feel as long as there's public pressure they'll continue to wind down their Russian operations.
> 
> It already sends a pretty strong message that they're willing to throw millions of dollars away, even if it's not a total pull out.
> 
> Now, will the easily distracted West continue to put pressure on these companies? That remains to be seen.



I'm impressed too, especially with the political speed and unity. 

I am just picking faults that a lot of the headlines are sadly not realistic.

And yeah, I hope that they don't slowly backslide on the commitments, especially when this war drags on and become the new normal.



LostTheTone said:


> I agree - I wasn't expecting much, especially from companies like McDonalds who can at least plausibly claim that they provide food to normal Russians (and so exempted from sanctions) and who try not to be political in public.
> 
> And every business that pulls out from Russia does create real, visible pain. In the long term Russia can potentially build ersatz businesses, but every time they need to do that it hurts them. It's not like there are factories just waiting to pick up the short fall. There will be shortages, for a considerable time.
> 
> I don't know how believable the pictures are since they were on the Daily Mail, but it seems that stores in Russia are just running out of stuff.



Things like this remind me of the massive cultural power of the West. They're all watching Hollywood movies on Netflix, drinking Pepsi, buying French/Italian fashion and listening to Adele, Ed Sheehan etc etc. I cannot name one single Russian actor, movie, drink brand, pop star or fashion designer. Maybe being isolated from that sort of thing will also have some effect, and hopefully Putin doesn't successfully spin it into being the victim.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

Gorbachev brings Russia Pizza Hut, Putin loses it.


----------



## bostjan

Flappydoodle said:


> Eh?
> 
> There’s a huge difference
> 
> You said they fly bombers over Taiwan regularly. This is totally false. It is not just semantics. It is a completely different scenario.
> 
> They enter areas outside of Taiwanese airspace, but within an identification zone. Every nation has these zones. The areas China fly into are international waters.
> 
> You can stand by everything you said if you want. But it is factually inaccurate.
> 
> I’m not up-playing or downplaying Chinese threats. I’m just giving actual facts and refuting your false information. Chinese military planes do not enter Taiwan airspace. They do not fly over the island of Taiwan. Those are facts.
> 
> And I spelled out the reasons why they do it. To cause annoyance and intimidation. If a Chinese bomber entered Taiwanese airspace, it risks being shot down. If it approaches the island itself it WILL be shot down. That’s why China has never done it.
> 
> And as I posted above, China has no good reason to start a huge war right now.


Years ago, China has publicly stated that it *will* shoot down any craft flying into its AIDZ.

So, you can say I'm inaccurate all you want, when I've already posted the evidence, but it does not make it so.


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> Who's reporting this?


Well, now, it's all over the news this morning: Newsweek, Jerusalem Post, WION, etc.

It looks like an accurate story, but I can see different spins, which is important.

This may likely be a tactic for Zelensky to approach Putin with a message of "let's compromise," knowing full well that Putin cannot compromise, because of ego, but also because the reasons Putin gave the international commmunity for the invasion are not the real reasons for the invasion. Once Putin's bullshit is under rhetorical attack, maybe nations who were walking on the fence will give up on Putin or maybe international outrage will lead to more grief for him in other ways, or maybe this will speak to the Russian people. Maybe all three.


----------



## Flappydoodle

bostjan said:


> Years ago, China has publicly stated that it *will* shoot down any craft flying into its AIDZ.
> 
> So, you can say I'm inaccurate all you want, when I've already posted the evidence, but it does not make it so.





Do you even read your own link?

"A PLA air force general has warned that any foreign aircraft disobeying warnings and deemed to be “hostile” could be shot down in China’s newly-established air defence identification zone (ADIZ), Chinese media reported on Wednesday."

COULD be shot down

IF they disobey warnings

AND if they are deemed hostile

This is the same for any ADIZ. Taiwan would shoot down the Chinese planes if they were in the ADIZ, disobeying warnings, and were deemed hostile. So would the UK when Russia flies up off the coast of Scotland. That's why they leave when they're warned.

Again - do you have any evidence of your original claim about Chinese bombers flying over Taiwan? 

If not, why not just retract it and admit you were wrong?

Here is what you said, just so we are clear what I'm disagreeing with.



> China had significantly ramped up their flyovers of Taiwan. In case anyone wasn't aware, China had been routinely flying bombers over Taiwan- and not just once over, but circling around and around.



and



> Right, but what does the radar tell you that it didn't tell you eight times yesterday when Chinese aircraft flew over your head (yes, it's been doing flyovers that often)?



These statements are wrong. No bomber has flown over Taiwan. And unless you were on a boat in the ocean nothing flew over anybody's heads.

I don't understand why can't you just admit that you were badly informed about something instead of moving goalposts and literally citing Chinese propaganda to support your points. SCMP is owned by Alibaba, lol. 









A Hong Kong Newspaper on a Mission to Promote China’s Soft Power (Published 2018)


Since buying The South China Morning Post, the Chinese tech giant Alibaba has pumped in cash with a goal of using it to change how the West sees China.




www.nytimes.com













A Newsroom at the Edge of Autocracy


The South China Morning Post is arguably the world’s most important newspaper—for what it tells us about media freedoms as China’s power grows.




www.theatlantic.com


----------



## bostjan

Flappydoodle said:


> Do you even read your own link?
> 
> "A PLA air force general has warned that any foreign aircraft disobeying warnings and deemed to be “hostile” could be shot down in China’s newly-established air defence identification zone (ADIZ), Chinese media reported on Wednesday."
> 
> COULD be shot down
> 
> IF they disobey warnings
> 
> AND if they are deemed hostile
> 
> This is the same for any ADIZ. Taiwan would shoot down the Chinese planes if they were in the ADIZ, disobeying warnings, and were deemed hostile. So would the UK when Russia flies up off the coast of Scotland. That's why they leave when they're warned.
> 
> Again - do you have any evidence of your original claim about Chinese bombers flying over Taiwan?
> 
> If not, why not just retract it and admit you were wrong?
> 
> Here is what you said, just so we are clear what I'm disagreeing with.
> 
> 
> 
> and
> 
> 
> 
> These statements are wrong. No bomber has flown over Taiwan. And unless you were on a boat in the ocean nothing flew over anybody's heads.
> 
> I don't understand why can't you just admit that you were badly informed about something instead of moving goalposts and literally citing Chinese propaganda to support your points. SCMP is owned by Alibaba, lol.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Hong Kong Newspaper on a Mission to Promote China’s Soft Power (Published 2018)
> 
> 
> Since buying The South China Morning Post, the Chinese tech giant Alibaba has pumped in cash with a goal of using it to change how the West sees China.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Newsroom at the Edge of Autocracy
> 
> 
> The South China Morning Post is arguably the world’s most important newspaper—for what it tells us about media freedoms as China’s power grows.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theatlantic.com


This is ridiculous. You are arguing China is not hostile toward Taiwan, or that Chinese news is not accurate about statements made by China.

No, I'm not retracting anything. It's well known that China does these flyovers. I posted my evidence. You don't want to believe it or make excuses for China for being deliberately hostile in a tense situation, or keep reiterating bullshit. Go ahead, there's no reason for me to try to get through to you at this point.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Well, now, it's all over the news this morning: Newsweek, Jerusalem Post, WION, etc.
> 
> It looks like an accurate story, but I can see different spins, which is important.
> 
> This may likely be a tactic for Zelensky to approach Putin with a message of "let's compromise," knowing full well that Putin cannot compromise, because of ego, but also because the reasons Putin gave the international commmunity for the invasion are not the real reasons for the invasion. Once Putin's bullshit is under rhetorical attack, maybe nations who were walking on the fence will give up on Putin or maybe international outrage will lead to more grief for him in other ways, or maybe this will speak to the Russian people. Maybe all three.



Sounds like a whole lot of nothing with some additional stuff taken out of context.

Also, "talking about disputed territories" is more likely to mean discussing their return.

Might also be some intentional time-wasting to get Russia to really start to feel the burn of sanctions.

The beating that the Russian economy is taking is no joke, the draconian measures they're implementing to try to stifle dissent are beyond ridiculous (6-15 years prison camps for "unauthorized" information on military matters, INCLUDING JUST CALLING THE WAR A WAR, expropriation of foreign currency accounts, forcing websites to go domestic as they prepare to shut off the global internet, etc.), and default seems imminent. Multinational companies are pretty much ALL gone. People are fleeing Russia like it's the one getting invaded, no joke. As long as Ukraine doesn't lose Kyiv or get its government murdered, every day wasted not negotiating seriously is a win.


----------



## Adieu

In other facepalmy news of embezzlement, corruption, and decline, it is now believed to be established fact that Russia's multi-billion-dollar encrypted military communication system

...secretly uses... local civilian 3G/4G cell towers.

Because OF COURSE THEY DO. Some sly embezzler prolly ordered the whole damn system on aliexpress.

Which they found out the hard way, after blowing up some local 3G/4G equipment and experiencing full comms outage in some areas. Cause of course that little tidbit was too damn secret to warn them not to.


----------



## LostTheTone

Flappydoodle said:


> Agreed. Germany could have kept their nuclear plants rather than closing them for stupid political reasons. It's crazy how much tables have turned and suddenly Europe is so shocked by things that were pretty obvious. Just two years ago they were LOL'ing at Trump telling them to increase military spending.
> 
> End of the day, there's a solid national security argument for why you don't want to have to import from Russia, Saudi, Venezuela and Qatar. Hell, I just saw that Saudi won't even take Biden's phone calls now. They LOVE these higher prices.



What is particularly insane is that Russia was overtly pressuring Ukraine by constricting their supply of gas since 2010ish, and that this in turn had an impact on European gas supplies. They have done it numerous times. The whole point of the Nordstream pipelines was literally so that gas could be cut off to Eastern europe, without disrupting supply to Western europe.

It has been over a decade (probably longer) where gas has been used as a specific tool to prise apart Europe. It was so very obvious that this had to stop. And instead Germany did the exact opposite, and became more reliant on Russia, and was really keen on those pipelines.

I know that most of us weren't thinking in depth about this, especially as there is a lot of noise in the Green policy area. But as you say, no country can consider themselves secure if they are not able to fulfil their own energy needs. 

A bunch of pages back I mentioned the book Red Storm Rising by Tom Clancy. In that book the spark that starts the slow fuse to war between the USSR and NATO wasn't anything military. It was a massive oil fire in Baku, caused by Islamic fundamentalist terrorism. They see that at some point their whole society will collapse without energy, they won't even be able to train their troops and defend their borders. It's prescient as fuck, honestly.


----------



## wheresthefbomb

Grindspine said:


> This would all be easier if people just stopped having kids.
> 
> Fewer children to demand things as they get older = more sustainable supply.
> 
> just sayin'
> 
> I posted an article several pages back in this thread about wheat & corn in Ukraine. It is looking more like those are strategic resources that Russia has in sight.



vasectomy gang reporting in


----------



## LostTheTone

wheresthefbomb said:


> vasectomy gang reporting in



High five!


----------



## nightflameauto

LostTheTone said:


> High five!


Me three!


----------



## Adieu

You guys are practically writing Putin's propaganda for him


----------



## 4Eyes

seems that this war will get uglier and uglier - they shelled maternity hospital in Mariupol. 








У Маріуполі окупанти завдали артудару по пологовому будинку і не тільки, багато загиблих (відео)


В результаті обстрілу будівля повністю зруйнована.




www-unian-ua.translate.goog





and they also repeatedly block humanitarian help and corridors, despite they agreed to allow evacuation of civilians from regions hit by conflict.


----------



## Demiurge

Adieu said:


> You guys are practically writing Putin's propaganda for him



What, that in The West some elect to not have kids as to spare them a wretched future cowering under Russian dominance?


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> You guys are practically writing Putin's propaganda for him



"Da comrade, in degenerate capitalist west they have prudently invest pension to care for them in old age, instead of raising six children in shack. Such weakness!"

Edit for serious answer -

The question is, in strategic terms, "What do we need more people for?".

The answer being that we don't. 

In fact the whole on the 20th century, and even the latter part of the 19th century has been a series of demonstrations that it really doesn't matter how many people you got, what matters is what they can do.


----------



## Adieu

Trust me, voluntarily emasculated western males supporting Ukraine would be a smash-hit on RT or other Russian state TV

These are the people who want to "save" Ukraine from western zoophiliacs who bang turtles in brothel zoos in Denmark (...this was a thing that a Russian MP actually said on TV, not sure if it was about Ukraine or NATO, but western values = NATO = turtle rapists = coming to Ukraine totally *IS* a thing for Russian propaganda).


----------



## Demiurge

Adieu said:


> Trust me, voluntarily emasculated western males supporting Ukraine would be a smash-hit on RT or other Russian state TV
> 
> These are the people who want to "save" Ukraine from western zoophiliacs who bang turtles in brothel zoos in Denmark (...this was a thing that a Russian MP actually said on TV, not sure if it was about Ukraine or NATO, but western values = NATO = turtle rapists = coming to Ukraine totally *IS* a thing for Russian propaganda).



Well, it sounds like their imaginations need no assistance so it's no bother. Putin, you're so vain, you probably think this family-planning decision is about you, don't you, don't you, don't you?


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Trust me, voluntarily emasculated western males supporting Ukraine would be a smash-hit on RT or other Russian state TV
> 
> These are the people who want to "save" Ukraine from western zoophiliacs who bang turtles in brothel zoos in Denmark (...this was a thing that a Russian MP actually said on TV, not sure if it was about Ukraine or NATO, but western values = NATO = turtle rapists = coming to Ukraine totally *IS* a thing for Russian propaganda).



And of course up until now the Russian media has had a super high opinion of the West, eh?

If the best that my country's avowed enemies can do is laugh and do a funny voice, then I don't care much what they have to say about me. Ain't my currency that is cratering, you know?


----------



## oversteve

Demiurge said:


> Well, it sounds like their imaginations need no assistance so it's no bother. Putin, you're so vain, you probably think this family-planning decision is about you, don't you, don't you, don't you?


How about 58 types of "gay" and 100k zoophiles? 









58 видов геев и сто тысяч зоофилов от Ирины Бергсет стали хитом интернета


Видео, в котором лидер движения "Русских матерей" Ирина Бергсет предостерегает россиян от "западных лисиц" и "геев в костюмах сатанистов", стало вирусным. Разошедшийся по интернту ролик сделан на основе выступления госпожи Бергсет на уфимском митинге так называемого Национально-освободительного...




upogau.org







Spoiler: translation



A video in which Russian Mothers leader Irina Bergset warns Russians against "Western vixens" and "gays dressed as Satanists" has gone viral.

The video that went viral on the Internet was based on a speech by Mrs. Bergset at a rally in Ufa of the so-called National Liberation Movement, and not in Crimea, as the author of the video compilation claims. From which, however, the statements of the "Russian mother" used in the video do not become less epic.

The activist warns: there is an information war in which "civilian people are dying." And "America and other Western brothels" are waging this war. But "Russia has risen from its knees." "Western foxes win with cunning, deceit, lies - we won with the truth," Ms. Bergset testifies with special fervor. "The Americans came to us with their slurry of lies, they will drown in it."

"They don't even need our land anymore. They need our children, they need our souls," the guardian of "traditional values" is horrified. According to her, education is being introduced in Western schools, which "will be taught by the new teachers of the new Europe" - "homosexuals and other perverts" who "from the first grade will teach children same-sex love." According to Bergset, the European Parliament almost unanimously voted for the fact that "children should be corrupted late at 4 years old, we should start teaching them same-sex love before 4 years old."

“By the meaning of same-sex love in schools and kindergartens, they understand sexual diversity,” the activist continues to enlighten. “On February 14, the Facebook website published a list of this sexual diversity: 58 types of gays. Fifty-eight types! Good people, where have you seen and how can we distinguish one from another at all?! We have barely gotten used to the fact that there are LGBT people there and some other multitude!"

Along the way, Bergset, who, according to her, was born in a town in western Ukraine, also told about how she almost suffered in her childhood at the hands of the bloody "Bandera": "I was born in 1965, and it was impossible to go outside in the city of Novo- Volynsky, because everyone was warned: be careful, Bandera! They killed people, they stole children. It all happened, we do not exaggerate. And this is terrible: be careful, we live in Bandera."

And the same bestiality, according to Bergset, was legalized in Europe almost immediately after its birth, and now zoophiles are marching in hundreds of thousands across European countries: “Zoophilia has been legalized in Europe since 1969. Bestiality, in our opinion. In Germany, for example, in January 2014, that is, when this process was already underway in Crimea, some German politicians said: "Isn't it time for us to protect the rights of animals from these same people - nonhumans who attack them?"

“And what happened to Germany?” the activist asks, and then she answers her own question. “It was not you and me with flags that took to the streets, but one hundred thousand zoophiles in Germany. In Denmark, one hundred thousand zoophiles. In Norway, one hundred thousand zoophiles. They came out and said: this is a form of love, this is our kind of this sexual orientation. And there are an infinite number of them too. They want to open their own schools, they want to teach and remake our children." The parents, who went out to a peaceful demonstration against such indecency, were sprayed with gas and "all sorts of dyes" in the eyes by "gay men in costumes of Satanists."

“This is Europe against us,” Bergset sums up. “Our children are in danger, that today we need to stand like an iron curtain from our human maternal bodies in a circle around our children and say: “We will not let this infection into Russia!”


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> How about 58 types of "gay" and 100k zoophiles?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 58 видов геев и сто тысяч зоофилов от Ирины Бергсет стали хитом интернета
> 
> 
> Видео, в котором лидер движения "Русских матерей" Ирина Бергсет предостерегает россиян от "западных лисиц" и "геев в костюмах сатанистов", стало вирусным. Разошедшийся по интернту ролик сделан на основе выступления госпожи Бергсет на уфимском митинге так называемого Национально-освободительного...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> upogau.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: translation
> 
> 
> 
> A video in which Russian Mothers leader Irina Bergset warns Russians against "Western vixens" and "gays dressed as Satanists" has gone viral.
> 
> The video that went viral on the Internet was based on a speech by Mrs. Bergset at a rally in Ufa of the so-called National Liberation Movement, and not in Crimea, as the author of the video compilation claims. From which, however, the statements of the "Russian mother" used in the video do not become less epic.
> 
> The activist warns: there is an information war in which "civilian people are dying." And "America and other Western brothels" are waging this war. But "Russia has risen from its knees." "Western foxes win with cunning, deceit, lies - we won with the truth," Ms. Bergset testifies with special fervor. "The Americans came to us with their slurry of lies, they will drown in it."
> 
> "They don't even need our land anymore. They need our children, they need our souls," the guardian of "traditional values" is horrified. According to her, education is being introduced in Western schools, which "will be taught by the new teachers of the new Europe" - "homosexuals and other perverts" who "from the first grade will teach children same-sex love." According to Bergset, the European Parliament almost unanimously voted for the fact that "children should be corrupted late at 4 years old, we should start teaching them same-sex love before 4 years old."
> 
> “By the meaning of same-sex love in schools and kindergartens, they understand sexual diversity,” the activist continues to enlighten. “On February 14, the Facebook website published a list of this sexual diversity: 58 types of gays. Fifty-eight types! Good people, where have you seen and how can we distinguish one from another at all?! We have barely gotten used to the fact that there are LGBT people there and some other multitude!"
> 
> Along the way, Bergset, who, according to her, was born in a town in western Ukraine, also told about how she almost suffered in her childhood at the hands of the bloody "Bandera": "I was born in 1965, and it was impossible to go outside in the city of Novo- Volynsky, because everyone was warned: be careful, Bandera! They killed people, they stole children. It all happened, we do not exaggerate. And this is terrible: be careful, we live in Bandera."
> 
> And the same bestiality, according to Bergset, was legalized in Europe almost immediately after its birth, and now zoophiles are marching in hundreds of thousands across European countries: “Zoophilia has been legalized in Europe since 1969. Bestiality, in our opinion. In Germany, for example, in January 2014, that is, when this process was already underway in Crimea, some German politicians said: "Isn't it time for us to protect the rights of animals from these same people - nonhumans who attack them?"
> 
> “And what happened to Germany?” the activist asks, and then she answers her own question. “It was not you and me with flags that took to the streets, but one hundred thousand zoophiles in Germany. In Denmark, one hundred thousand zoophiles. In Norway, one hundred thousand zoophiles. They came out and said: this is a form of love, this is our kind of this sexual orientation. And there are an infinite number of them too. They want to open their own schools, they want to teach and remake our children." The parents, who went out to a peaceful demonstration against such indecency, were sprayed with gas and "all sorts of dyes" in the eyes by "gay men in costumes of Satanists."
> 
> “This is Europe against us,” Bergset sums up. “Our children are in danger, that today we need to stand like an iron curtain from our human maternal bodies in a circle around our children and say: “We will not let this infection into Russia!”


----------



## LostTheTone

oversteve said:


> How about 58 types of "gay" and 100k zoophiles?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 58 видов геев и сто тысяч зоофилов от Ирины Бергсет стали хитом интернета
> 
> 
> Видео, в котором лидер движения "Русских матерей" Ирина Бергсет предостерегает россиян от "западных лисиц" и "геев в костюмах сатанистов", стало вирусным. Разошедшийся по интернту ролик сделан на основе выступления госпожи Бергсет на уфимском митинге так называемого Национально-освободительного...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> upogau.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: translation
> 
> 
> 
> A video in which Russian Mothers leader Irina Bergset warns Russians against "Western vixens" and "gays dressed as Satanists" has gone viral.
> 
> The video that went viral on the Internet was based on a speech by Mrs. Bergset at a rally in Ufa of the so-called National Liberation Movement, and not in Crimea, as the author of the video compilation claims. From which, however, the statements of the "Russian mother" used in the video do not become less epic.
> 
> The activist warns: there is an information war in which "civilian people are dying." And "America and other Western brothels" are waging this war. But "Russia has risen from its knees." "Western foxes win with cunning, deceit, lies - we won with the truth," Ms. Bergset testifies with special fervor. "The Americans came to us with their slurry of lies, they will drown in it."
> 
> "They don't even need our land anymore. They need our children, they need our souls," the guardian of "traditional values" is horrified. According to her, education is being introduced in Western schools, which "will be taught by the new teachers of the new Europe" - "homosexuals and other perverts" who "from the first grade will teach children same-sex love." According to Bergset, the European Parliament almost unanimously voted for the fact that "children should be corrupted late at 4 years old, we should start teaching them same-sex love before 4 years old."
> 
> “By the meaning of same-sex love in schools and kindergartens, they understand sexual diversity,” the activist continues to enlighten. “On February 14, the Facebook website published a list of this sexual diversity: 58 types of gays. Fifty-eight types! Good people, where have you seen and how can we distinguish one from another at all?! We have barely gotten used to the fact that there are LGBT people there and some other multitude!"
> 
> Along the way, Bergset, who, according to her, was born in a town in western Ukraine, also told about how she almost suffered in her childhood at the hands of the bloody "Bandera": "I was born in 1965, and it was impossible to go outside in the city of Novo- Volynsky, because everyone was warned: be careful, Bandera! They killed people, they stole children. It all happened, we do not exaggerate. And this is terrible: be careful, we live in Bandera."
> 
> And the same bestiality, according to Bergset, was legalized in Europe almost immediately after its birth, and now zoophiles are marching in hundreds of thousands across European countries: “Zoophilia has been legalized in Europe since 1969. Bestiality, in our opinion. In Germany, for example, in January 2014, that is, when this process was already underway in Crimea, some German politicians said: "Isn't it time for us to protect the rights of animals from these same people - nonhumans who attack them?"
> 
> “And what happened to Germany?” the activist asks, and then she answers her own question. “It was not you and me with flags that took to the streets, but one hundred thousand zoophiles in Germany. In Denmark, one hundred thousand zoophiles. In Norway, one hundred thousand zoophiles. They came out and said: this is a form of love, this is our kind of this sexual orientation. And there are an infinite number of them too. They want to open their own schools, they want to teach and remake our children." The parents, who went out to a peaceful demonstration against such indecency, were sprayed with gas and "all sorts of dyes" in the eyes by "gay men in costumes of Satanists."
> 
> “This is Europe against us,” Bergset sums up. “Our children are in danger, that today we need to stand like an iron curtain from our human maternal bodies in a circle around our children and say: “We will not let this infection into Russia!”



A reasonably accurate description of Essex if you ask me.


----------



## Wc707




----------



## Xaios

Adieu said:


> These are the people who want to "save" Ukraine from western zoophiliacs who bang turtles in brothel zoos in Denmark (...this was a thing that a Russian MP actually said on TV, not sure if it was about Ukraine or NATO, but western values = NATO = turtle rapists = coming to Ukraine totally *IS* a thing for Russian propaganda).


What a horrible day to be able to read.


----------



## LostTheTone

Xaios said:


> What a horrible day to be able to read.



You ever wonder if some propoagandist ever thinks "Nah, that's too much..."


----------



## Cyanide_Anima

Anyone seen the stuff about Novorossiya? Basically it's Putin trying to rebuild an old historical empire anew as a Russian version of the EU and with it's own NATO analog. Apparently, Belarus and Russia and the only current members, and once they get others they're going to make this an official new thing. It previously stretched from Lugansk to Odessa which is why it could be so important for Putin to seize control of those areas as having those could make a New Russia seem more legitimate in the eyes of Russian people.


----------



## oversteve

Cyanide_Anima said:


> Anyone seen the stuff about Novorossiya? Basically it's Putin trying to rebuild an old historical empire anew as a Russian version of the EU and with it's own NATO analog. Apparently, Belarus and Russia and the only current members, and once they get others they're going to make this an official new thing. It previously stretched from Lugansk to Odessa which is why it could be so important for Putin to seize control of those areas as having those could make a New Russia seem more legitimate in the eyes of Russian people.


You've mistaken it a little bit, according to them Novorossiya is a South-Eastern part of Ukraine but overall yes, he's building USSR 2.0.

Some more denazifying from Russia...


----------



## tedtan

I first accidentally posted this in the US Political Discussion thread, but earlier today the power supply to the Chernobyl nuclear reactor was damaged, cutting power off to the plant. I’ve seen some reports that indicate that Russia did this intentionally and others that indicate that the power lines were damaged in a firefight between Russsian and Ukrainian forces.

Either way, the lack of power means that the water pumps pumping the cooling water to the rods can’t operate. This should be safe for a couple of weeks, but could lead to Chernobyl returning to meltdown status if power is not restored within that time frame.

And to make matters worse, the US White House is now reporting that they have evidence that Russia is planning to use chemical and/or biological weapons in Ukraine. I wouldn’t normally pay too much attention to to WH statements, but they’ve been pretty accurate with thier intelligence reporting so far, so there may be something to this. And, if that’s the case, then the Chernobyl attack may have been intentional.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace

tedtan said:


> I first accidentally posted this in the US Political Discussion thread, but earlier today the power supply to the Chernobyl nuclear reactor was damaged, cutting power off to the plant. I’ve seen some reports that indicate that Russia did this intentionally and others that indicate that the power lines were damaged in a firefight between Russsian and Ukrainian forces.
> 
> Either way, the lack of power means that the water pumps pumping the cooling water to the rods can’t operate. This should be safe for a couple of weeks, but could lead to Chernobyl returning to meltdown status if power is not restored within that time frame.
> 
> And to make matters worse, the US White House is now reporting that they have evidence that Russia is planning to use chemical and/or biological weapons in Ukraine. I wouldn’t normally pay too much attention to to WH statements, but they’ve been pretty accurate with thier intelligence reporting so far, so there may be something to this. And, if that’s the case, then the Chernobyl attack may have been intentional.


The White House reported that they have bioweapons labs in Ukraine that Russia could stage a false flag with. Real great use of tax payer money. Fucking morons.


----------



## Adieu

tedtan said:


> I first accidentally posted this in the US Political Discussion thread, but earlier today the power supply to the Chernobyl nuclear reactor was damaged, cutting power off to the plant. I’ve seen some reports that indicate that Russia did this intentionally and others that indicate that the power lines were damaged in a firefight between Russsian and Ukrainian forces.
> 
> Either way, the lack of power means that the water pumps pumping the cooling water to the rods can’t operate. This should be safe for a couple of weeks, but could lead to Chernobyl returning to meltdown status if power is not restored within that time frame.
> 
> And to make matters worse, the US White House is now reporting that they have evidence that Russia is planning to use chemical and/or biological weapons in Ukraine. I wouldn’t normally pay too much attention to to WH statements, but they’ve been pretty accurate with thier intelligence reporting so far, so there may be something to this. And, if that’s the case, then the Chernobyl attack may have been intentional.



Turns out Cherobyl was actually shut down for a while.

Do you mean Zaporizhzhia (Energodar)? That thing was active when captured.

Or did the Putinist scum actually, seriously manage to re-f*ck original Chernobyl???


----------



## spudmunkey

Adieu said:


> Or did the Putinist scum actually, seriously manage to re-f*ck original Chernobyl???


----------



## tedtan

Adieu said:


> Turns out Cherobyl was actually shut down for a while.
> 
> Do you mean Zaporizhzhia (Energodar)? That thing was active when captured.
> 
> Or did the Putinist scum actually, seriously manage to re-f*ck original Chernobyl???


Sometime within the last day, Chernobyl was re-fucked. Hopefully it can be corrected before it becomes a serious issue.


----------



## wheresthefbomb

Xaios said:


> What a horrible day to be able to read.



And yet, here I am, reading the funniest thing I've read in at least a couple days.

The circle of life.


----------



## Flappydoodle

bostjan said:


> This is ridiculous. You are arguing China is not hostile toward Taiwan, or that Chinese news is not accurate about statements made by China.
> 
> No, I'm not retracting anything. It's well known that China does these flyovers. I posted my evidence. You don't want to believe it or make excuses for China for being deliberately hostile in a tense situation, or keep reiterating bullshit. Go ahead, there's no reason for me to try to get through to you at this point.



LOL. Are you hallucinating? I have not argued that China is not hostile. Please quote where I said that. 

I'll wait for you to go check where I said that. (I didn't. I fully acknowledge that China is hostile to Taiwan, and flying jets around peoples territory is a dick move that many countries do to each other.)

However, you said China is flying over Taiwan. Bombers flying overhead. *That is factually incorrect*.

You've moved goalposts from "bombers over Taiwan" to "well, they enter a couple of miles into an identification zone over international waters". Now you cite mainland Chinese propaganda to support yourself.

And your own link did not say "WILL shoot down". It said "MAY shoot down IF conditions X, Y and Z are met". Quite a difference. And again, that's true of any ADIZ. If Russian planes entered the UK ADIZ, refused to ID themselves, refused to turn around etc, they'd be shot down too. This isn't unique to the China-Taiwan situation.

Just admit you were wrong. You probably read headlines about Chinese jets near Taiwan and made an assumption. That's fine. Just admit you were wrong about it.

Really this is quite an informative lesson in human ego witnessing your behaviour right here. You said something which is provably wrong by less than 2 minutes of google. Yet you're doubling down on your incorrect position, moving goalposts, and doing anything possible to avoid acknowledging that you made a mistake. Putin sent in tanks, and his ego is probably bigger than yours. It doesn't bode well for him giving up and leaving, does it.



LostTheTone said:


> What is particularly insane is that Russia was overtly pressuring Ukraine by constricting their supply of gas since 2010ish, and that this in turn had an impact on European gas supplies. They have done it numerous times. The whole point of the Nordstream pipelines was literally so that gas could be cut off to Eastern europe, without disrupting supply to Western europe.
> 
> It has been over a decade (probably longer) where gas has been used as a specific tool to prise apart Europe. It was so very obvious that this had to stop. And instead Germany did the exact opposite, and became more reliant on Russia, and was really keen on those pipelines.
> 
> I know that most of us weren't thinking in depth about this, especially as there is a lot of noise in the Green policy area. But as you say, no country can consider themselves secure if they are not able to fulfil their own energy needs.
> 
> A bunch of pages back I mentioned the book Red Storm Rising by Tom Clancy. In that book the spark that starts the slow fuse to war between the USSR and NATO wasn't anything military. It was a massive oil fire in Baku, caused by Islamic fundamentalist terrorism. They see that at some point their whole society will collapse without energy, they won't even be able to train their troops and defend their borders. It's prescient as fuck, honestly.



Well I hate to say it but there WAS a US president who massively increased domestic production, filled up the emergency reserve stockpiles, and was offering to sell to Europe and others. That would make sense short-term, and the EU would at least have a stable and reliable partner.

But now there is a US president who closed all that down, just spunked out the reserves to try and protect his image and is now desperately calling up the Saudis begging for oil. 

As for Germany - they are simply retarded and totally impotent. One idiotic decision after another. What else is there to say about them?


----------



## tedtan

Flappydoodle said:


> the EU would at least have a stable and reliable partner.


Whatever you think of Trump, positive or negative, the terms “stable” and “reliable” are not accurate descriptors.


----------



## LostTheTone

Flappydoodle said:


> Well I hate to say it but there WAS a US president who massively increased domestic production, filled up the emergency reserve stockpiles, and was offering to sell to Europe and others. That would make sense short-term, and the EU would at least have a stable and reliable partner.
> 
> But now there is a US president who closed all that down, just spunked out the reserves to try and protect his image and is now desperately calling up the Saudis begging for oil.
> 
> As for Germany - they are simply retarded and totally impotent. One idiotic decision after another. What else is there to say about them?



Ah yes but we have to remember that the president who was drilling more, so that the US wasn't reliant on Russia, and who was also happy to sell friendly countries gas and oil so that they too were not reliant on Russia, was definitely a Russia agent working to undermine the US and increase the power of Russia.

I'm really glad that other people have aggressively screamed that into my face until I agreed with them, because it's really not obvious how those things might be connected. Lucky for me I've already made up my mind about that certain president, so I'm not going to look silly here!


----------



## narad

Yes, in retrospect Trump was a great president. I just didn't realize it at the time with all the lies and riots and the undermining of democracy.


----------



## spudmunkey

narad said:


> Yes, in retrospect Trump was a great president. I just didn't realize it at the time with all the lies and riots and the undermining of democracy.


...And the subsequent, and continuing, undermining of democracy...


----------



## LostTheTone

narad said:


> Yes, in retrospect Trump was a great president. I just didn't realize it at the time with all the lies and riots and the undermining of democracy.



With any historical figure, it is important to separate out their different strands and assess them seperately.

For example, JFK is generally accepted to have been a good president on foreign relations, but he was also a drug addicted manwhore. Both of these are true at the same time.

Just because you like (for example) Obama's policy on healthcare doesn't mean you have to like his policy on Libya. You can like him, even lionise him, while still acknowledging that he made missteps and mistakes.

While Trump was of course a Russia agent in hoc to Putin, looking back from 2022 his policy to be energy independent seems pretty smart. That doesn't impact whatever else you might think about literally anything else he did. But if we knew then what we know now, there is no question that the US (whoever might be president) would have kept on with that policy.

As we all know, Trump is a literal traitor that deserves nothing but scorn. As we all know, impeachment was too good for him, and the man should have been hung, drawn and quartered. 

But energy independence is still a good idea nevertheless, and no amount of riots will change that.


----------



## Andromalia

bostjan said:


> simply because China threatens anyone who says Taiwan is a country.


it's funny, Putin put Taiwan in the list of hostile countries and the CCP is likely having a fit about that, in a paradoxical way.


----------



## narad

LostTheTone said:


> With any historical figure, it is important to separate out their different strands and assess them seperately.
> 
> For example, JFK is generally accepted to have been a good president on foreign relations, but he was also a drug addicted manwhore. Both of these are true at the same time.
> 
> Just because you like (for example) Obama's policy on healthcare doesn't mean you have to like his policy on Libya. You can like him, even lionise him, while still acknowledging that he made missteps and mistakes.
> 
> While Trump was of course a Russia agent in hoc to Putin, looking back from 2022 his policy to be energy independent seems pretty smart. That doesn't impact whatever else you might think about literally anything else he did. But if we knew then what we know now, there is no question that the US (whoever might be president) would have kept on with that policy.
> 
> As we all know, Trump is a literal traitor that deserves nothing but scorn. As we all know, impeachment was too good for him, and the man should have been hung, drawn and quartered.
> 
> But energy independence is still a good idea nevertheless, and no amount of riots will change that.



Yes, Trump is a good president on the "Even broken presidents are correct twice a day" approach to evaluating them. The problem with Trump is that you never really know why he did any of the things he did... so many turned out to be power plays for himself. I'm sure so many are roughly correlated with policies that would be seen as good things in light of current events. I see Trump's approach to energy independence as "hey, let's use up this finite resource now -- it's free money!" as an approach to boost the economy to get re-elected with no thought about future ramifications to the country in the decades after his death. If you view them as a genius 4d chess maneuver to reduce Putin's footprint on the world stage, by all means. We'll never know.

We know about the election fraud and riots though.


----------



## LostTheTone

narad said:


> Yes, Trump is a good president on the "Even broken presidents are correct twice a day" approach to evaluating them. The problem with Trump is that you never really know why he did any of the things he did... so many turned out to be power plays for himself. I'm sure so many are roughly correlated with policies that would be seen as good things in light of current events. I see Trump's approach to energy independence as "hey, let's use up this finite resource now -- it's free money!" as an approach to boost the economy to get re-elected with no thought about future ramifications to the country in the decades after his death. If you view them as a genius 4d chess maneuver to reduce Putin's footprint on the world stage, by all means. We'll never know.
> 
> We know about the election fraud and riots though.



Dude, it is suuuuuper fucking tiresome to keep playing "Good president or bad president?". And it's beyond facile too. Good and bad are moralistic terms that mean nothing.

And honestly, it's weirdly passive aggressive to say that it's not good enough to do the right thing, but that you also need the right reasons or else it's still trash that you hate.

No-one here said anything about 4D chess. You're arguing with no-one. Aside from anything else, I of course agree with you that Trump should have raw sewage pumped into his nostrils until he explodes, so I can't see why you would presume I am suggesting 4D chess was going on.

As @Flappydoodle said before, energy security is a real kind of security, so is food security. It is never a bad thing for a nation to be self-sufficient, instead of relying on other states that have the option to sell to someone else. As we are seeing play out in Europe right this second, the EUs naive approach to push for deeper and more critical economic reliance results in this kind of disaster. Now, aggressive globalism, of the kind supported by the EU, did not dissuade Russia from attacking anyone, all it did was give them a huge lever to use when they started attacking.

Even your characterisation of Trumps policy - "Let's drill, it's free money!" - needs to be properly considered. If the US buys oil from abroad, the money is going abroad, right? The US gets the benefit of the oil, but the money leaves the US economy. When the US produces its own oil, they get the oil to use and also the money stays in the US economy, and pays for hundreds of Americans to have jobs, and thence to have homes and buy things and live productive lives.

Domestic supply kinda is free money. Because the money goes back into the US economy, which also benefits the people buying the oil.


----------



## narad

LostTheTone said:


> Dude, it is suuuuuper fucking tiresome to keep playing "Good president or bad president?". And it's beyond facile too. Good and bad are moralistic terms that mean nothing.


That's just being pedantic. Of course we can talk about who is a good or bad president in the same way we talk about who is good or bad at anything from guitar playing, business, movies, art, etc.


LostTheTone said:


> And honestly, it's weirdly passive aggressive to say that it's not good enough to do the right thing, but that you also need the right reasons or else it's still trash that you hate.


Someone kills and eats baby hitler. It's not enough that they did a good thing, but that they did it for the right reasons, and not out of a desire to kill and eat babies.



LostTheTone said:


> As @Flappydoodle said before, energy security is a real kind of security, so is food security. It is never a bad thing for a nation to be self-sufficient, instead of relying on other states that have the option to sell to someone else. As we are seeing play out in Europe right this second, the EUs naive approach to push for deeper and more critical economic reliance results in this kind of disaster. Now, aggressive globalism, of the kind supported by the EU, did not dissuade Russia from attacking anyone, all it did was give them a huge lever to use when they started attacking.
> 
> Even your characterisation of Trumps policy - "Let's drill, it's free money!" - needs to be properly considered. If the US buys oil from abroad, the money is going abroad, right? The US gets the benefit of the oil, but the money leaves the US economy. When the US produces its own oil, they get the oil to use and also the money stays in the US economy, and pays for hundreds of Americans to have jobs, and thence to have homes and buy things and live productive lives.
> 
> Domestic supply kinda is free money. Because the money goes back into the US economy, which also benefits the people buying the oil.


It's free money, but you obviously have to be careful budgeting the country's resources long-term. Trump is the kinda president that strolls into office, maxes out all your credit cards, then runs away in a mustache and a wig. A different one. You're acting like drilling those resources makes the US less reliant on oil abroad, and it does at that exact moment, but it makes them more reliant on foreign resources long-term. All while neglecting the more sustainable energy sources that would have actually helped accomplish it.

And all the meanwhile we dumped infinite gallons of it into the ocean, dirtied drinking water, and desecrated indigenous burial grounds.


----------



## IwantTacos

Listening to western media talk about Taiwan is funny. 



Big island. Taiwan. 
That little tiny island right next to where I live? Also Taiwan. Sometimes planes fly too close to that little island. 

Taiwan’s response - we’re under attack!


----------



## Xaios

IwantTacos said:


> That little tiny island right next to where I live? Also Taiwan.


Huh. TIL.


----------



## LostTheTone

narad said:


> That's just being pedantic. Of course we can talk about who is a good or bad president in the same way we talk about who is good or bad at anything from guitar playing, business, movies, art, etc.



We are able to talk about it, but this discussion is _not _about whether he was a good president. Aside from anything else, I keep agreeing with you that he is a bad guy that should have his genitals placed in a blender, so we all agree on this point, and thus that aspect of the discussion is utterly superfluous. That was my whole point. That it doesn't matter whether he was good or bad, only that one specific policy was more prescient than we knew at the time.



narad said:


> Someone kills and eats baby hitler. It's not enough that they did a good thing, but that they did it for the right reasons, and not out of a desire to kill and eat babies



...Wat?

Firstly, you are presuming it's ok to murder a baby at all, and I have some problems with that. But secondly, if we agree that murdering baby hitler is necessary, why would you then also stop someone killing baby hitler until he proves to your satisfaction that he shares your "good" motives? How can you know what is in his mind anyway? Why wouldn't he just lie to you? This is an insane and impossible moral standard.



narad said:


> It's free money, but you obviously have to be careful budgeting the country's resources long-term. Trump is the kinda president that strolls into office, maxes out all your credit cards, then runs away in a mustache and a wig. A different one. You're acting like drilling those resources makes the US less reliant on oil abroad, and it does at that exact moment, but it makes them more reliant on foreign resources long-term. All while neglecting the more sustainable energy sources that would have actually helped accomplish it.
> 
> And all the meanwhile we dumped infinite gallons of it into the ocean, dirtied drinking water, and desecrated indigenous burial grounds.



We have vastly greater options about what to do in the long term. In the short term we have to use oil from somewhere, otherwise there will be horrendous problems instantly.

We are getting there with green power, and I strongly support efforts to make that happen sooner. But we still need oil tomorrow. And we can either develop domestic supply, or we can buy from someone else who may cut us off. 

Even if we accept that there is only a little bit of oil left, every day that passes brings us closer to a green economy. In a years time we will be much better placed to endure oil shocks from foreign markets than we are today. In two years, even more.

We are fully capable of developing domestic supply today and also developing green power.


----------



## nightflameauto

The fact that people have managed to turn this thread into another defense of Trump's constant inept bumbling, even when he did something that could be seen in a positive light is just mind-numbingly tiresome.

And I'm of the opinion that anybody claiming at this point that Trump was an "agent" of Putin's has to be as fully stupid as Trump himself. Nobody would hire that man on as an agent. He's too unpredictable to be relied on to do anything other than spasm his way back and forth on whatever issue happened to bounce through his twitter feed that day. He made a lot of public comments that made it seem like he admired Putin, but that's probably just because Putin epitomizes the attitude of "fuck you, I do what I want," which is all Trump has ever wanted.


----------



## LostTheTone

nightflameauto said:


> The fact that people have managed to turn this thread into another defense of Trump's constant inept bumbling, even when he did something that could be seen in a positive light is just mind-numbingly tiresome.
> 
> And I'm of the opinion that anybody claiming at this point that Trump was an "agent" of Putin's has to be as fully stupid as Trump himself. Nobody would hire that man on as an agent. He's too unpredictable to be relied on to do anything other than spasm his way back and forth on whatever issue happened to bounce through his twitter feed that day. He made a lot of public comments that made it seem like he admired Putin, but that's probably just because Putin epitomizes the attitude of "fuck you, I do what I want," which is all Trump has ever wanted.



I completely agree with you on all of this.

But to be clear - I am NOT defending Trump, and I don't think Señor Flappy is either. We have to be able to speak the man's name without that being read as a value judgement of his time in office.

Energy policy across the west is a big part of this present crisis. Jesus, look at Germany's utter failure in this area and how that led to them forbidding other countries to transport military aid through their air space. No-one in this thread explodes into a rage when we talk shit about Mama Merkel though. And nor should they.

It is neither a defense nor an attack to say that energy independence made the US less manipulable. That is simply true. It should not provoke instant knee jerk responses about riots and attacks on democracy, any more than the observation that Merkel's shift away from nuclear and reliance on Russian fossil fuels places Germany is a very weak position.


----------



## narad

LostTheTone said:


> I completely agree with you on all of this.
> 
> But to be clear - I am NOT defending Trump, and I don't think Señor Flappy is either. We have to be able to speak the man's name without that being read as a value judgement of his time in office.
> 
> Energy policy across the west is a big part of this present crisis. Jesus, look at Germany's utter failure in this area and how that led to them forbidding other countries to transport military aid through their air space. No-one in this thread explodes into a rage when we talk shit about Mama Merkel though. And nor should they.
> 
> It is neither a defense nor an attack to say that energy independence made the US less manipulable. That is simply true. It should not provoke instant knee jerk responses about riots and attacks on democracy, any more than the observation that Merkel's shift away from nuclear and reliance on Russian fossil fuels places Germany is a very weak position.



You invited that sort of discussion when you added the following:

"I'm really glad that other people have aggressively screamed that into my face until I agreed with them, because it's really not obvious how those things might be connected. Lucky for me I've already made up my mind about that certain president, so I'm not going to look silly here!"

to a paragraph that would have otherwise been reasonably on-topic, apart from the segue talk about Trump being a Russian agent.


----------



## nightflameauto

LostTheTone said:


> It is neither a defense nor an attack to say that energy independence made the US less manipulable. That is simply true. It should not provoke instant knee jerk responses about riots and attacks on democracy, any more than the observation that Merkel's shift away from nuclear and reliance on Russian fossil fuels places Germany is a very weak position.


The real problem with the entire Trump presidency is what a polarizing guy he was even before he took office. The man is both a bumbling idiot, and a many-times over proven crook. He's also admired by a lot of people just because he gives off an aura of being rich, and not giving a fuck about anything, which for some people is apparently the most admirable quality a person can possess. He also continually fails to actually make bank and cuts and runs on business partners and contractors alike the second the bill comes due. 

Add four years of stoking the divisions in this country on top of that, plus his instigation of one of the worst political environments in our lifetimes in the states and it's easy to see why there are some folks who can't help but have knee-jerk reactions when his name is mentioned in any form of positive light. I think the constant bickering over him at this point is detrimental all the way around. 

Some folks additionally saying that Biden caused this whole situation, flat out? Pfffffft. This was coming one way or another, whoever was sitting in that pretty white house.


----------



## Adieu

Merkel was a very odd frontwoman for the EU anyway

Turning away from nuclear to fossils, coddling dictators, austerity, letting Brexit happen, refugee crises...

Just what exactly did she NOT screw up royally?

While she was there, she somehow managed to project the idea that all was going according to plan anyway, but really... was it? Some plan. Damn.

Although I guess the projecting part worked, because Putin seems to have waited for her to retire. Then again, that guy was always kinda dim.


----------



## Adieu

In effect, the Merkel Art of Domestic and Foreign Policy boils down to:

* Dress like an Eastern European headmistress
* Look dour
* Exploit European men's weird childhood traumas
* Wing it and hope nobody ever notices

In retrospect, this whole mess is because the headmistress was a phony and enabled the local bully in the political equivalent of his early formative years.


----------



## Drew

nightflameauto said:


> The fact that people have managed to turn this thread into another defense of Trump's constant inept bumbling, even when he did something that could be seen in a positive light is just mind-numbingly tiresome.
> 
> And I'm of the opinion that anybody claiming at this point that Trump was an "agent" of Putin's has to be as fully stupid as Trump himself. Nobody would hire that man on as an agent. He's too unpredictable to be relied on to do anything other than spasm his way back and forth on whatever issue happened to bounce through his twitter feed that day. He made a lot of public comments that made it seem like he admired Putin, but that's probably just because Putin epitomizes the attitude of "fuck you, I do what I want," which is all Trump has ever wanted.


I think the only argument you can make that Trump was an "agent" of Putin is if you consider him one in the same way that a bull in a china shop could be an agent of Putin. 

Even before he was elected, I think it was pretty clear that Trump wasn't someone who could really be trusted - his record with subcontractors during his real estate days alone was evidence that he was entirely self interested and if it was in his best interest to, if he had an opening he'd hang you out to dry. 

But, the US hegemony built after WWII and during the Cold War was one that wasn't especially friendly to Russia, as a lot of it was designed with Russian containment in mind, and relegated Russia, a former superpower, to a fairly small role on the global stage. If Putin wanted to change that, and he pretty clearly did, then one of the best ways he could do so would be to disrupt and weaken that global order, to create space for Russia to play a proportionally bigger role. And one of the best ways Putin could do _that_, was to support the candidacy of an American presidential candidate who could be depended on to piss off his allies and tarnish America's reputation and potentially weaken the US's relationship with the rest of the world. 

I'm reasonably confident Trump wasn't a knowing agent of Russia - you're right, I'm not sure even WITH something like the infamous pee tape Putin could have really believed he could control Trump in any meaningful sense. However, it's well established Putin wanted to see Trump elected. Putin has said as much, we have ample evidence, strong enough to indict, to demonstrate Russian troll farms were actively supporting Trump's campaign, and we have some evidence, though nothing rising nearly to the threshold of "beyond a reasonable doubt" that Russia may have attempted to directly support the Trump campaign with money (Maria Butina, channeling Russian money to the GOP via the NRA), and with intelligence (Trump Tower meetings). Trump being an active Russian agent, bought and working for Russia, is not a necessary precondition or effect of Putin waging a propaganda war to support the Trump campaign, as he doesn't really _have_ to be for Putin to benefit by his election, by counting on Trump to destabilize an international order built in part to contain Russia.


----------



## Cyanide_Anima

It's more likely that the Kremlin understood that trump is small man and playing to his enormous and fragile ego would gain them some advantage. Also the funding from Russia. He's just a useful idiot to Putin. But it does make him appear like a Russian asset, especially when he attempts to strand Ukraine from NATO and the EU just to get some dirt on a political opponent.

One thing I don't see a lot of talking about is the Chinese money going into the GOP and most importantly of all, directly supporting Trump. New Tang Dynasty (NTD) and their conspiracy rag The Epoch Times have been massive supporters and funders of Trump. They're a racist Chinese apocalyptic cult that essentially wants war between China's CCP and USA to destroy the CCP and install their own nationalistic religion as the force that drives China. The CPAC has been sponsored by NTD for a while now. But that is all for another thread.


----------



## Drew

Cyanide_Anima said:


> It's more likely that the Kremlin understood that trump is small man and playing to his enormous and fragile ego would gain them some advantage. Also the funding from Russia. He's just a useful idiot to Putin. But it does make him appear like a Russian asset, especially when he attempts to strand Ukraine from NATO and the EU just to get some dirt on a political opponent.
> 
> One thing I don't see a lot of talking about is the Chinese money going into the GOP and most importantly of all, directly supporting Trump. New Tang Dynasty (NTD) and their conspiracy rag The Epoch Times have been massive supporters and funders of Trump. They're a racist Chinese apocalyptic cult that essentially wants war between China's CCP and USA to destroy the CCP and install their own nationalistic religion as the force that drives China. The CPAC has been sponsored by NTD for a while now. But that is all for another thread.


I guess, the way I think of this is...

...Trump doesn't have to KNOW he's an asset of Putin's, for him to be an asset to Putin. He was an asset to Putin by doing exactly what any idiot could have expected him to do - cozy up to anti-democratic strongmen, start a trade war and strain diplomatic relations witht he rest of the world, test the strength of the NATO relationship, and ultimately bend the US democracy to the breaking point and provide a whole bunch of talking points to nondemocratic authoritarian regimes like Russia and China that "Western-style Democracy does not work, just look at the US." 

Like, a bull doesn't have to have it in for_ that one tea pot in particular_, to do an excellent job smashing it to smithereens, if you point him at the right china shop.


----------



## LostTheTone

narad said:


> You invited that sort of discussion when you added the following:
> 
> "I'm really glad that other people have aggressively screamed that into my face until I agreed with them, because it's really not obvious how those things might be connected. Lucky for me I've already made up my mind about that certain president, so I'm not going to look silly here!"
> 
> to a paragraph that would have otherwise been reasonably on-topic, apart from the segue talk about Trump being a Russian agent.



I thought I should make it clear that I WAS NOT defending Trump at all, so that no-one could accuse me of doing so.

How the fuck can it be that when anyone says something positive about Trump, you scream at them, and when someone makes clear they are NOT saying something positive about Trump you scream at them too?


----------



## bostjan

Bias usually looks like this:

Story: Detroit Red Wings win ice hockey game against Colorado Avalanche 5 to 3.
Detroit Free Press: "Wings are too much for Avalance"
Denver Post: "Injury begins Avs' tumble"

But, with Fox, it sometimes crosses a line into absurdity, because of factual inaccuracies. For example, these headlines are from the same story, both from Fox, but one geared toward the Latin community:






...and then there's this, the worst example I've seen:





Yes, you read that correctly, Fox was running the same story, but failed to mention covid in the headline.

That's why Fox News is dumb. I'm not going to defend CNN, because I don't like how biased they are at times, but I'd love to see anyone try to show an example as bad as the above.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> In effect, the Merkel Art of Domestic and Foreign Policy boils down to:
> 
> * Dress like an Eastern European headmistress
> * Look dour
> * Exploit European men's weird childhood traumas
> * Wing it and hope nobody ever notices
> 
> In retrospect, this whole mess is because the headmistress was a phony and enabled the local bully in the political equivalent of his early formative years.



Perfectly correct. Merkel has a record of completely folding to strongmen. Having appeased Putin, she then decided to equal up by also kowtowing to Erdogan.

It's so crazy to me to watch from not very far away from Germany and see people praising her as some sort of queen of reason and consensus when the reality is that she was an absolute disaster on all the key issues of the modern era.

She was a disaster on the climate/energy, she was a disaster on defense, she was a disaster on migration, and she only got away with it because Germany has the huge competitive advantage (from the perspective of an exporter) of being in the Euro. 

And having just got to the point where it was clear that the Green party's last spell in the government was an abject disaster for the whole of Europe, Germany stuck them back in.


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> That's why Fox News is dumb. I'm not going to defend CNN, because I don't like how biased they are at times, but I'd love to see anyone try to show an example as bad as the above.



I'm sorry, who was defending Fox exactly?

It certainly wasn't me - It was only a few pages ago I was saying that Fox has been beyond parody on Ukraine.


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> I'm sorry, who was defending Fox exactly?
> 
> It certainly wasn't me - It was only a few pages ago I was saying that Fox has been beyond parody on Ukraine.


Sorry, my fault, I ended up posting in the wrong thread.


----------



## LostTheTone

nightflameauto said:


> The real problem with the entire Trump presidency is what a polarizing guy he was even before he took office. The man is both a bumbling idiot, and a many-times over proven crook. He's also admired by a lot of people just because he gives off an aura of being rich, and not giving a fuck about anything, which for some people is apparently the most admirable quality a person can possess. He also continually fails to actually make bank and cuts and runs on business partners and contractors alike the second the bill comes due.
> 
> Add four years of stoking the divisions in this country on top of that, plus his instigation of one of the worst political environments in our lifetimes in the states and it's easy to see why there are some folks who can't help but have knee-jerk reactions when his name is mentioned in any form of positive light. I think the constant bickering over him at this point is detrimental all the way around.
> 
> Some folks additionally saying that Biden caused this whole situation, flat out? Pfffffft. This was coming one way or another, whoever was sitting in that pretty white house.



In my experience, Trump is exactly the kind of person you would expect to become a politician at some point - A businessman who is a bit of a chancer, and who would say "It's just business" when he collapses a deal and leaves you on the hook for all the debts. Thats just who most elected officials tend to be, people who are in the business of politics.

I read something interesting today what I didn't know. I'm a Brit so it's all a bit further away from me, you know? 

Thing is - The US became a net oil exporter right at the end of Obama's last term. Trump made a point of continuing and growing that, and of course took credit for it, but it wasn't a new thing. In 2015, before Trump, most people would have said "Yeah, that's good that the US is self-sufficient". 

Which is why it's so damn tiresome to keep replaying the same argument over exactly how much Hitler Trump was. 

I know that Trump is an emotive figure, but it seems every few pages there is a random outburst of "Gah! Fuck! Trump! Bastard!" whenever anyone mentions anything vaguely to do with him. And it's just... It's arguing with no-one. It's literally tilting at windmills. And having to stop everything to give people a tender fucking cuddle and assure them that we aren't saying anything nice about Trump is so very wearing.


----------



## DiezelMonster

I watched this today, and I feel this is an interesting take. Nothing surprising of course, at least to me.

And take it/him with a grain of salt, I understand he is an entertainer but it seems the political world has bitten him a bit more and while I don't always agree with his take I appreciate it.


----------



## StevenC

DiezelMonster said:


> I watched this today, and I feel this is an interesting take. Nothing surprising of course, at least to me.
> 
> And take it/him with a grain of salt, I understand he is an entertainer but it seems the political world has bitten him a bit more and while I don't always agree with his take I appreciate it.



Brand's understanding of politics really doesn't go beyond "fOlLoW tHe MoNeY"


----------



## nightflameauto

LostTheTone said:


> In my experience, Trump is exactly the kind of person you would expect to become a politician at some point - A businessman who is a bit of a chancer, and who would say "It's just business" when he collapses a deal and leaves you on the hook for all the debts. Thats just who most elected officials tend to be, people who are in the business of politics.
> 
> I read something interesting today what I didn't know. I'm a Brit so it's all a bit further away from me, you know?
> 
> Thing is - The US became a net oil exporter right at the end of Obama's last term. Trump made a point of continuing and growing that, and of course took credit for it, but it wasn't a new thing. In 2015, before Trump, most people would have said "Yeah, that's good that the US is self-sufficient".
> 
> Which is why it's so damn tiresome to keep replaying the same argument over exactly how much Hitler Trump was.
> 
> I know that Trump is an emotive figure, but it seems every few pages there is a random outburst of "Gah! Fuck! Trump! Bastard!" whenever anyone mentions anything vaguely to do with him. And it's just... It's arguing with no-one. It's literally tilting at windmills. And having to stop everything to give people a tender fucking cuddle and assure them that we aren't saying anything nice about Trump is so very wearing.


One thing you may not understand, as you're not immersed in the bullshit march that is American society / news cycles / etc. is that we were literally flooded, constantly, for almost six straight years, with story after story after story about Trump. Just a constant barrage of the nonstop bullshit. So when those of us that were sick of hearing about him constantly get hit with some nonsense about him in a topic that doesn't really have a lot to do with him? Some of us snap. Mostly because we thought we could finally set the fucker aside and talk about things without having to constantly tolerate the scum-brigade that swung from his nuts the last few years telling us how wonderful, loving and amazing he was.

So yeah, it's a knee-jerk for some. If somebody mentions Trump, a big chunk of us just throw up our hands and go, "Here we fucking go again!"


----------



## DiezelMonster

StevenC said:


> Brand's understanding of politics really doesn't go beyond "fOlLoW tHe MoNeY"


Sure but that is what influences EVERY political decision, especially in this climate, there are no peace and love philanthropists currently leading these countries.


----------



## Randy

Drew said:


> I think the only argument you can make that Trump was an "agent" of Putin is if you consider him one in the same way that a bull in a china shop could be an agent of Putin.
> 
> Even before he was elected, I think it was pretty clear that Trump wasn't someone who could really be trusted - his record with subcontractors during his real estate days alone was evidence that he was entirely self interested and if it was in his best interest to, if he had an opening he'd hang you out to dry.
> 
> But, the US hegemony built after WWII and during the Cold War was one that wasn't especially friendly to Russia, as a lot of it was designed with Russian containment in mind, and relegated Russia, a former superpower, to a fairly small role on the global stage. If Putin wanted to change that, and he pretty clearly did, then one of the best ways he could do so would be to disrupt and weaken that global order, to create space for Russia to play a proportionally bigger role. And one of the best ways Putin could do _that_, was to support the candidacy of an American presidential candidate who could be depended on to piss off his allies and tarnish America's reputation and potentially weaken the US's relationship with the rest of the world.
> 
> I'm reasonably confident Trump wasn't a knowing agent of Russia - you're right, I'm not sure even WITH something like the infamous pee tape Putin could have really believed he could control Trump in any meaningful sense. However, it's well established Putin wanted to see Trump elected. Putin has said as much, we have ample evidence, strong enough to indict, to demonstrate Russian troll farms were actively supporting Trump's campaign, and we have some evidence, though nothing rising nearly to the threshold of "beyond a reasonable doubt" that Russia may have attempted to directly support the Trump campaign with money (Maria Butina, channeling Russian money to the GOP via the NRA), and with intelligence (Trump Tower meetings). Trump being an active Russian agent, bought and working for Russia, is not a necessary precondition or effect of Putin waging a propaganda war to support the Trump campaign, as he doesn't really _have_ to be for Putin to benefit by his election, by counting on Trump to destabilize an international order built in part to contain Russia.


Lost somewhere in the shuffle is the fact Trump's advisors WERE agents for Russia or their enablers in Ukraine and elsewhere. If you wanna say Trump is too stupid or too big a target to fully compromise like Giuliani (former mayor the biggest city in the US btw) or Manafort, fine but his decisions were being influenced by people who are known publicly, confirmed agents of Putin or his financiers.


----------



## Xaios

LostTheTone said:


> Hitler Trump


Two things:

- There is video of an alt-right members meeting making the Nazi salute to Richard Spencer while he was making an exultant speech about Trump on the night he won the 2016 election, and the KKK also planned several celebration parades in the wake of his victory. Trump may not have voluntarily invited the comparison, but the most infamously racist organization in the history of America felt it fitting to hail his ascension as though he was the successor to White Power's legacy. That's pretty telling.
- Some of Trump's most infamous instituted policies were undoubtedly xenophobic, such as the so-called Muslim Travel Ban, and the mass jailing of Mexican and Central American refugees in migrant detention centers, including the forced separation of children from their parents. These detention centers were widely considered to meet the criteria of being concentration camps by historians, academics, and Jewish Americans.

It's also no secret that his presence in the White House emboldened white racists not only in America but all over the world. The comparison, while certainly exaggerated, is definitely not unwarranted.

You've made it clear that you're no fan of Trump, but you're also oddly reductive of specific and legitimate criticism towards him.


----------



## Cyanide_Anima

Trump is a malignant cancerous tumor who spread his cancerous hatred throughout the GOP like wildfire, managed to takeover and buy an entire party, and attempted to nullify and invalidate an election and seize power of the country by sowing doubt in the very concept of democracy. The guy literally tried to turn the entire country into his personal little corrupt business and is still actively trying to do so. So yes, fuck Trump. Forgive us when people act wary of anyone who comes in and says "well, you know, Trump actually did some good such and such stuff here. Oh, I'm toats not defending him or on his side while I say good stuff about him". That stuff comes off as disingenuous even if that is not the case.

Anything that could even be slightly considered a good deed by him is moot when he incited an attempted insurrection and continues to peddle lies and garbage about any who oppose him. The Russia stuff is just icing on the shitcake.


----------



## Drew

Randy said:


> Lost somewhere in the shuffle is the fact Trump's advisors WERE agents for Russia or their enablers in Ukraine and elsewhere. If you wanna say Trump is too stupid or too big a target to fully compromise like Giuliani (former mayor the biggest city in the US btw) or Manafort, fine but his decisions were being influenced by people who are known publicly, confirmed agents of Putin or his financiers.


I suppose I DID kind of gloss over this, at that. Odd, too, considering how much Ukraine figured into a lot of this. 

But yeah, I too am eagerly awaiting the day when sentences containing both "Donald Trump" and "politics" are regulated to the parts of history books we try to gloss over in elementary school.


----------



## ArtDecade

I really wish Zelensky could roll this asshat into traffic and leave him there. And by traffic, I mean tanks. These Trumpublicans are such morons.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/10/cawthorn-zelensky-thug/


----------



## devastone

Serious d-bag, brainwashing propaganda isn't just limited to communist countries.


----------



## nightflameauto

ArtDecade said:


> I really wish Zelensky could roll this asshat into traffic and leave him there. And by traffic, I mean tanks. These Trumpublicans are such morons.
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/10/cawthorn-zelensky-thug/


Well, this is a new level of stupid even among the GOP. It's amazing to me how much bile some folks can spew while claiming everyone else is spreading misinformation.


----------



## AMOS

Cyanide_Anima said:


> It's more likely that the Kremlin understood that trump is small man and playing to his enormous and fragile ego would gain them some advantage. Also the funding from Russia. He's just a useful idiot to Putin. But it does make him appear like a Russian asset, especially when he attempts to strand Ukraine from NATO and the EU just to get some dirt on a political opponent.
> 
> One thing I don't see a lot of talking about is the Chinese money going into the GOP and most importantly of all, directly supporting Trump. New Tang Dynasty (NTD) and their conspiracy rag The Epoch Times have been massive supporters and funders of Trump. They're a racist Chinese apocalyptic cult that essentially wants war between China's CCP and USA to destroy the CCP and install their own nationalistic religion as the force that drives China. The CPAC has been sponsored by NTD for a while now. But that is all for another thread.


The only Russian assets I see are these bumbling boobie's in the White House. I've never seen such weakness in world leaders before. All Harris can do is laugh at everything, I sometimes wonder if she's on shrooms. I'll tell you what though, I served in the military under Reagan, no one since him has displayed any back bone.


----------



## ArtDecade

AMOS said:


> The only Russian assets I see are these bumbling boobie's in the White House. I've never seen such weakness in world leaders before. All Harris can do is laugh at everything, I sometimes wonder if she's on shrooms. I'll tell you what though, I served in the military under Reagan, no one since him has displayed any back bone.



Ok, Boomer.


----------



## devastone

ArtDecade said:


> Ok, Boomer.


Tread lightly here LOL


----------



## narad

LostTheTone said:


> I thought I should make it clear that I WAS NOT defending Trump at all, so that no-one could accuse me of doing so.
> 
> How the fuck can it be that when anyone says something positive about Trump, you scream at them, and when someone makes clear they are NOT saying something positive about Trump you scream at them too?



I'm not harping on you for saying something nice about Trump. But what you're seeing as prescience, I'm just seeing as an unknowingly reasonable policy in retrospect. Which is quite obvious from the content of my recent posts, but if you want to call that a kneejerk screaming fit, go for it dude. A positive post about Trump doesn't get a free pass from any vetting or discussion just because it's a hot take.


----------



## LostTheTone

narad said:


> I'm not harping on you for saying something nice about Trump. But what you're seeing as prescience, I'm just seeing as an unknowingly reasonable policy in retrospect. Which is quite obvious from the content of my recent posts, but if you want to call that a kneejerk screaming fit, go for it dude. A positive post about Trump doesn't get a free pass from any vetting or discussion just because it's a hot take.


Dude, you responded to "Hmm Trumps policy looks pretty sensible from todays POV" with "Oh yeah he's a great guy what the the lies and riots and attacks on democracy ".

That's the shit I'm complaining about.

If you want to say Trumps energy policy was more luck than skill then by all means say that. That could well be true. I still think that bolstering the US economy and energy security is still a good idea even if you don't know that you have to fight Russia, but there is an argument to be had.

But you didn't do that.

You just had to instantly snap back and make damn clear that you really hate everything else that happened in his term too, without even referencing the policy that was relevant.

I notice also that you haven't answered why you think it's ok to murder children, as long as you have the "correct" reason to do so. I presume that's because it's a laughably indefensible position?


----------



## narad

LostTheTone said:


> I notice also that you haven't answered why you think it's ok to murder children, as long as you have the "correct" reason to do so. I presume that's because it's a laughably indefensible position?



Nah, it's because it's a terrible misreading of the point and not something I suspect other readers of this thread are succumbing to. 

It's not ok to murder children, but if we sat here with our current knowledge of history (and barring understanding other potentially worse things that could have come up as a result of changing history), then I'd go out on a limb and say it'd be a good thing for the world if someone had killed Hitler when he was a child. You're saying now, it's a good thing to have pushed for EU to have greater energy independence from its neighbors. We know in retrospect, that either of these may have been good things. You said the why doesn't matter. But we wouldn't call some murderer a good guy if we discovered somehow that their actions accidentally benefitted the world in a huge way, nor would we call a guy a good president in the same way. That's why the "why" matters, and since Trump was cupping Putin's balls throughout his whole term, I find it hard to believe he was taking a power stance on some problems between Russian and the EU he foresaw would occur there in the future. As I said, you're free to believe otherwise. If you could do it quietly it'd be great though.


----------



## Andromalia

DiezelMonster said:


> I watched this today, and I feel this is an interesting take. Nothing surprising of course, at least to me.
> 
> And take it/him with a grain of salt, I understand he is an entertainer but it seems the political world has bitten him a bit more and while I don't always agree with his take I appreciate it.


My overall understanding of things is that it's better to get your information from journalists with a professional history. Usually, people would delegate that task to the press organisms (mainly, newspapers) who build confidence over the years by not botching the job. I'm keeping to that. People needing to post on youtube or twitter aren't necessarily wrong or malicious, but they usually don't have the professional credit needed to take their word for it.


----------



## Adieu

So... SSO's experience now demonstrates that the maximum attention span of even high-IQ, literate and eloquent Homo Sapiens apes is ~2 weeks?


----------



## DrewH

AMOS said:


> The only Russian assets I see are these bumbling boobie's in the White House. I've never seen such weakness in world leaders before. All Harris can do is laugh at everything, I sometimes wonder if she's on shrooms. I'll tell you what though, I served in the military under Reagan, no one since him has displayed any back bone.



I like Reagan, but there is a lot of revisionist history regarding his presidency. He was far from this great man that he's portrayed to be by some people now. Backbone? He only got tough on the USSR in his second term when they started to crumble. Easy to kick someone when they are down on one knee. Reagan did more or less the same thing as we are doing now. Using money as a weapon instead of getting into armed conflict. Nothing wrong with that. But, it makes people hypocrites who laud Reagan but trash Biden for how he is handling the current situation. Heck, people trash Biden for the Afghan withdrawal because a few people got killed. Yet, Reagan gets us into Lebanon and a couple of hundred troops lost in a single suicide bombing? Not to mention the other really sketchy stuff that somehow gets swept under the rug by the Reagan fanbois.


----------



## oversteve

Some more twisted logic here. Russia had another war council and said that Ukraine is breaking international laws allowing international volunteers to fight here and at the same meeting they said that 16k Syrian fighters are ready to deploy in Ukraine 

P.S. Correct me if I'm wrong but as I understand those Syrian "volunteers" under Russia are basically ISIS?


----------



## ArtDecade

Reagan paved the way for Trump. His party line of pro-*WHITE-picket fences* and anti-*welfare queens* set up the middle-class race politics that turned the middle class on itself. And don't forget the utter nonsense of trickle down economics.


----------



## profwoot

Reagan also hit the gas on deregulation, setting us up for our corporate overlord nightmare hellscape future. Because nothing says "backbone" like having corpo glans fused to one's oropharynx.


----------



## bostjan

The WHO is concerned about attacks on Ukrainian research centers causing a spill of harmful pathogens. Meanwhile, Russian authorities are accusing Ukrainian research labs of developing bioweapons for the USA.

Putin gave a speech about how sanctions against Russia will only lead to a stronger Russian economy as the country becomes more self sufficient.

Also, CNN is reporting that the 40-mile Russian convoy disappeared overnight. I don't know what they mean by that, but perhaps that's entirely normal.

Another high ranking officer was killed near Kiev. This guy was not the highest ranking, but was purportedly personally close to Putin.

The situation is still unravelling rapidly. If this war "special military operation" ends up leading the world into the next deadly global pandemic, then I'll be certain that I'll never again see economic prosperity during my life.


----------



## nightflameauto

ArtDecade said:


> Reagan paved the way for Trump. His party line of pro-*WHITE-picket fences* and anti-*welfare queens* set up the middle-class race politics that turned the middle class on itself. And don't forget the utter nonsense of trickle down economics.


Anyone? Anyone?
Voodoo economics.

Reagan set a lot of things in motion that have fucked us. But he also was standing on the shoulders of mental midgets to do it.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> The WHO is concerned about attacks on Ukrainian research centers causing a spill of harmful pathogens. Meanwhile, Russian authorities are accusing Ukrainian research labs of developing bioweapons for the USA.
> 
> Putin gave a speech about how sanctions against Russia will only lead to a stronger Russian economy as the country becomes more self sufficient.
> 
> Also, CNN is reporting that the 40-mile Russian convoy disappeared overnight. I don't know what they mean by that, but perhaps that's entirely normal.
> 
> Another high ranking officer was killed near Kiev. This guy was not the highest ranking, but was purportedly personally close to Putin.
> 
> The situation is still unravelling rapidly. If this war "special military operation" ends up leading the world into the next deadly global pandemic, then I'll be certain that I'll never again see economic prosperity during my life.



Wasn't the accepted thinking that this bioweapons nonsense is just another disorderly, off-tempo attempt at following the knockoff Iraq invasion scenario?

Germ warfare next door by the same assclown whose idea of social distancing is 18-wheeler-length conference tables? That feels out of character

And as to ACTUAL pathogens in Ukrainian facilities, what strain of RT bs have you been smoking?


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Wasn't the accepted thinking that this bioweapons nonsense is just another disorderly, off-tempo attempt at following the knockoff Iraq invasion scenario?
> 
> Germ warfare next door by the same assclown whose idea of social distancing is 18-wheeler-length conference tables? That feels out of character
> 
> And as to ACTUAL pathogens in Ukrainian facilities, what strain of RT bs have you been smoking?



To be fair, the 30ft conference table is an effective form of social distancing 

I think the whole biolabs in Ukraine rumours/lies/whatever is... It's weird and I don't quite know how to pick it apart.

If this was, say, 2004 during the war on terror and someone told me the US was into biological weapon research in Ukraine I would have said "Yeah, that sounds about right". 

I mean, as it turns out the US had black sites in a bunch of Eastern European countries, doing all manner of shady shit. As far as I know they didn't do bioweapon research like that, but that is exactly the kind of shit that they outsourced out of the homeland, put into countries where the government was... So keen to help Uncle Sam that they didn't ask questions.

But there is not a single fucking chance that the US just forgot about their shady biolab. And it's obviously hilariously convenient that such things would pop up now. Literally incredible, as in not credible.

And so obviously incredible that it feels like it's insulting my intelligence. Which makes me feel like its not official Russian disinformation. So where does this come from?


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> And so obviously incredible that it feels like it's insulting my intelligence. Which makes me feel like its not official Russian disinformation. So where does this come from?



Wdym where? It's plagiarized straight from Colin Powell, circa 20 years ago

This whole thing is a botched attempt at a Russian knockoff of the Iraq invasion. Which is pretty odd already considering how sideways THAT went...


----------



## thebeesknees22

ArtDecade said:


> Reagan paved the way for Trump. His party line of pro-*WHITE-picket fences* and anti-*welfare queens* set up the middle-class race politics that turned the middle class on itself. And don't forget the utter nonsense of trickle down economics.


100% ^^

He also started the Christian conservative movement which has in turn pushed the Right into becoming a cult more/less.


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> Wasn't the accepted thinking that this bioweapons nonsense is just another disorderly, off-tempo attempt at following the knockoff Iraq invasion scenario?
> 
> Germ warfare next door by the same assclown whose idea of social distancing is 18-wheeler-length conference tables? That feels out of character
> 
> And as to ACTUAL pathogens in Ukrainian facilities, what strain of RT bs have you been smoking?


It's well known fact that the USSR, mostly under Stalin, had a bioweapons program. They even used a weaponized version of rabbit fever against the Nazis in WW2.

This isn't science fiction. There was already an accidental release that was well documented, in Uzbekistan, when an abandoned soviet-era bioweapons facility leaked weaponized anthrax, and luckily was decontaminated and contained (we think). That same facility had already had a previous uncontained leak that killed a bunch of people in 1971.

Anyway, what are the odds that there are absolutely zero of such facilities in Ukraine?

I could 100% see Putin knowing about some secret bioweapons facility in Ukraine, making up some outlandish bullshit about the US running a bioweapons program there, and then shelling that facility, causing a bunch of leaks, and then suddenly a bunch of refugees are fleeing Ukraine to all neighbouring countries carrying smallpox-andromeda-strain or bubonic-plague-2022 or whatever. Putin would then totally be gloating his "I told you so," and the rest of the world suffers.

Do you think any of this sounds outlandish? Yeah, it sounds outlandish, I agree, but when you put the puzzle pieces together, there's not any one particular part of this scenario that hasn't had an example of something very similar had happened before.


----------



## Adieu

Putin is so far from giving a sh!t about having a veneer of truth that I think he would be genuinely shocked and possibly dismayed if something he said turned out to he real

At this point in time, if Putin opens his mouth, what comes out is certified bullsh!t


----------



## Adieu

Just heard a fresh claim that Russian planes flew through Ukraine and bombed some middle of nowhere village in Belarus... false flag show to get Belarus armor to move on Kyiv?


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> Wdym where? It's plagiarized straight from Colin Powell, circa 20 years ago
> 
> This whole thing is a botched attempt at a Russian knockoff of the Iraq invasion. Which is pretty odd already considering how sideways THAT went...


All that bio-weapon stuff looks more like a pre-text to use some chemical weapons here and then blame it on us having those mystic biolabs going out of control. Basically like they did it with shelling civilians and blaming it on Ukrainian forces.


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> Just heard a fresh claim that Russian planes flew through Ukraine and bombed some middle of nowhere village in Belarus... false flag show to get Belarus armor to move on Kyiv?


There's already some video of it circulating. But belarus ministry of defence said it was a fake so seems like Luka isn't willing to join so far


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> There's already some video of it circulating. But belarus ministry of defence said it was a fake so seems like Luka isn't willing to join so far



Waiiit up.... so it's NOT the cockroach plotting with Putin, this is Putin's own initiative to *nudge* his stubborn sorta-minion into action?

With f*cking bombs????


----------



## profwoot

bostjan said:


> It's well known fact that the USSR, mostly under Stalin, had a bioweapons program. They even used a weaponized version of rabbit fever against the Nazis in WW2.
> 
> This isn't science fiction. There was already an accidental release that was well documented, in Uzbekistan, when an abandoned soviet-era bioweapons facility leaked weaponized anthrax, and luckily was decontaminated and contained (we think). That same facility had already had a previous uncontained leak that killed a bunch of people in 1971.
> 
> Anyway, what are the odds that there are absolutely zero of such facilities in Ukraine?
> 
> I could 100% see Putin knowing about some secret bioweapons facility in Ukraine, making up some outlandish bullshit about the US running a bioweapons program there, and then shelling that facility, causing a bunch of leaks, and then suddenly a bunch of refugees are fleeing Ukraine to all neighbouring countries carrying smallpox-andromeda-strain or bubonic-plague-2022 or whatever. Putin would then totally be gloating his "I told you so," and the rest of the world suffers.
> 
> Do you think any of this sounds outlandish? Yeah, it sounds outlandish, I agree, but when you put the puzzle pieces together, there's not any one particular part of this scenario that hasn't had an example of something very similar had happened before.



Yeah the US has partnered with various former-soviet countries to help them decommission their old biolabs -- not because the US is so altruistic, but because they don't want any pathogens, weaponized or otherwise, finding their way into the world. 

The Russia/Qanon conspiracy bullshit is about how Fauci (and probably Hillary Clinton somehow) is working with a Ukrainian biolab to create a new bioweapon or something.


----------



## bostjan

profwoot said:


> Yeah the US has partnered with various former-soviet countries to help them decommission their old biolabs -- not because the US is so altruistic, but because they don't want any pathogens, weaponized or otherwise, finding their way into the world.
> 
> The Russia/Qanon conspiracy bullshit is about how Fauci (and probably Hillary Clinton somehow) is working with a Ukrainian biolab to create a new bioweapon or something.


QAnon: "What are the odds that Fauci (a world renowned immunologist) would be connected to research done in other countries on deadly diseases?! Also, you know where Fauci's grandparents were from? Naples. You know what else comes from Naples? Pizza. Connect the dots - Bioweapons - Labs - Fauci - Naples - Pizza - Pizzagate! Also, you know what kind of dog the Clintons had in the White House?! That's right, a chocolate *lab*! ClinTon piZzaGaTe biOweApoN cOnfiRmEd!!!"


----------



## bostjan

A third Russian general is reported to have been killed today.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> A third Russian general is reported to have been killed today.



Yay!

...otoh, Russia prolly has more generals than China has lieutenant colonels. Rank inflation there got real ridiculous a long long time ago. It's nowhere near some rational pattern like ~10x fewer officers of each more senior rank going up the ladder.

20 years ago, the number was estimated to be *3,000 (thousand!) Generals*. Doubt it got better since. Can't find any more recent numbers, but that makes the lower-end Russian "general", what, roughly equivalent to a Major anywhere else??? Maybe a Lt. Col, but hardly higher in real position in the command structure.


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> Waiiit up.... so it's NOT the cockroach plotting with Putin, this is Putin's own initiative to *nudge* his stubborn sorta-minion into action?
> 
> With f*cking bombs????


idk what he thinks, Luka is a cunning bastard and looking at the mess happening here and Russia under sanctions he's probably not very fond of it. It might be that he says one thing to please Putin and then does the opposite in order to not get involved more. But it's just an assumption, he already told he won't get involved in any way and here we have Russia firing missiles at us from Belarus territory...


----------



## bostjan

Each of the three that made world news were in charge of a brigade. I don't know how many brigades there are in the Russian army, but I think probably not much more than a dozen in each Army, with about a dozen armies per district and four districts, so maybe 500 people with that rank, maximum? That does sound like a lot, but each time one gets taken out, it means that an entire brigade gets a less experienced leader. Anyway, at this rate it is an effective brain drain that will have to have some consequences for the invaders special military operators.

But probably in the mean time, yes, every time a general gets blasted, I'm sure there's another officer who picks up the star and staples it onto his (or her) uniform and then the Russian government reassures themselves that there is no problem.


----------



## DiezelMonster

Andromalia said:


> My overall understanding of things is that it's better to get your information from journalists with a professional history. Usually, people would delegate that task to the press organisms (mainly, newspapers) who build confidence over the years by not botching the job. I'm keeping to that. People needing to post on youtube or twitter aren't necessarily wrong or malicious, but they usually don't have the professional credit needed to take their word for it.


and that's why I said this

"And take it/him with a grain of salt, I understand he is an entertainer but it seems the political world has bitten him a bit more and while I don't always agree with his take I appreciate it."

Perhaps I should have been a bit more explicit in what I meant. Anyhow, most major sources of news and news casters seem to show their bias more these days than in the past, I still watch them too but they are no Walter Cronkite


----------



## Drew

thebeesknees22 said:


> 100% ^^
> 
> He also started the Christian conservative movement which has in turn pushed the Right into becoming a cult more/less.


Eh, the "Silent Majority" and the culture wars really date back to Nixon, not Reagan. He absolutely gave the culture wars a giant smiley face PR image though.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Wdym where? It's plagiarized straight from Colin Powell, circa 20 years ago
> 
> This whole thing is a botched attempt at a Russian knockoff of the Iraq invasion. Which is pretty odd already considering how sideways THAT went...



That's what I mean though.

Either it has to be some weird backward subtle stuff from the CIA, or it has to be something weirdly sideways and not from the principle players in this conflict. Either of which is super fucking weird. The US warhawks aren't exactly keen on deploying US troops into Ukraine. But who the hell else wants to try and make that happen?


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> That's what I mean though.
> 
> Either it has to be some weird backward subtle stuff from the CIA, or it has to be something weirdly sideways and not from the principle players in this conflict. Either of which is super fucking weird. The US warhawks aren't exactly keen on deploying US troops into Ukraine. But who the hell else wants to try and make that happen?



No, dude

Colin Powell LIED twenty years ago. And Putin's moron crew sat and took notes.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> No, dude
> 
> Colin Powell LIED twenty years ago. And Putin's moron crew sat and took notes.



...Why does Russia need to lie anymore? They already invaded. And a lie that is so patently false, and also so poorly timed? What do they gain from that?

Edit -

To my mind this lie seems to be an attempt to pull the US in directly to Ukraine. I don't think anyone wants that, least of all the US and Russia. So that just makes it more insane.


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> ...Why does Russia need to lie anymore? They already invaded. And a lie that is so patently false, and also so poorly timed? What do they gain from that?
> 
> Edit -
> 
> To my mind this lie seems to be an attempt to pull the US in directly to Ukraine. I don't think anyone wants that, least of all the US and Russia. So that just makes it more insane.



For internal consumption, perhaps?

They REALLY screwed the pooch on their half-assed attempt at a media blackout. Zelensky's team and a whole bunch of independent patriots, friends, and sympathizers UTTERLY blitzed the Putinists in international mass and social media.

They had planned on an intimidation-based near-bloodless win. At gunpoint, but "politely". They didn't need MUCH of an excuse for a "clean" win.

Now... now their economy is in tatters, families are getting death notifications, and people are viewing videos of burned-out Russian convoys and sad f*ckin POWs who look like bums, and internal repression is turned up to 11 trying to will reality out of existence.


This mess... DOES require a boatload of excuses.


----------



## AMOS

ArtDecade said:


> Ok, Boomer.


You refuse to admit that Biden is an incompetent old fool that's in over his head, he's scared of Putin, and Kamala Harris is even more clueless than he is. You lefties are clueless about all aspects of foreign policy yet spout off like you have all the answers. Leave fucking Trump out of it for once and focus on the facts. You don't know how, you're a collective of Parrots that blame Trump for everything, I don't like him either but this is all Biden.


----------



## Adieu

Here's a thought: I'm glad we don't have Trump.... but I'd much much rather have had Romney instead of Biden right now.


----------



## AMOS

ArtDecade said:


> Reagan paved the way for Trump. His party line of pro-*WHITE-picket fences* and anti-*welfare queens* set up the middle-class race politics that turned the middle class on itself. And don't forget the utter nonsense of trickle down economics.


Biden is paving the way to make us the largest welfare state in the world, no need to work, we'll keep giving you money creating unprecedented inflation. You're seeing it already, unless you're too busy worshiping at the feet of the almighty leftist Messiah to be able to smell the coffee. This shit show you're seeing now is because of Biden, not Putin, and certainly not Trump. The Parrot Collective in here likes to blame Trump because they don't want to admit that they voted in this shit show.


----------



## AMOS

Adieu said:


> Here's a thought: I'm glad we don't have Trump.... but I'd much much rather have had Romney instead of Biden right now.


I actually agree with you, Romney is a progressive Republican but he has a pair.


----------



## bostjan

Damn, this thread about Ukraine and Russia has been, what, 60% US politics? Way to go fighting the stereotype that we have to make everything about us!


----------



## StevenC

AMOS said:


> Biden [...] leftist Messiah


----------



## Randy

I'm a "leftist" and I can say with every fiber of my existence that I hate Joe Biden more than anybody on this website or the entire internet. He is the yin to my yang.


----------



## Adieu

AMOS said:


> Biden is paving the way to make us the largest welfare state in the world, no need to work, we'll keep giving you money creating unprecedented inflation. You're seeing it already, unless you're too busy worshiping at the feet of the almighty leftist Messiah to be able to smell the coffee. This shit show you're seeing now is because of Biden, not Putin, and certainly not Trump. The Parrot Collective in here likes to blame Trump because they don't want to admit that they voted in this shit show.



Seriously?

Where do I apply? I'm sick and tired of working for a living

....however, this is the UKRAINE (and maybe possibly WW3) topic. Americans' welfare or lack thereof doesn't matter here.

Quit derailing. We can only moan about Biden's lack of foreign policy balls here.


----------



## CovertSovietBear

AMOS said:


> Biden is paving the way to make us the largest welfare state in the world, no need to work, we'll keep giving you money creating unprecedented inflation. You're seeing it already, unless you're too busy worshiping at the feet of the almighty leftist Messiah to be able to smell the coffee. This shit show you're seeing now is because of Biden, not Putin, and certainly not Trump. The Parrot Collective in here likes to blame Trump because they don't want to admit that they voted in this shit show.


----------



## Xaios

Adieu said:


> Where do I apply? I'm sick and tired of working for a living


No kidding. Bring on that Star Trek-style post-scarcity society where we can have all our needs met without working and don't have to pretend to enjoy being wage slaves or that there's some silly nobility to working yourself to the bone for our corporate overlords, all in the vain hope of having enough built up over a lifetime of toil so that we can retire long after we're too old to fully enjoy it.


----------



## ArtDecade

AMOS said:


> Biden is paving the way to make us the largest welfare state in the world, no need to work, we'll keep giving you money creating unprecedented inflation. You're seeing it already, unless you're too busy worshiping at the feet of the almighty leftist Messiah to be able to smell the coffee. This shit show you're seeing now is because of Biden, not Putin, and certainly not Trump. The Parrot Collective in here likes to blame Trump because they don't want to admit that they voted in this shit show.



How does Trump taste? Are your lips orange afterward?


----------



## Randy




----------



## wheresthefbomb

If we can print fake money to build F-35s and predator drones we can print fake money to pay my fucking rent.


----------



## fantom

LostTheTone said:


> With any historical figure, it is important to separate out their different strands and assess them seperately.
> 
> For example, JFK is generally accepted to have been a good president on foreign relations, but he was also a drug addicted manwhore. Both of these are true at the same time.
> 
> Just because you like (for example) Obama's policy on healthcare doesn't mean you have to like his policy on Libya. You can like him, even lionise him, while still acknowledging that he made missteps and mistakes.
> 
> While Trump was of course a Russia agent in hoc to Putin, looking back from 2022 his policy to be energy independent seems pretty smart. That doesn't impact whatever else you might think about literally anything else he did. But if we knew then what we know now, there is no question that the US (whoever might be president) would have kept on with that policy.
> 
> As we all know, Trump is a literal traitor that deserves nothing but scorn. As we all know, impeachment was too good for him, and the man should have been hung, drawn and quartered.
> 
> But energy independence is still a good idea nevertheless, and no amount of riots will change that.


I don't understand this preaching about Trump wanting to be energy independent. Democrats have been preaching for investing into clean energy for decades and Trump and McConnell undermined that. Wouldn't that look pretty smart right now if they didn't have big oil up their asses? I think hindsight for the last 30 years at least shows that relying on oil and pushing policies that depend on oil is economically, politically, and environmentally bad for everyone. Just because Trump wanted to fix a problem you think needed to be solved doesn't mean he wasn't also actively destroying any long-term solutions to that problem that would have ended up better today and tomorrow.


----------



## fantom

AMOS said:


> Biden is paving the way to make us the largest welfare state in the world, no need to work, we'll keep giving you money creating unprecedented inflation. You're seeing it already, unless you're too busy worshiping at the feet of the almighty leftist Messiah to be able to smell the coffee. This shit show you're seeing now is because of Biden, not Putin, and certainly not Trump. The Parrot Collective in here likes to blame Trump because they don't want to admit that they voted in this shit show.


I thought it was common knowledge that wealth inequality in America is correlated to the Reagen administration and subsequent policies to deregulate private companies and funnel money to them instead of taxes. I'm not sure anyone can blame Trump or Putin, but we definitely can't blame Biden for inheriting a economic mess.


----------



## Randy

fantom said:


> I thought it was common knowledge that wealth inequality in America is correlated to the Reagen administration and subsequent policies to deregulate private companies and funnel money to them instead of taxes. I'm not sure anyone can blame Trump or Putin, but we definitely can't blame Biden for inheriting a economic mess.


Underappreciated point. Pricing for goods/services no longer tethered to cost and profit margin, now entirely dependent on figuring out how much money the average person has left at the end of the week and pricing as high as you can until people would rather go without. 

If all taxes went away overnight, your utility bill, cellphone bill, Netflix bill, Prime bill would just bloat enough to fill in that new gap. Blaming taxes or the government for the lack of economic freedom (beyond their refusing to clip the wings of predatory corporations) is entirely out of step with reality.


----------



## BMFan30

Flappydoodle said:


> So out of 6 reactors, only 1 was actually active. And this type of reactor literally cannot go up in a Chernobyl style boom. Chernobyl had a meltdown and then burned with a graphite fire for several days.


The site they were firing at literally had 6 reactors. Of course they are guarded/armored but not enough to withstand constant firing from tanks.



Flappydoodle said:


> This reactor in Ukraine has no graphite and cannot melt down by design. Even if Russia hit the roof of the actual reactor with a bunker-busting bomb, you would have a radiation leak, not a meltdown. Obviously still extremely bad and we want to avoid it, but it not be anywhere near the scale or severity of Chernobyl.





Flappydoodle said:


> My point is, there is a LOT of "fake news" out there. You've got one side claiming a special military operation and no targeting of civilians and you've got the other basically calling for WW3 (no fly zone) and promoting "six Chernobyls". The six Chernobyls thing is far away enough from truth that I am comfortable calling it fear-mongering bullshit. Problem is, it's very harmful. That kind of exaggeration scares the shit out of people, and also manipulates them into making uninformed decisions which are not based on facts. And as I mentioned earlier, "boy who cried wolf" syndrome if you do it too often.


There would be entire regions in Ukraine and other parts of Europe without power and hospitals where people are on life support would die.

It's not a calling for WW3 by Ukraine, Putin has already done that by starting a war with Ukraine then threatening the west with Nuclear weapons. Putin wants to capture Ukraine then the neighboring European countries, what makes you think he won't start a war with the west after that? 

Looks like WW3 will happen either way, but there's a chance to stop more Ukrainian bloodshed and push back now rather than wait until he hits Poland, Moldova then all their neighbors next.

At least Africa has replaced 4 military attack helicopters which Ukraine lost recently. While Biden is looking a lot like Trump as time passes. I think the western leaders are looking to be more complicit with Agenda 21 and the decrease of the population as the Georgie guidestones mention as Putin is doing than they are on the side of Ukraine.

If NATO closed the sky since it's near impossible for them to do on their own since their already weak airbases have been bombed early on by Russians, then Ukraine stands a dominant chance on the ground as they have shown already.

Another thing is Ukraine has is a biolab like Wuhan in China (where Covid came from) which holds all sorts of viruses and pathogens. In of itself it's not a weapon but if the dumbass Russian soldiers are somehow able to bring those substances and studies back to Russia then Russia can weaponize the lab and use it against the entire world as Wuhan has already.

What the west is failing to see is there is no negotiation or reasoning with Putin, he will come against the west either way because he has already stated that even sanctions against him by the west is a declaration of war on top of his nuclear threats. I don't understand how Americans want to live in a world afraid of Putin and his diva-like status acting out on how he feels that particular morning.

Take it as fearmongering or however you want but it's not going to end well for anybody because Putin doesn't announce a war and he hits people as they sleep. So he can wake up tomorrow and miss Coca-Cola then Americans will have entire cities oblinerated. The man has lost his mind. The only way to reason with his is to push back on him and his bluffs and show him nobody is afraid of his pussy.


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> Why so aggravated? I'm not the one lying to you. Not sure to which extent you have to cope to think they would go through the effort of creating a humanitarian corridor only to start shelling it while their Battalion is leading the operation in the midst of it. Not to mention "an unknown entity" opened fire and shot the Battalion leader to death, but these were probably also some Russian saboteur insurgents creating a false flag, or maybe Russia now shells Kalashnikovs which open fire on impact because their supply lines are so sad and economy so poor that they ran out of mortars.
> 
> Let me whisper you a little secret, the reason why the humanitarian corridors are being jeopardised, is because cities like Mariupol are completely surrounded and there is absolutely no way out for combatants. And considering the fascist militants stationed there would never surrender, they are using the innocent civilians as a shield. Russia has nothing to gain from starting a siege there as it controls the neighbouring areas anyway. The only one who has something to gain from the city & civilians remaining locked down are the militants remaining there.


Keep watching Russian sponsored news.


----------



## BMFan30

oversteve said:


> They shelled green corridors in Chechnya, they did the same here in Ukraine in 2014, and they are doing it now again.
> 
> Of course you'll find that it's some Ukrainian "nazis" wrongdoings if you continue to eat sh*t from sources directly affected by Russian propaganda. But it seems like you are doing it deliberately


@ItWillDo has just become a broken record and it's hard to respond to him without rearranging your words like a crossword puzzle by replying the same way everyone already has to the same exactly points he keeps making about Azov Battalion and "special military operations"

I'm just going to let him cum all over himself when he logs onto Russian websites to get his propaganda. A troll will be a troll. There's no point in trying to talk sense into someone that has none, just like there is no point in trying to negotiate with a liar like Putin.


----------



## fantom

BMFan30 said:


> Another thing is Ukraine has is a biolab like Wuhan in China (where Covid came from) which holds all sorts of viruses and pathogens.


I am on your side regarding this mess and have no way to comprehend your situation. I just want to point out that peer-reviewed scientific publications at this point strongly suggest that COVID did not come from a biolab.


----------



## BMFan30

fantom said:


> I am on your side regarding this mess and have no way to comprehend your situation. I just want to point out that peer-reviewed scientific publications at this point strongly suggest that COVID did not come from a biolab.


A link to the Biolab in Ukraine:


Well covid like any other virus, disease or sickness didn't come from nothing. Honestly, it's irrelevant at this point if Covid came from a lab or not although I think it came from Wuhan regadless. Personally I think Covid isn't as big a deal if I know so many people personally that had it from ages 30-56 and they all got every it like any other flu lasting 3 days to 1 week by natural immunity. 

Also we have had so many protests all over the world and so many people in one spot and nobody is dying from that. On the flipside people who have taken the vaccine have died or have had limbs amputated like a black Chicago woman who had both arms and legs amputated after the vaccine.

Like this woman: https://www.ibtimes.sg/who-jummai-n...fter-contracting-covid-19-despite-fully-59137


----------



## spudmunkey

Like any drug, shitty things can happen. Kids die from non-overdose reactions to Dimetapp.

And the US also had 400,000 excess deaths in 2020 from...nothing, I guess, before the vaccines, and even with unparalleled global restriction measures.. The flu normally kills 30-70k-ish in the US, with everything wide-open.


----------



## Adieu

BMFan30 said:


> A link to the Biolab in Ukraine:
> 
> 
> Well covid like any other virus, disease or sickness didn't come from nothing. Honestly, it's irrelevant at this point if Covid came from a lab or not although I think it came from Wuhan regadless. Personally I think Covid isn't as big a deal if I know so many people personally that had it from ages 30-56 and they all got every it like any other flu lasting 3 days to 1 week by natural immunity.
> 
> Also we have had so many protests all over the world and so many people in one spot and nobody is dying from that. On the flipside people who have taken the vaccine have died or have had limbs amputated like a black Chicago woman who had both arms and legs amputated after the vaccine.
> 
> Like this woman: https://www.ibtimes.sg/who-jummai-n...fter-contracting-covid-19-despite-fully-59137




Look, there's lots of stuff in Ukraine, both current and old Soviet-era

Among those, there are most certainly active MEDICAL research facilities and civilian nuclear energy sites.

This propaganda bullshit ain't about them. They're about an alleged comic book villain plot to exterminate Putin's serfs and oligarchs. That is totally NOT a thing. Even if they find some formerly nefarious old rotted-out Soviet black site and Solovyov and Zakharova start screaming haha I told you so... still NOT a thing.

It's just Colin Powell's old dog ate my homework excuse.


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> Look, there's lots of stuff in Ukraine, both current and old Soviet-era
> 
> Among those, there are most certainly active MEDICAL research facilities and civilian nuclear energy sites.
> 
> This propaganda bullshit ain't about them. They're about an alleged comic book villain plot to exterminate Putin's serfs and oligarchs. That is totally NOT a thing. Even if they find some formerly nefarious old rotted-out Soviet black site and Solovyov and Zakharova start screaming haha I told you so... still NOT a thing.
> 
> It's just Colin Powell's old dog ate my homework excuse.


I know, I never said it was good or bad that Ukraine has a biolab research facility. Just that they have one is all. I'm not sure who Colin Powell is so idk how I should follow you halway into your comment, please explain in simpler terms.


----------



## BMFan30

LostTheTone said:


> I can certainly see why Zelensky would be annoyed, but I'm sure he knows that it was always a pretty big ask that had little chance of happening.
> 
> Aside from anything else, a No Fly wouldn't actually help him that much. I understand that he wants basically anyone to join in the war properly, and holy shit I do too, but he needs an army not less Russian jets.


Actually it would help Ukraine a lot since the sky is the only place they are weak. On the ground Ukrainians are elite compared to Russians. So that's the difference between saving Ukrainian civilians or quite possibly losing the entire country to Russian bastards.

Russians are coward snot babies compared to armed Ukrainian civilians and army on the ground.


----------



## Adieu

BMFan30 said:


> I know, I never said it was good or bad that Ukraine has a biolab research facility. Just that they have one is all. I'm not sure who Colin Powell is so idk how I should follow you halway into your comment, please explain in simpler terms.



Medical and Clinical Research and Testing.

Stop using enemy talking points.

"Biolab research" = somewhere you send 007 James Bond to neutralize for world peace

Not where they check whether granny is responding to the new meds, whether said meds are up to spec, and does her grandkid have a GI disease from not washing his hands before he eats.

PS Colin Powell = American bigwig, very light brown guy with glasses who shook some kinda test tube or something at the world and said Iraq NEEDED to be invaded because bioweapons (which was a lie)


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> Medical and Clinical Research and Testing.
> 
> Stop using enemy talking points.
> 
> "Biolab research" = somewhere you send 007 James Bond to neutralize for world peace
> 
> Not where they check whether granny is responding to the new meds, whether said meds are up to spec, and does her grandkid have a GI disease from not washing his hands before he eats.


I'm not a scientist so I just have no other terms to call it honestly.


----------



## BMFan30

MaxOfMetal said:


> I mean, we're just two weeks into this invasion and the Russian economy is crumbling, soon it won't be worthwhile for these companies to do any business there. I feel as long as there's public pressure they'll continue to wind down their Russian operations.




Most Russians seem to not give much of a shit yet but pages back I said they wouldn't although some have already changed their opinion based on the video. Give them 2 more weeks and the same vid will have a followup with more joining the side of truth.


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> Trust me, voluntarily emasculated western males supporting Ukraine would be a smash-hit on RT or other Russian state TV
> 
> These are the people who want to "save" Ukraine from western zoophiliacs who bang turtles in brothel zoos in Denmark (...this was a thing that a Russian MP actually said on TV, not sure if it was about Ukraine or NATO, but western values = NATO = turtle rapists = coming to Ukraine totally *IS* a thing for Russian propaganda).


If emasculated American males started banging snapping turtles then it would have no point because they have already snapped off their own end on their own terms already. It would just be a turtle eating a pussy at that point.


----------



## BMFan30

LostTheTone said:


> As we all know, Trump is a literal traitor that deserves nothing but scorn. As we all know, impeachment was too good for him, and the man should have been hung, drawn and quartered.
> 
> But energy independence is still a good idea nevertheless, and no amount of riots will change that.


At this point I honestly don't think that Trump or Biden will be re-elected again.


----------



## LostTheTone

BMFan30 said:


> It's not a calling for WW3 by Ukraine, Putin has already done that by starting a war with Ukraine then threatening the west with Nuclear weapons. Putin wants to capture Ukraine then the neighboring European countries, what makes you think he won't start a war with the west after that?
> 
> Looks like WW3 will happen either way, but there's a chance to stop more Ukrainian bloodshed and push back now rather than wait until he hits Poland, Moldova then all their neighbors next.



Ukraine is not WW3 - That's kinda the point. It's a proxy conflict, which the NATO countries are a party to but which they are not fighting in. It is reverse Vietnam, or third Afghanistan (two Anglo afghan wars, then Russian invasion, IIRC). 

The war in Vietnam was really horrendous, especially for the North. China supported and supplied the NVA but they didn't send troops, because the US would have gotten really nuclear about that sort of thing. Everyone knew that the US was supplying to Mujahadeen in Afghanistan; it was a bit implausible that Señor bin Laden had his own Stinger missile factory hidden away in Helmund.

I really, really wish that the West was stepping in to Ukraine to end that war today. But that has to be an escalation, and proper full global conflict as soon as the boots hit the ground. That conflict is not what is happening atm.

NATO forces are forward deployed into Poland, Romania and the Baltics. There is no way for Russia to attack those countries without instantly engaging American and British forces. 

If NATO cross into Ukraine, then it's seriously on. If Russia crosses out of Ukraine, it is seriously on. And I don't think either side wants to provoke that. In a very real sense, the "red lines" are the same as they ever have been. And it fucking sucks that Ukraine is on the outside of that, but they were still on the outside before this war all the same.

Russia has always been good at brinksmanship. I still don't understand at all why invading Ukraine is worth the effort itself. And as a trigger to try and do some economic bullshit... Well, Russia is going to hurt a lot more than everyone else. The fact that the Russian people probably aren't going to start a revolution is basically irrelevant. 

The borders of the West are the borders of NATO. In the 20th century, the US didn't even step in to defend Israel, even though they are very very close allies. The only country that we did intervene to defend was Saudi Arabia, and there's no way we would do that again today. 

We should have stood up for Ukraine. But at this point its a pretty fucking prosaic move to "end the killing" when Ukraine is already rubble and it would start a much much bigger war too.


----------



## LostTheTone

BMFan30 said:


> At this point I honestly don't think that Trump or Biden will be re-elected again.



Agreed.

So I for one would like to congratulate President DeSantis on his landslide win against Kamala Harris, the least popular woman in American politics.


----------



## BMFan30

LostTheTone said:


> Ukraine is not WW3 - That's kinda the point


You're right it's not, but I'm talking in the terms of the future and if Russia somehow defeats Ukraine and moves to other countries then Ukraine would have been the flint that ignited the flames that became WW3 since it would force NATO to interfere later rather than now. 

Not that Ukraine VS Russia IS WW3 in of itself, to clear up any confusion.



LostTheTone said:


> NATO forces are forward deployed into Poland, Romania and the Baltics. There is no way for Russia to attack those countries without instantly engaging American and British forces.


That's exactly what I mean, if Ukraine falls then those are the neighboring countries that are next. The only difference is: how many Ukrainians have to die. I do understand the risk of WW3 while I also understand that Putin is a liar that's greedy and senseless so he will end up starting a world war regardless of what we say.



LostTheTone said:


> Russia has always been good at brinksmanship.


Yes they are. Great at blurring the lines between a bluff, a lie and senseless brutality in the middle of the night. None of which belongs in a domestic dispute in my opinion, but here we are two weeks later...



LostTheTone said:


> The fact that the Russian people probably aren't going to start a revolution is basically irrelevant.


They already started their own backwards revolution into the Soviet Union again. I just don't see how some Russians have nostalgia over standing in an endless line for milk and butter only to run out of it when it's their turn, rendering their wait in vain. 

Yet they all are quick to forget that part... But they will be forced to remember again like a dog that forgot their shit tastes like shit so they do it again.



LostTheTone said:


> The borders of the West are the borders of NATO. In the 20th century, the US didn't even step in to defend Israel, even though they are very very close allies. The only country that we did intervene to defend was Saudi Arabia, and there's no way we would do that again today.


I'm unaware of what happened in Saudi Arabia. Fill me in.

Maybe if NATO did interfere then it would have helped those other countries faster. NATO and US military are elite and everybody knows that. Compare a US tank next to a Russian one. The Russian tank looks like a kitten next to an overfed Tiger from the US that hasn't. Same deal with their infantry.



LostTheTone said:


> We should have stood up for Ukraine. But at this point its a pretty fucking prosaic move to "end the killing" when Ukraine is already rubble and it would start a much much bigger war too.


The UK is standing for them and they are way smaller than America. I'm super grateful for the Brits willingly going there to help.

Only some of the borders of Ukraine are in rubble but there is still so much left to save in the center at this point while only having to rebuild the edges if NATO were to interfere. 

Imagine what a great alliance it would be for fearless Ukrainians to join with American and British soldiers against another future threat like Putin when Ukraine has done more than prove itself to be strength itself already. I just don't even think anyone would try anything funny knowing so many great countries have joined NATO and EU. It might just mean peace for everyone for many years to come.


----------



## BMFan30

nightflameauto said:


> The fact that people have managed to turn this thread into another defense of Trump's constant inept bumbling, even when he did something that could be seen in a positive light is just mind-numbingly tiresome.
> 
> And I'm of the opinion that anybody claiming at this point that Trump was an "agent" of Putin's has to be as fully stupid as Trump himself. Nobody would hire that man on as an agent. He's too unpredictable to be relied on to do anything other than spasm his way back and forth on whatever issue happened to bounce through his twitter feed that day. He made a lot of public comments that made it seem like he admired Putin, but that's probably just because Putin epitomizes the attitude of "fuck you, I do what I want," which is all Trump has ever wanted.


That or Putin just has footage of Trump fucking a kid, since he's on Epstein's Lolita Express flight log. Trump seems to like his own daughter Ivanka a whole lot in all the wrong ways it seems.


----------



## LostTheTone

BMFan30 said:


> You're right it's not, but I'm talking in the terms of the future and if Russia somehow defeats Ukraine and moves to other countries then Ukraine would have been the flint that ignited the flames that became WW3 since it would force NATO to interfere later rather than now.
> 
> Not that Ukraine VS Russia IS WW3 in of itself, to clear up any confusion.



Future historians might well consider that the Ukrainian invasion was the first move towards the third world war... But part of the problem today is that this conflict is self-contained and doesn't have to expand.

And students of the first world war are alarmed to recall that the great war began when a great power decided to defend a small nation against another great power.




BMFan30 said:


> The UK is standing for them and they are way smaller than America. I'm super grateful for the Brits willingly going there to help.
> 
> Only some of the borders of Ukraine are in rubble but there is still so much left to save in the center at this point while only having to rebuild the edges if NATO were to interfere.
> 
> Imagine what a great alliance it would be for fearless Ukrainians to join with American and British soldiers against another future threat like Putin when Ukraine has done more than prove itself to be strength itself already. I just don't even think anyone would try anything funny knowing so many great countries have joined NATO and EU. It might just mean peace for everyone for many years to come.



Definitely agree that the UK has been stepping up - I'm unexpectedly supportive of our government for the first time in forever. And the US definitely should be matching or exceeding what we've been doing.

I also agree that Ukraine should join NATO (assuming they want in), and should have done before all this. If NATO had real balls they would have said "Yup, this is a NATO member, whatchagunnado Ivan?".

The problem is really that we should have done this before the war, and changing horses in mid race is just about impossible.


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> Ukraine is not WW3 - That's kinda the point. It's a proxy conflict, which the NATO countries are a party to but which they are not fighting in. It is reverse Vietnam, or third Afghanistan (two Anglo afghan wars, then Russian invasion, IIRC).
> 
> The war in Vietnam was really horrendous, especially for the North. China supported and supplied the NVA but they didn't send troops, because the US would have gotten really nuclear about that sort of thing. Everyone knew that the US was supplying to Mujahadeen in Afghanistan; it was a bit implausible that Señor bin Laden had his own Stinger missile factory hidden away in Helmund.
> 
> I really, really wish that the West was stepping in to Ukraine to end that war today. But that has to be an escalation, and proper full global conflict as soon as the boots hit the ground. That conflict is not what is happening atm.
> 
> NATO forces are forward deployed into Poland, Romania and the Baltics. There is no way for Russia to attack those countries without instantly engaging American and British forces.
> 
> If NATO cross into Ukraine, then it's seriously on. If Russia crosses out of Ukraine, it is seriously on. And I don't think either side wants to provoke that. In a very real sense, the "red lines" are the same as they ever have been. And it fucking sucks that Ukraine is on the outside of that, but they were still on the outside before this war all the same.
> 
> Russia has always been good at brinksmanship. I still don't understand at all why invading Ukraine is worth the effort itself. And as a trigger to try and do some economic bullshit... Well, Russia is going to hurt a lot more than everyone else. The fact that the Russian people probably aren't going to start a revolution is basically irrelevant.
> 
> The borders of the West are the borders of NATO. In the 20th century, the US didn't even step in to defend Israel, even though they are very very close allies. The only country that we did intervene to defend was Saudi Arabia, and there's no way we would do that again today.
> 
> We should have stood up for Ukraine. But at this point its a pretty fucking prosaic move to "end the killing" when Ukraine is already rubble and it would start a much much bigger war too.



Ukraine's NOT rubble.

Huge swathes of Ukraine aren't physically affected by this war at all yet, and just watching in horror like the rest of us.

Even directly affected areas like Kyiv aren't even in full shutdown, much less destroyed. 

About half of my business is translating civilian Ukrainian documents (clinical studies). The client is in Kyiv. After the first shock of the war, which involved trying to clear out backlogs, I've since received correspondence between CROs and regulators IN KYIV, stamped *MARCH 2022*.

Don't write off Ukraine. It's still standing. And will f*cking stand unless hydrogen bombs start flying, in which case... it's WW3 and we ALL screwed.


----------



## Adieu

If the pussies in Washington and Brussels let (or help) Ukraine fall, that will literally be the end of the world as we know it.

NOT if we "provoke" Putler by sending planes, missiles, hit squads, USMC, whatever... but if we convince Zelensky to run/surrender or let him get killed and then write off Ukraine.

It might be delayed weeks or months, but we're all fooked then.

The crazy midget in the Kremlin needs to die fast or the world will burn.

PS and yes, the people of Ukraine can and will fight a bloody insurgency even if abandoned, but the thing is that Putin has crossed lines that can't be uncrossed. He would find other wars to fight if we let him call a "win" in this one. His physical survival depends on NOT letting the effect of a wrecked and hopeless economy sink in, and "the war effort" is the only possible excuse he can run with.

Btw, in retrospect, the sanctions WERE nuclear brinksmanship. Meeting him with NATO armor in the fields of Ukraine would have been far, far less "escalatory".

Now? Now it's very much an us-or-him (or EVERYONE) situation with no possible exits that don't involve his death or capture. And he knows it.


----------



## BMFan30

LostTheTone said:


> I also agree that Ukraine should join NATO (assuming they want in), and should have done before all this. If NATO had real balls they would have said "Yup, this is a NATO member, whatchagunnado Ivan?".




Well, Ukraine recently signed up to be part of EU which is a step in the right direction although I'm in agreement that it's a bit too late as well since there was a whole 8 years to call those shots as well as joining NATO in the same time frame. 

Having said that, no one including Ukraine would have thought that Putin would be so senseless and stupid enough to go through with it 2 weeks ago. Mistakes have been made from both sides. But at least Putin is seeing that Ukraine is not Syria since his plans have been caving left and right. I only just wish his plans would cave from the north in the sky as well.

Ukraine has been through so much that they just stopped shedding tears since they have been through so much hell throughout history already. They are just simple people that want to live their lives and nothing more. I'm Ukrainian so trust me when I tell you we start no shit with anyone first, we just want to be left alone in our peace to live our lives like anyone else. We are merely forced to finish something someone else started because peaceful kindness looks like weakness to someone else. But that's not our fault.

We don't go into someone else's house and demand it's ours while we fuck their wife when we have a home and wife of our own.



LostTheTone said:


> Definitely agree that the UK has been stepping up - I'm unexpectedly supportive of our government for the first time in forever. And the US definitely should be matching or exceeding what we've been doing.


I'm super grateful for it too. I understand that your country has a leader that lies to it's people about mandates while serving tea without masks while infinitely forgetting his hairbrush. 

But your military is might that understands the horrors of war where destruction of civilians, theft and raping of women happen in the middle of everything happening all at once. 

I've always loved the Brits before this for all sorts of reasons but now I hold tons of passion for them too. Before all of this I actually wanted to move to London, now I don't know how long that will take to happen.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Ukraine's NOT rubble.
> 
> Huge swathes of Ukraine aren't physically affected by this war at all yet, and just watching in horror like the rest of us.
> 
> Even directly affected areas like Kyiv aren't even in full shutdown, much less destroyed.
> 
> About half of my business is translating civilian Ukrainian documents (clinical studies). The client is in Kyiv. After the first shock of the war, which involved trying to clear out backlogs, I've since received correspondence between CROs and regulators IN KYIV, stamped *MARCH 2022*.
> 
> Don't write off Ukraine. It's still standing. And will f*cking stand unless hydrogen bombs start flying, in which case... it's WW3 and we ALL screwed.



I'm not writing off Ukraine, I'm saying that Ukraine has already suffered huge damage and lots of casualties. The time to intervene to defend Ukraine was before a million people fled their homes, you feel me? 

We get it, you really fucking love Ukraine. And I'm very much on your side on this, but please stop snapping at me for not supporting Ukraine hard enough.


----------



## BMFan30

LostTheTone said:


> I'm not writing off Ukraine, I'm saying that Ukraine has already suffered huge damage and lots of casualties. The time to intervene to defend Ukraine was before a million people fled their homes, you feel me?
> 
> We get it, you really fucking love Ukraine. And I'm very much on your side on this, but please stop snapping at me for not supporting Ukraine hard enough.




If you can't be arsed to watch the entire vid then just scroll to 3:43 to see approximately the map of how much Russia has invaded then compare that to the land that has not yet to get a broader picture.

He's not snapping at you. He was just simply saying what I said earlier that only some of the borders of Ukraine have been invaded or captured leaving most of the middle and the west of Ukraine still left in good condition and able to be saved.

Only some of the women and kids have been able to leave Ukraine as well as seniors While many have not, including everyone I just not mentioned. There is still hope and hand that's reaching for help there for the meantime.

All the men up to a senior age have been drafted/forced to fight even though many women including city leaders have taken up arms based on a decision they made themselves.


----------



## Adieu

True, a hardass POTUS who would have temporarily deployed a thousand tanks flying the stars and stripes to the Ukraine border back in December WOULD have been preferable and WOULD have avoided all this sh!t

But that moment got missed due to the Merkel and Obama approach of coddling the homicidal gnome.

However, life goes on

PS as to casualties and damage, the baffling part is that this is *still* far less of a beating than Ukraine (or anyone else, except China) took from now-forgotten SARS-COV-2. The global significance of this is about the FUTURE of us all, not some weeping-heart-liberal "those poor children". YES, THOSE POOR CHILDREN, BUT ALSO BECAUSE THIS HAS THE POTENTIAL OF BECOMING 1000X BIGGER WITH 1000X MORE POOR CHILDREN SO, SO EASILY.


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> Medical and Clinical Research and Testing.
> 
> Stop using enemy talking points.
> 
> "Biolab research" = somewhere you send 007 James Bond to neutralize for world peace
> 
> Not where they check whether granny is responding to the new meds, whether said meds are up to spec, and does her grandkid have a GI disease from not washing his hands before he eats.
> 
> PS Colin Powell = American bigwig, very light brown guy with glasses who shook some kinda test tube or something at the world and said Iraq NEEDED to be invaded because bioweapons (which was a lie)
> 
> View attachment 104502


Oh I wasn't saying that Ukraine has Bioweapons, I was just saying they have a facility that studies viruses like Doctors do. I wasn't saying anything about them using it against people. 

I said that if Russia gets a hold of their research they will, in the same way that someone that doesn't know how to use a scalpel can hijack medical research and learn how to gut people while keeping them alive for the torment.


----------



## Adieu

Also... if the enduring message of this is "if you don't have nukes, you stand alone", then this still heralds the eventual end of the world even if it somehow magically defuses overnight for now.


----------



## Adieu

BMFan30 said:


> Oh I wasn't saying that Ukraine has Bioweapons, I was just saying they have a facility that studies viruses like Doctors do. I wasn't saying anything about them using it against people.
> 
> I said that if Russia gets a hold of their research they will, in the same way that someone that doesn't know how to use a scalpel can hijack medical research and learn how to gut people while keeping them alive for the torment.



Nah

The Ukrainian medical industry doesn't have any wondrous tech that Russia didn't have access to already.


----------



## BMFan30

Adieu said:


> Nah
> 
> The Ukrainian medical industry doesn't have any wondrous tech that Russia didn't have access to already.


I was just going off the vids I saw days earlier, I don't pretend to actually know anything about labs and everything they do in there.


----------



## BMFan30

Saw this vid on a Ukrainians source but I don't remember where I saw it because I'm watching a lot of Ukrainian videos so I had to pull this link through search it by hand.

It shows an elderly Ukrainian couple kick 4 Russian soldiers right off their property with no fucks given even though they fired warning shots then got their ass handed back to them in a bread basket without any fear to give.

They were told to go back to their own Russian turf.


----------



## LostTheTone

BMFan30 said:


> He's not snapping at you. He was just simply saying what I said earlier that only some of the borders of Ukraine have been invaded or captured leaving most of the middle and the west of Ukraine still left in good condition and able to be saved.



He has accused me a bunch of times of not being positive enough about Ukraine. Like five or six times through this thread, where I said something offhand to the effect of "Ukraine is in a tough spot".

I know Ukraine is not literally a wasteland. Of course I know that, that's why I strongly support efforts to make it not become a wasteland. But it is fair to say that Ukraine has suffered heavily from this invasion.


----------



## ItWillDo

BMFan30 said:


> @ItWillDo has just become a broken record and it's hard to respond to him without rearranging your words like a crossword puzzle by replying the same way everyone already has to the same exactly points he keeps making about Azov Battalion and "special military operations"
> 
> I'm just going to let him cum all over himself when he logs onto Russian websites to get his propaganda. A troll will be a troll. There's no point in trying to talk sense into someone that has none, just like there is no point in trying to negotiate with a liar like Putin.


Not even reading, I only keep coming back here for you baby! 

Last time I checked, scale is still tipping in Russia's favor, enjoy your cope.


----------



## 4Eyes

ItWillDo said:


> Last time I checked, scale is still tipping in Russia's favor, enjoy your cope.


It must have been like 50 years ago or your scale is broken.


----------



## narad

ItWillDo said:


> Not even reading,



It shows.


----------



## Adieu

That's what happens when all the literate ones desert


----------



## DrewH

Adieu said:


> True, a hardass POTUS who would have temporarily deployed a thousand tanks flying the stars and stripes to the Ukraine border back in December WOULD have been preferable and WOULD have avoided all this sh!t
> 
> But that moment got missed due to the Merkel and Obama approach of coddling the homicidal gnome.
> 
> However, life goes on
> 
> PS as to casualties and damage, the baffling part is that this is *still* far less of a beating than Ukraine (or anyone else, except China) took from now-forgotten SARS-COV-2. The global significance of this is about the FUTURE of us all, not some weeping-heart-liberal "those poor children". YES, THOSE POOR CHILDREN, BUT ALSO BECAUSE THIS HAS THE POTENTIAL OF BECOMING 1000X BIGGER WITH 1000X MORE POOR CHILDREN SO, SO EASILY.



So much wrong with this. We have small forces in Nato right now because we have infrastructure for that. Trying to put a couple of additional armored divisions over there is a whole other logistical nightmare. Where do you put them? What country agrees to host them? I'm not educated on how the Nato agreements are written but I believe Nato would have to vote for some kind of military build up. That's not going to happen. Easy for us to sit here and say to send forces to the Ukraine border, but these other Nato countries are within range of a variety of really nasty weaponry. Putin has proven over time he's not afraid to cross certain lines. Nato isn't going to mass forces. Heck, the Poles wouldn't send the Migs, except through us. You think they are going to house 100k or more US troops and flip the bird to Putin? 

You may not like how Biden is handling this but it's really the only way. It's measured and it's smart. Similar to what Reagan did in the 80's. Cripple the Russian economy. China can't prop Russia up on their own. Eventually we will see a complete economic collapse in Russia and someone is going to dispose of Putin within his own house.


----------



## Adieu

DrewH said:


> So much wrong with this. We have small forces in Nato right now because we have infrastructure for that. Trying to put a couple of additional armored divisions over there is a whole other logistical nightmare. Where do you put them? What country agrees to host them? I'm not educated on how the Nato agreements are written but I believe Nato would have to vote for some kind of military build up. That's not going to happen. Easy for us to sit here and say to send forces to the Ukraine border, but these other Nato countries are within range of a variety of really nasty weaponry. Putin has proven over time he's not afraid to cross certain lines. Nato isn't going to mass forces. Heck, the Poles wouldn't send the Migs, except through us. You think they are going to house 100k or more US troops and flip the bird to Putin?
> 
> You may not like how Biden is handling this but it's really the only way. It's measured and it's smart. Similar to what Reagan did in the 80's. Cripple the Russian economy. China can't prop Russia up on their own. Eventually we will see a complete economic collapse in Russia and someone is going to dispose of Putin within his own house.



Not that.

As you may or may not be aware, the Russian army doesn't ALWAYS look like a bunch of bums who camped out in the forest for like 3 months in the snow... that just happens to be what they actually DID since late 2021 along the Ukrainian border.

If NATO had the will to park tanks and throw up tents on the other side a mile away from them, nothing would have happened.

Putler wanted a short victory march against a capitulating country in awe, not a real fight. 

He was under the impression that he had invited Biden & Co. to a staring contest last winter and they looked away. He was entirely sure that was that and felt he had been handed the deed and keys to Kyiv by Biden.

He's currently even less happy with the present situation than the Ukrainians, it's just that he is too proud to back down once he started throwing punches.


----------



## profwoot

BMFan30 said:


> Oh I wasn't saying that Ukraine has Bioweapons, I was just saying they have a facility that studies viruses like Doctors do. I wasn't saying anything about them using it against people.
> 
> I said that if Russia gets a hold of their research they will, in the same way that someone that doesn't know how to use a scalpel can hijack medical research and learn how to gut people while keeping them alive for the torment.



You're still playing into the propaganda even bringing it up. The existence of a biolab in Ukraine isn't interesting or important. I work in a building with dozens of biolabs. Across the hall from me is the open door of a biolab. Every university has biolabs. Tons of private companies have biolabs. It just doesn't matter that Ukraine has biolabs, and all the innuendo that there's anything weird about it is only happening because of Russian propaganda.


----------



## fantom

LostTheTone said:


> If NATO cross into Ukraine, then it's seriously on. If Russia crosses out of Ukraine, it is seriously on. And I don't think either side wants to provoke that. In a very real sense, the "red lines" are the same as they ever have been. And it fucking sucks that Ukraine is on the outside of that, but they were still on the outside before this war all the same


If your crazy drunk neighbor comes into your house breaking everything you own, it is perfectly acceptable to call up some buddies down the road and ask them to sit in your house to deter your neighbor. If all your buddies say, "that dude has a gun, I don't want to come over. He will go on a shooting spree." Well you are on this situation.

The problem here is that Putin believes Ukraine is his house too. And if that is the case, he is going to go into the whole neighborhood unless someone intervenes.


----------



## DiezelMonster

fantom said:


> If your crazy drunk neighbor comes into your house breaking everything you own, it is perfectly acceptable to call up some buddies down the road and ask them to sit in your house to deter your neighbor. If all your buddies say, "that dude has a gun, I don't want to come over. He will go on a shooting spree." Well you are on this situation.
> 
> The problem here is that Putin believes Ukraine is his house too. And if that is the case, he is going to go into the whole neighborhood unless someone intervenes.


Let's shoot the guns, it's too cold right now.


----------



## oversteve

So a US journalist was killed by russians and one more wounded, also the site 20km away from the border of Poland which is a member of NATO was bombed. Really interested to see if there will be any reaction from Biden. 









American journalist Brent Renaud shot and killed by Russian forces in Ukraine


Brent Renaud, a 50-year-old filmmaker, was killed when Russian troops opened fire, according to the head of Kyiv's regional police force.




www.cbsnews.com


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> So a US journalist was killed by russians and one more wounded, also the site 20km away from the border of Poland which is a member of NATO was bombed. Really interested to see if there will be any reaction from Biden.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> American journalist Brent Renaud shot and killed by Russian forces in Ukraine
> 
> 
> Brent Renaud, a 50-year-old filmmaker, was killed when Russian troops opened fire, according to the head of Kyiv's regional police force.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cbsnews.com



Sadly...probably NOT.

Biden seems hell-bent on either treating Russia as if it were the Soviet Union (rather than the early Nazi Germany it is becoming) OR perhaps hoping to retire/die before the problem forces American participation


----------



## profwoot

Adieu said:


> Sadly...probably NOT.
> 
> Biden seems hell-bent on either treating Russia as if it were the Soviet Union (rather than the early Nazi Germany it is becoming) OR perhaps hoping to retire/die before the problem forces American participation


Stuff like this is really easy to say, as evinced by it being posted untold thousands of times on the internet every day, but would you want to be the one making that decision? Even if you were 100% confident Putin won't stop at Ukraine, how confident are you that US intervention won't be met with nukes? I think we can all agree that as horrific as things are in Ukraine right now it pales in comparison to the end of worldwide civilization as we know it, which is absolutely on the table as soon as the first nuke launches.

The invasion of Ukraine is an absolute embarrassment for Putin, and scholars tell us that embarrassment is the one thing a dictator cannot abide. Putin is an international laughing stock right now, and US intervention and the subsequent nuclear war might be one of the few ways Putin can take the attention off of his terrible war strategy and pitiful armed forces.


----------



## Adieu

profwoot said:


> Stuff like this is really easy to say, as evinced by it being posted untold thousands of times on the internet every day, but would you want to be the one making that decision? Even if you were 100% confident Putin won't stop at Ukraine, how confident are you that US intervention won't be met with nukes? I think we can all agree that as horrific as things are in Ukraine right now it pales in comparison to the end of worldwide civilization as we know it, which is absolutely on the table as soon as the first nuke launches.
> 
> The invasion of Ukraine is an absolute embarrassment for Putin, and scholars tell us that embarrassment is the one thing a dictator cannot abide. Putin is an international laughing stock right now, and US intervention and the subsequent nuclear war might be one of the few ways Putin can take the attention off of his terrible war strategy and pitiful armed forces.



I would have been 100% convinced that reinforcing the Ukraine-Russia border with a few NATO-flagged tanks LAST YEAR would have shut this whole thing down.

Biden keeps letting Putler push him and Putler gets BOLDER, as any bully does.

Back in 2014 or even 2021, America was too afraid of getting roped into shooting at some *proxy mercs* in Donbas. Who would have 100% been abandoned by their masters. No risk of anything except some expenses and/or bad press.

Today? We're up to talking about nuking each other over arms sales and maybe over sanctions.

WAY TO DEESCALATE.


----------



## profwoot

Adieu said:


> I would have been 100% convinced that reinforcing the Ukraine-Russia border with a few NATO-flagged tanks LAST YEAR would have shut this whole thing down.
> 
> Biden keeps letting Putler push him and Putler gets BOLDER, as any bully does.
> 
> Back in 2014 or even 2021, America was too afraid of getting roped into shooting at some *proxy mercs* in Donbas. Who would have 100% been abandoned by their masters. No risk of anything except some expenses and/or bad press.
> 
> Today? We're up to talking about nuking each other over arms sales and maybe over sanctions.
> 
> WAY TO DEESCALATE.


Ok, but you'll notice you didn't address the question.


----------



## oversteve

profwoot said:


> Stuff like this is really easy to say, as evinced by it being posted untold thousands of times on the internet every day, but would you want to be the one making that decision? Even if you were 100% confident Putin won't stop at Ukraine, how confident are you that US intervention won't be met with nukes? I think we can all agree that as horrific as things are in Ukraine right now it pales in comparison to the end of worldwide civilization as we know it, which is absolutely on the table as soon as the first nuke launches.
> 
> The invasion of Ukraine is an absolute embarrassment for Putin, and scholars tell us that embarrassment is the one thing a dictator cannot abide. Putin is an international laughing stock right now, and US intervention and the subsequent nuclear war might be one of the few ways Putin can take the attention off of his terrible war strategy and pitiful armed forces.


ATM the thing under question isn't even closing the sky with the help of NATO forces, there was an idea about lending us old soviet jets from Poland and they already approved it but Biden is currently blocking it. Also he announced supplying us some anti aircraft systems but sofar it didn't went beyond words.


----------



## Adieu

profwoot said:


> Ok, but you'll notice you didn't address the question.



Today, I believe the perfect hawkish-but-non-escalatory we mean business "warning shot" that definitely WON'T be answered with nukes would be a flashy, showy execution-by-assassin of several Russian top brass (but NOT Putin) in Moscow.

Assassin as in bullets or knives, not poisons or drones.

That's like thug speak for politely saying "back off, or else". He'd understand.

PS I fully support the actual liquidation of Putin himself, this is just the absolutely-sure-to-avoid nukes way to signal serious business to the asshole


----------



## LostTheTone

oversteve said:


> ATM the thing under question isn't even closing the sky with the help of NATO forces, there was an idea about lending us old soviet jets from Poland and they already approved it but Biden is currently blocking it. Also he announced supplying us some anti aircraft systems but sofar it didn't went beyond words.



There are a number of reasons why handing over the Polish MiGs isn't a spectacular idea, including concerns about where they are going to fly from and whether the two are properly cross compatible. I mean, the Poles use the Roman alphabet, the Ukrainians use cyrillic, it's not like you can just read the labels.

But... Since Poland wants to give them, and Ukraine wants them, fuck it, let them figure out how to make them fly. 

I don't get why Biden specifically declined to make that happen. Sure, I know he got antsy about having the MiGs transfer via Ramstein, but that's just to underline that Poland is a NATO member.

Anti-aircraft systems (as opposed to one-man MANPADS like Stinger) are a slightly different deal, because the US probably doesn't want the Russians capturing their radars and so forth. Finding out how resistant to jamming the radar is, or how well it picks up low RCS planes, is a potential future problem.


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> There are a number of reasons why handing over the Polish MiGs isn't a spectacular idea, including concerns about where they are going to fly from and whether the two are properly cross compatible. I mean, the Poles use the Roman alphabet, the Ukrainians use cyrillic, it's not like you can just read the labels.
> 
> But... Since Poland wants to give them, and Ukraine wants them, fuck it, let them figure out how to make them fly.
> 
> I don't get why Biden specifically declined to make that happen. Sure, I know he got antsy about having the MiGs transfer via Ramstein, but that's just to underline that Poland is a NATO member.
> 
> Anti-aircraft systems (as opposed to one-man MANPADS like Stinger) are a slightly different deal, because the US probably doesn't want the Russians capturing their radars and so forth. Finding out how resistant to jamming the radar is, or how well it picks up low RCS planes, is a potential future problem.



Huh?

Any Ukrainian who can't puzzle out Polish labels is far, far too st00pid to graduate high school, much less military pilot academy

Also, this being Soviet kit, there's a very good chance it was always labeled in Russian and never adapted for anyone to begin with.


----------



## DiezelMonster

So China just said this....


----------



## Randy

Russia now explicitly targeting journalists in Ukraine. 

Bombing hospitals, maternity wards, tons of civilian structures, fleeing refugees but the west is still going to let this "territorial dispute" play out?


----------



## High Plains Drifter

With every passing day that putin continues with this and the US sits on it's hands while crying that if we take another step, we'll have hell to pay... I don't think I understand that stance anymore. He's going all in now and he'll continue more aggressively and ratchet it up KNOWING That other countries are scared of his threats. I could certainly be wrong but at least at this point I feel like if someone would grow a pair and strike back.. strike hard... cut off the head of this disgusting snake, that it's the only thing that'll stop him. We're just enabling and validating his terms now. Hit him.. Hit the Kremlin... Kill him or make him wish he was dead. Fuck putin... SLAVA UKRAINI!


----------



## ItWillDo

Randy said:


> Russia now explicitly targeting journalists in Ukraine.
> 
> Bombing hospitals, maternity wards, tons of civilian structures, fleeing refugees but the west is still going to let this "territorial dispute" play out?





I'm not an expert on the subject, but @BMFan30 might be able to pitch in. How many Russian saboteurs are stationed at the Kiev inner city checkpoints?


----------



## Randy

High Plains Drifter said:


> With every passing day that putin continues with this and the US sits on it's hands while crying that if we take another step, we'll have hell to pay... I don't think I understand that stance anymore. He's going all in now and he'll continue more aggressively and ratchet it up KNOWING That other countries are scared of his threats. I could certainly be wrong but at least at this point I feel like if someone would grow a pair and strike back.. strike hard... cut off the head of this disgusting snake, that it's the only thing that'll stop him. We're just enabling and validating his terms now. Hit him.. Hit the Kremlin... Kill him or make him wish he was dead. Fuck putin... SLAVA UKRAINI!


The thing I don't get is Russia with constant escalating threats of what constitutes declaration of war (he said sanctions were, at one point).

Now they say they'll target convoys carrying military hardware from abroad regardless of who's driving it, and of course bragging that they blew up base with "foreign mercenaries". So they've made clear anything within the Ukrainian border is fair game, for them, for Belarusians, Syrians and whoever else they've recruited.

Then you get to the West, NATO, US, etc and their refusal to implement a No Fly Zone because they believe shooting down a Russian plane if/when they cross the line IS an act of aggression and now they're involved. Totally accepting there's a double standard where Russia or any other foreign agents they seem as allies can shoot at anyone but you can't do the same.


----------



## iamaom

Adieu said:


> Back in 2014 or even 2021, America was too afraid of getting roped into shooting at some *proxy mercs* in Donbas.


I don't blame them considering how Afgahnistan went for 20 years, hindsight 20/20 and all that jazz. Dem voters were constatly holding Obama's feet to the fire for not pulling out + drone strikes killing civilians in Syria. "Not the world police" has been the progressive mantra for over a decade now. As a far left Bernie voter, I'll freely admit the past month my view of the US's role in geopolitics has been shaken up.


----------



## Adieu

ItWillDo said:


> I'm not an expert on the subject, but @BMFan30 might be able to pitch in. How many Russian saboteurs are stationed at the Kiev inner city checkpoints?




Green is forests/fields, dude. Not inner city.

This is the empty space between a bunch of front-line Kyiv exurbs and Kyiv region villages

PS oh wait, n/m, this is our resident "I don't read" Kremlin troll


----------



## narad

iamaom said:


> I don't blame them considering how Afgahnistan went for 20 years, hindsight 20/20 and all that jazz. Dem voters were constatly holding Obama's feet to the fire for not pulling out + drone strikes killing civilians in Syria. "Not the world police" has been the progressive mantra for over a decade now. As a far left Bernie voter, I'll freely admit the past month my view of the US's role in geopolitics has been shaken up.



But it's like when the BLM protesters have that whole defund the police thing. If policing means mistakenly busting into people's homes and shooting them, or harassing everyone on the street, sure, defund them and diversify that resource allocation. But if a bunch of innocent people are being murdered, please, do the policing.


----------



## ItWillDo

Adieu said:


> Green is forests/fields, dude. Not inner city.
> 
> This is the empty space between a bunch of front-line disputed Kyiv suburbs and Kyiv region villages
> 
> PS oh wait, n/m, this is our resident "I don't read" Kremlin troll


Oh geez thanks, I would've never guessed what the green could represent. Checkpoint marker is in some grey-ish area marked as something else, but I'm most likely wrong as I don't read anyway. Good thing we have you here to counterpoint neutral & independent investigative journalism with ad hominems.


----------



## Adieu

ItWillDo said:


> Good thing we have you here to counterpoint neutral & independent investigative journalism with *ad hominems*.



Troglodytam non hominem est


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> I'm not an expert on the subject, but @BMFan30 might be able to pitch in. How many Russian saboteurs are stationed at the Kiev inner city checkpoints?




The wounded reporter said clearly they were going to a second bridge where a shooting took place, the one marked on the map as a "spot" is the first bridge, please take a little effort to see where the next bridge is located.


----------



## AMOS

High Plains Drifter said:


> With every passing day that putin continues with this and the US sits on it's hands while crying that if we take another step, we'll have hell to pay... I don't think I understand that stance anymore. He's going all in now and he'll continue more aggressively and ratchet it up KNOWING That other countries are scared of his threats. I could certainly be wrong but at least at this point I feel like if someone would grow a pair and strike back.. strike hard... cut off the head of this disgusting snake, that it's the only thing that'll stop him. We're just enabling and validating his terms now. Hit him.. Hit the Kremlin... Kill him or make him wish he was dead. Fuck putin... SLAVA UKRAINI!


Russian leaders only understand power, we have to hit him and hit him hard. Take out all of his military units in Ukraine with one massive blow.


----------



## Adieu

AMOS said:


> Russian leaders only understand power, we have to hit him and hit him hard. Take out all of his military units in Ukraine with one massive blow.



He doesn't care about units or any such serfs

Take out his chief henchmen. That'll send the right signal.


----------



## ItWillDo

oversteve said:


> The wounded reporter said clearly they were going to a second bridge where a shooting took place, the one marked on the map as a "spot" is the first bridge, please take a little effort to see where the next bridge is located.



That's odd, because to me it seems he clearly said:


> Somebody offered to take us to the other bridge, *and we cross the checkpoint and they start shooting at us*.


Here's even more context if you like: https://dossier.substack.com/p/tragic-shooting-of-american-journalist


----------



## Randy




----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


>




You missed part 2. The full video is a minute longer.

Some valley girl type saunters over to the camera and asks if they only care about the opposition or people who SUPPORT the invasion can speak their mind.

They're like, ok, go for it.

She starts saying she SUPPORTS the invasion... and THE SAME STORMTROOPERS HAUL HER OFF TO THE SAME PRISON BUS IMMEDIATELY

GJ, morons


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Huh?
> 
> Any Ukrainian who can't puzzle out Polish labels is far, far too st00pid to graduate high school, much less military pilot academy
> 
> Also, this being Soviet kit, there's a very good chance it was always labeled in Russian and never adapted for anyone to begin with.



Jesus fucking Christ dude...

I literally said that if the Ukrainians want to try and fly the Polish MiGs then we should wish them good luck and let them try. 

How the actually fuck can you read that as a slur against Ukraine? 

And you do know that the whole reason why no-one has even offered Ukraine F16s, even though they are available in huge numbers, is because the Ukrainians can't fly them, and the planes are not localised for Russian or Ukrainian speakers, right? The only reason that Poland is offering 30 year old MiGs, based on 50 year old Soviet designs is because they are crap that the Poles don't care about, but which the Ukrainians can probably fly with a bit of training. 

Your naked nationalism is so fucking tiring.

Even when I'm literally agreeing with you, it's never good enough for you.


----------



## LostTheTone

AMOS said:


> Russian leaders only understand power, we have to hit him and hit him hard. Take out all of his military units in Ukraine with one massive blow.



So... Nuke Ukraine? 

That's the only way to strike like 100,000 soldiers at once.


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> Jesus fucking Christ dude...
> 
> I literally said that if the Ukrainians want to try and fly the Polish MiGs then we should wish them good luck and let them try.
> 
> How the actually fuck can you read that as a slur against Ukraine?
> 
> And you do know that the whole reason why no-one has even offered Ukraine F16s, even though they are available in huge numbers, is because the Ukrainians can't fly them, and the planes are not localised for Russian or Ukrainian speakers, right? The only reason that Poland is offering 30 year old MiGs, based on 50 year old Soviet designs is because they are crap that the Poles don't care about, but which the Ukrainians can probably fly with a bit of training.
> 
> Your naked nationalism is so fucking tiring.
> 
> Even when I'm literally agreeing with you, it's never good enough for you.



I didn't, though

I just casually mentioned that written Polish is pretty much fully intelligible to a determined Ukrainian speaker, unless said person is very very dense (which would presumably preclude them from becoming a fighter pilot)... it's a closely related language written in a different but universally understood alphabet

Some effort might be involved, but they'd definitely figure it out


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> That's odd, because to me it seems he clearly said:
> 
> Here's even more context if you like: https://dossier.substack.com/p/tragic-shooting-of-american-journalist


Again please try to read it and try to comprehend how the "journalist" is twisting the story



> *We crossed the checkpoint and they started shooting at us*,” Arrendondo started. “*So the driver turned around, and they kept shooting at us*
> 
> Arrendondo, who is by far our most reliable source for this incident, makes it clear that the shooting came from the direction of the checkpoint


In which way does the first piece makes it clear who is shooting at them and from which direction? This is nothing more then the false assumption by the author at this point making it look like a fact. 
Somehow the author assumes the first bridge = checkpoint.
He didn't say they started shooting immediately after crossing the checkpoint, again it's the author's assumption.
There are photos of the car with the most damage on the passenger's side which gives an idea from where the car was shot and it's deffinitely not from the back and somehow the 'journalist' excluded this from his 'investigation'.
If they were shot from the back why did they return back to where they were shot from?

This article looks like a typical propaganda piece with some info present and some omited with pretty strange author's assumptions that are imposed on a reader as a given fact


----------



## ItWillDo

oversteve said:


> Again please try to read it and try to comprehend how the "journalist" is twisting the story
> 
> 
> In which way does the first piece makes it clear who is shooting at them and from which direction? This is nothing more then the false assumption by the author at this point making it look like a fact.
> Somehow the author assumes the first bridge = checkpoint.
> He didn't say they started shooting immediately after crossing the checkpoint, again it's the author's assumption.
> There are photos of the car with the most damage on the passenger's side which gives an idea from where the car was shot and it's deffinitely not from the back and somehow the 'journalist' excluded this from his 'investigation'.
> If they were shot from the back why did they return back to where they were shot from?
> 
> This article looks like a typical propaganda piece with some info present and some omited with pretty strange author's assumptions that are imposed on a reader as a given fact


Not everything that doesn't fit your bias is "twisting". Rather, it's you who's contorting things to your liking.

> If they would be close to the second bridge, the reporter would've briefed it more clearly as he's an experienced professional. His choice of words are timid and rather indicates that the shooting happened close after leaving the first checkpoint which is completely under UKR control
> How is not having any damage in the back an indication of it not being UKR troops? Do you assume the only UKR troops are huddled in a checkpoint cabin and not patrolling the premise?
> If they were shot by a patrol from the area beyond the checkpoint (which is under UKR control, as the frontline is 2KM away), why would they not instinctively return to the inner city where they came from?

But believe whichever you want to, we didn't need 77 pages in this thread to determine your reality is dissonant with the real one. Should you want a reality check though, maybe test yourself on these points from "The Basic Principles of War Propaganda":




(Just make sure you replace "devil" with "Hitler" if you want the full 10/10 experience)


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> I didn't, though
> 
> I just casually mentioned that written Polish is pretty much fully intelligible to a determined Ukrainian speaker, unless said person is very very dense (which would presumably preclude them from becoming a fighter pilot)... it's a closely related language written in a different but universally understood alphabet
> 
> Some effort might be involved, but they'd definitely figure it out



I literally fucking said that if the Ukrainians want to give it a try, then we should let them try. Why are you determined to break balls on every single point?

And seriously Poland uses a different alphabet to Ukraine. One is cyrillic, one is latin. They are not interchangeable. This is not like Danish and Norwegian being very nearly identical, or even like Danish and Swedish being so closely related that you just swap ø for ö. They have different symbols for many letters.


----------



## LostTheTone

ItWillDo said:


> Not everything that doesn't fit your bias is "twisting". Rather, it's you who's contorting things to your liking.
> 
> > If they would be close to the second bridge, the reporter would've briefed it more clearly as he's an experienced professional. His choice of words are timid and rather indicates that the shooting happened close after leaving the first checkpoint which is completely under UKR control
> > How is not having any damage in the back an indication of it not being UKR troops? Do you assume the only UKR troops are huddled in a checkpoint cabin and not patrolling the premise?
> > If they were shot by a patrol from the area beyond the checkpoint (which is under UKR control, as the frontline is 2KM away), why would they not instinctively return to the inner city where they came from?
> 
> But believe whichever you want to, we didn't need 77 pages in this thread to determine your reality is dissonant with the real one. Should you want a reality check though, maybe test yourself on these points from "The Basic Principles of War Propaganda":
> 
> View attachment 104695
> 
> 
> (Just make sure you replace "devil" with "Hitler" if you want the full 10/10 experience)



I too have heard reports that the journalists may have been shot by Ukrainians.

There's a report from Fox going around somewhere where the reporter says to the camera something like "...they were shot in a Ukrainian controlled area by Russians...". Now, Fox isn't wonderful but this kind of reportage doesn't fill me with confidence about whoever pulled the trigger.

I am also deeply cynical about the plight of journalists in conflict zones. I'm certainly not outraged that they get shot, at least any more so than any other civilians. I dare say thousands of locals have died in similar ways. In the west, the press screams about journalists even being slightly inconvenienced by police, but in a war zone they are just some non-locals with a car full of equipment which looks deeply suspicious. 

Israeli forces have shot a good number of journalists over the years, and while it is still really awful that those guys died, at the same time when you start setting up a tripod within eyesight of soldiers and putting a big bulky thing on top pointing their way... 

But for all of this...

The rules of propaganda apply to all sides equally. And it is not in any way surprising or sinister that all sides frame all conflict through the lens of their own perceptions.

You are trying to use a variation on the paradox of tolerance here, but it's not going to work. You are saying that, in effect, we must accept sources that we know are definitely propaganda simply because other sources are also propaganda. But there is plenty of media that if not supports Russia, at least saw this invasion coming and believes NATO or the EU are to blame. 

In the west, such media are allowed to exist. I personally do have a problem with RT etc being banned in the West too; we have nothing to fear from speech. Those view points are out there thought. Not on the MSM, but they have been garbage forever and ever and ever. There are only so many times we can see MSM outlets completely realigning their views on the pandemic or whatever other big events are happening before they cease to be credible. In broad terms, the mainstream media have never met a war or a panic that they didn't like.

But the West is pluralist, and we should be more pluralist. Some outlets are propagandist. But many are not. Some are repulsively contrarian, and just say the opposite, but some are balanced and some are just weird and have their own theories.

Contrast that to Russia though, where you can be arrested and jailed for "misinformation" about the "special military operation". 

We know with certainty that western reporting is unreliable. We know they are taking stories from the Ukrainian government and security services. However, we also know that they are able to report something else if they want to. In many of these situations, the only sources are those official ones with an obvious vested interest. At least such information can be evaluated through that lens.

We also know with certainty that Russian reporting is unreliable, but we also know that reporters are not legally able to give different points of view. We also know that their sources are all entirely Russian military. When we observe from the outside and see that reporters have not been arrested, we can be certain that they are repeating what they are told to. It doesn't matter whether reporters are critically analysing or not, because they will get the dreaded knock on the door at 2am if they don't do what they are told.

If you have two people in front of you, both who have a long history of lies, do you trust the one who has an FSB officer stood behind him with a pistol? 

Of course not. The correct answer is to trust neither.

We still need to pay attention to whatever reporting we can get, because we all want to know what is going on. But everything should be weighted appropriately, based on its source.

And, bluntly, sometimes when someone says they were defending themselves, they actually are. The idea that Ukraine was ever going to invade Russia is laughable. And it is a lot harder to say that you're defending yourself when you are launching attacks on Kiev. 

Livy said that Rome conquered the world in self-defense. Roman law didn't allow for wars of aggression. So every conquest was framed as unruly barbarians on their borders, likely in the pay of Romes enemies. So the legions marched on and on. This has always been how wars of conquest were conducted. 

The Peloponnesian war was fought not over any matter of import, but over Spartas fear that Athens would one day be powerful enough to challenge them. Self-defense, you see? Alexander the Great invaded and conquered the Persian empire to free the Greek cities that had been taken before. Self-defense of his fellow countrymen. 

But no-one conquers in self-defense. They do fight heroic last stands in self-defense though. 

If you had to say which side in this conflict was more like Sparta or Rome or Macedonia, which would it be?


----------



## bostjan

ItWillDo said:


> Not everything that doesn't fit your bias is "twisting". Rather, it's you who's contorting things to your liking.
> 
> > If they would be close to the second bridge, the reporter would've briefed it more clearly as he's an experienced professional. His choice of words are timid and rather indicates that the shooting happened close after leaving the first checkpoint which is completely under UKR control
> > How is not having any damage in the back an indication of it not being UKR troops? Do you assume the only UKR troops are huddled in a checkpoint cabin and not patrolling the premise?
> > If they were shot by a patrol from the area beyond the checkpoint (which is under UKR control, as the frontline is 2KM away), why would they not instinctively return to the inner city where they came from?
> 
> But believe whichever you want to, we didn't need 77 pages in this thread to determine your reality is dissonant with the real one. Should you want a reality check though, maybe test yourself on these points from "The Basic Principles of War Propaganda":
> 
> View attachment 104695
> 
> 
> (Just make sure you replace "devil" with "Hitler" if you want the full 10/10 experience)


You know that the Uno Reverse Card doesn't work in real life, right?

The reports are that they were shot by Russian forces as they approached a Russian checkpoint. The reports could be wrong, but, what is your evidence to the contrary? Is Russia even denying this?! No, they are not denying it. You are just being arbitrarily contrary.


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> Not everything that doesn't fit your bias is "twisting". Rather, it's you who's contorting things to your liking.
> 
> > If they would be close to the second bridge, the reporter would've briefed it more clearly as he's an experienced professional. His choice of words are timid and rather indicates that the shooting happened close after leaving the first checkpoint which is completely under UKR control
> > How is not having any damage in the back an indication of it not being UKR troops? Do you assume the only UKR troops are huddled in a checkpoint cabin and not patrolling the premise?
> > If they were shot by a patrol from the area beyond the checkpoint (which is under UKR control, as the frontline is 2KM away), why would they not instinctively return to the inner city where they came from?
> 
> But believe whichever you want to, we didn't need 77 pages in this thread to determine your reality is dissonant with the real one. Should you want a reality check though, maybe test yourself on these points from "The Basic Principles of War Propaganda":
> 
> View attachment 104695
> 
> 
> (Just make sure you replace "devil" with "Hitler" if you want the full 10/10 experience)


> The reporter was literally staying on surgeon's table with his body being patched at that moment speaking briefly with only a few details. Again he didn't clearly specify the time they were shot only that it was after they passed the checkpoint. The thing that it was exactly after they crossed the checkpoint and that the first bridge is a checkpoint is the author's assumption which he imposes on the reader as a given fact.
> Just take a look at the damage on the car, it's not your average portable machine gun from someone patroling the area, also the location of the damage on passenger's side and orientation of the road shows that the car was most likely shot from some North - North-East - North-West direction
> They have exactly returned to the area behind the first bridge, it's in the video where the soldier says they are in Romanivka and the body is behind him already taken out of the car.

Regarding the propaganda piece

1) Russia - invading another country telling they defend themselves from NATO that way and defend the russian speaking population
Ukraine - defending from Russian invasion
2) Russia - Ukrainian Nazi and NATO are responsible + some random shit = we invade
Ukraine - Russia + local Ukrainian collaborators responsible 
3) Russia - mystic Ukrainian Nazi and scary NATO, Nazi-jew president
Ukraine - Putin is a prick threatening the whole world with nukes
4) Russia - we are fighting against mystic Ukrainian Nazi and scary NATO
Ukraine - basically defending from Russian invasion - both a noble cause and the interest here
5) Russia - shelling civil areas in the cities ok Ukraine
Ukraine - not shelling civil areas in the cities ok Russia
6) Russia - thermobaric charges and cluster bombs
Ukraine - ?
7) Of course each side will lessen their losses and exagerate enemy's losses. However for that we have some independent sources that try to count everyhting like this one








Attack On Europe: Documenting Russian Equipment Losses During The 2022 Russian Invasion Of Ukraine







www.oryxspioenkop.com




8) Russia - Fred Durst 
Ukraine - majority of civilized world + plenty of remarkable Russians
9) Invasion or self defence - which cause is more "sacred"?
10) Just compare persecution of dissent in Russia vs the other world - 15 years of imprisonment vs verbal condemnation

Of course there will be some propaganda from both side but the level of Russian propaganda is incomparable


----------



## StevenC

I miss the good old days when we only had to deal with mbardu's walls of text. I am truly sorry buddy. You don't know what you've got until it gets replaced by much worse people.


----------



## Cyanide_Anima

For real. Trying to address a wall of Sophistry is exhausting when that person doesn't care what the truth is and will simply just reply with garbage like "what is the truth? How can we even know what truth is? What even IS mom's spaghetti?"


----------



## bostjan

oversteve said:


> > The reporter was literally staying on surgeon's table with his body being patched at that moment speaking briefly with only a few details. Again he didn't clearly specify the time they were shot only that it was after they passed the checkpoint. The thing that it was exactly after they crossed the checkpoint and that the first bridge is a checkpoint is the author's assumption which he imposes on the reader as a given fact.
> > Just take a look at the damage on the car, it's not your average portable machine gun from someone patroling the area, also the location of the damage on passenger's side and orientation of the road shows that the car was most likely shot from some North - North-East - North-West direction
> > They have exactly returned to the area behind the first bridge, it's in the video where the soldier says they are in Romanivka and the body is behind him already taken out of the car.
> 
> Regarding the propaganda piece
> 
> 1) Russia - invading another country telling they defend themselves from NATO that way and defend the russian speaking population
> Ukraine - defending from Russian invasion
> 2) Russia - Ukrainian Nazi and NATO are responsible + some random shit = we invade
> Ukraine - Russia + local Ukrainian collaborators responsible
> 3) Russia - mystic Ukrainian Nazi and scary NATO, Nazi-jew president
> Ukraine - Putin is a prick threatening the whole world with nukes
> 4) Russia - we are fighting against mystic Ukrainian Nazi and scary NATO
> Ukraine - basically defending from Russian invasion - both a noble cause and the interest here
> 5) Russia - shelling civil areas in the cities ok Ukraine
> Ukraine - not shelling civil areas in the cities ok Russia
> 6) Russia - thermobaric charges and cluster bombs
> Ukraine - ?
> 7) Of course each side will lessen their losses and exagerate enemy's losses. However for that we have some independent sources that try to count everyhting like this one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Attack On Europe: Documenting Russian Equipment Losses During The 2022 Russian Invasion Of Ukraine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.oryxspioenkop.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8) Russia - Fred Durst
> Ukraine - majority of civilized world + plenty of remarkable Russians
> 9) Invasion or self defence - which cause is more "sacred"?
> 10) Just compare persecution of dissent in Russia vs the other world - 15 years of imprisonment vs verbal condemnation
> 
> Of course there will be some propaganda from both side but the level of Russian propaganda is incomparable


Nemtsov in 2008 warned that Putin would mastermind a way to stay in power beyond his term limits. Putin told the Russian people not to worry about it. In 2014, Nemtsov warned that Putin was planning to invade all of Ukraine. Later that year, the Russian government accused him of felony insult to Putin, because he called him "nutty", then Nemtsov predicted that Putin would have him killed. In 2015, Nemtsov was shot just before an anti-war protest he organized. After intense international pressure to investigate the murder, one of Ramzan Kadyrov's (remember the Chechen leader who is now best buds with Putin, especially over the invasion of Ukraine?) henchmen was convicted. Putin suggested that the killing was done by Nemtsov's followers to make him (Putin) look bad, because that's totally makes sense.

Look, if anyone wants to believe Putin's claims, like Zelensky is a Nazi, in spite of being Jewish, or that he has to kill Ukrainian civilians in order to protect them from Western powers, or that his political opponents are murdering their leaders just to make Putin looks bad, well, ... if you say "ya legkovarny" three times really slowly, an elf will grant you three wishes.


----------



## Randy

> accused him of *felony insult*


Here's your window into Hell for today.


----------



## Xaios

\


Cyanide_Anima said:


> For real. Trying to address a wall of Sophistry is exhausting when that person doesn't care what the truth is and will simply just reply with garbage like "what is the truth? How can we even know what truth is? What even IS mom's spaghetti?"


Exactly. "If you wish to refute my bad-faith arguments, you must first invent the universe."


----------



## nightflameauto

Xaios said:


> \
> 
> Exactly. "If you wish to refute my bad-faith arguments, you must first invent the universe."


No, no. "If you wish to refute my bad-faith arguments, you must first re-invent the universe with a completely arbitrary set of laws and rules based only on your own imagination, and not adhering to any known form of reality."


----------



## AMOS

LostTheTone said:


> So... Nuke Ukraine?
> 
> That's the only way to strike like 100,000 soldiers at once.


No, but A-10's, Apache's and C-130 Gunships have been proven to work well. Just need air superiority first, which shouldn't be that difficult.


----------



## bostjan

AMOS said:


> No, but A-10's, Apache's and C-130 Gunships have been proven to work well. Just need air superiority first, which shouldn't be that difficult.


Throw a bunch of 50-70 year old aircraft into battle?!


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Throw a bunch of 50-70 year old aircraft into battle?!



Against 50-70 y.o. tanks, APCs, and 4x4's... actually sounds about right, although you'd have massive losses too

Drones would be smarter


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> Against 50-70 y.o. tanks, APCs, and 4x4's... actually sounds about right, although you'd have massive losses too
> 
> Drones would be smarter


A couple F-35s maybe. Drones for sure.


----------



## AMOS

bostjan said:


> Throw a bunch of 50-70 year old aircraft into battle?!


Yup! After you clear the skies with the new stuff.


----------



## StevenC

It's wild to me that B-52s are still in service and expected to serve into the 2050s, when they'll be 90 to 100 years old.


----------



## Adieu

Who knows....maybe even turboprop WW2-era Messerschmitts/Zeros/P38s etc could light up those conscript-manned ancient tank columns


----------



## AMOS

StevenC said:


> It's wild to me that B-52s are still in service and expected to serve into the 2050s, when they'll be 90 to 100 years old.


They're still effective at carpet bombing as well as laser/GPS guided weapons, as long as there's no aerial threats


----------



## Randy

EXCLUSIVE: Kremlin war memos instruct Russian media to feature Tucker Carlson.


The Russian government has pressed outlets to highlight the Fox host's Putin-helping broadcasts.




www.motherjones.com


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> I'm not an expert on the subject, but @BMFan30 might be able to pitch in. How many Russian saboteurs are stationed at the Kiev inner city checkpoints?



Too many for you to root for while you're doused in Russian propaganda...

A better question is how many Russian generals have been killed while protecting Ukrainian soil? Putin's plans been going according to plan or is your cum running thin as of late?


----------



## BMFan30

profwoot said:


> You're still playing into the propaganda even bringing it up. The existence of a biolab in Ukraine isn't interesting or important. I work in a building with dozens of biolabs. Across the hall from me is the open door of a biolab. Every university has biolabs. Tons of private companies have biolabs. It just doesn't matter that Ukraine has biolabs, and all the innuendo that there's anything weird about it is only happening because of Russian propaganda.


That's all I mentioned as well even saying that I wasn't saying it's good or bad... lol


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> Not even reading, I only keep coming back here for you baby!
> 
> Last time I checked, scale is still tipping in Russia's favor, enjoy your cope.


 lmfao a lot of Russian generals are dying on Ukrainian soil... The narrative that Russia is winning is something that comes from RU sites. lmfao! Have you soiled yourself yet? Even Russian generals have admitted that things aren't going according to plan but you won't hear that coming from the smelly mouth of Putin. lmfao!


----------



## BMFan30

Canada is stepping it up. One of the worlds deadliest snipers (from Canada) joins Ukrainian forces.

Ukraine has also been dropping Russian generals left and right as well as dropping planes and heli's down from the sky. Slava Ukraini!


----------



## fantom

ItWillDo said:


> Not everything that doesn't fit your bias is "twisting". Rather, it's you who's contorting things to your liking.
> 
> > If they would be close to the second bridge, the reporter would've briefed it more clearly as he's an experienced professional. His choice of words are timid and rather indicates that the shooting happened close after leaving the first checkpoint which is completely under UKR control
> > How is not having any damage in the back an indication of it not being UKR troops? Do you assume the only UKR troops are huddled in a checkpoint cabin and not patrolling the premise?
> > If they were shot by a patrol from the area beyond the checkpoint (which is under UKR control, as the frontline is 2KM away), why would they not instinctively return to the inner city where they came from?
> 
> But believe whichever you want to, we didn't need 77 pages in this thread to determine your reality is dissonant with the real one. Should you want a reality check though, maybe test yourself on these points from "The Basic Principles of War Propaganda":
> 
> View attachment 104695
> 
> 
> (Just make sure you replace "devil" with "Hitler" if you want the full 10/10 experience)


Would honestly love to see how YOU got 10/10 here. Would also love to see which ones you think Russia is not spreading as well.


----------



## fantom

BMFan30 said:


> That's all I mentioned as well even saying that I wasn't saying it's good or bad... lol


Honestly, I also read it as fear mongering. Why bring it up if it isn't relevant? I think biolab conversation is detracting from constructive discussion.


----------



## fantom

BMFan30 said:


> Canada is stepping it up. One of the worlds deadliest snipers (from Canada) joins Ukrainian forces.
> 
> Ukraine has also been dropping Russian generals left and right as well as dropping planes and heli's down from the sky. Slava Ukraini!



As much as I get it... It still isn't a good thing for society to celebrate killing people. That plays straight into the Russian narrative.


----------



## ItWillDo

LostTheTone said:


> I too have heard reports that the journalists may have been shot by Ukrainians.
> 
> There's a report from Fox going around somewhere where the reporter says to the camera something like "...they were shot in a Ukrainian controlled area by Russians...". Now, Fox isn't wonderful but this kind of reportage doesn't fill me with confidence about whoever pulled the trigger.
> 
> I am also deeply cynical about the plight of journalists in conflict zones. I'm certainly not outraged that they get shot, at least any more so than any other civilians. I dare say thousands of locals have died in similar ways. In the west, the press screams about journalists even being slightly inconvenienced by police, but in a war zone they are just some non-locals with a car full of equipment which looks deeply suspicious.
> 
> Israeli forces have shot a good number of journalists over the years, and while it is still really awful that those guys died, at the same time when you start setting up a tripod within eyesight of soldiers and putting a big bulky thing on top pointing their way...
> 
> But for all of this...
> 
> The rules of propaganda apply to all sides equally. And it is not in any way surprising or sinister that all sides frame all conflict through the lens of their own perceptions.
> 
> You are trying to use a variation on the paradox of tolerance here, but it's not going to work. You are saying that, in effect, we must accept sources that we know are definitely propaganda simply because other sources are also propaganda. But there is plenty of media that if not supports Russia, at least saw this invasion coming and believes NATO or the EU are to blame.
> 
> In the west, such media are allowed to exist. I personally do have a problem with RT etc being banned in the West too; we have nothing to fear from speech. Those view points are out there thought. Not on the MSM, but they have been garbage forever and ever and ever. There are only so many times we can see MSM outlets completely realigning their views on the pandemic or whatever other big events are happening before they cease to be credible. In broad terms, the mainstream media have never met a war or a panic that they didn't like.
> 
> But the West is pluralist, and we should be more pluralist. Some outlets are propagandist. But many are not. Some are repulsively contrarian, and just say the opposite, but some are balanced and some are just weird and have their own theories.
> 
> Contrast that to Russia though, where you can be arrested and jailed for "misinformation" about the "special military operation".
> 
> We know with certainty that western reporting is unreliable. We know they are taking stories from the Ukrainian government and security services. However, we also know that they are able to report something else if they want to. In many of these situations, the only sources are those official ones with an obvious vested interest. At least such information can be evaluated through that lens.
> 
> We also know with certainty that Russian reporting is unreliable, but we also know that reporters are not legally able to give different points of view. We also know that their sources are all entirely Russian military. When we observe from the outside and see that reporters have not been arrested, we can be certain that they are repeating what they are told to. It doesn't matter whether reporters are critically analysing or not, because they will get the dreaded knock on the door at 2am if they don't do what they are told.
> 
> If you have two people in front of you, both who have a long history of lies, do you trust the one who has an FSB officer stood behind him with a pistol?
> 
> Of course not. The correct answer is to trust neither.
> 
> We still need to pay attention to whatever reporting we can get, because we all want to know what is going on. But everything should be weighted appropriately, based on its source.
> 
> And, bluntly, sometimes when someone says they were defending themselves, they actually are. The idea that Ukraine was ever going to invade Russia is laughable. And it is a lot harder to say that you're defending yourself when you are launching attacks on Kiev.
> 
> Livy said that Rome conquered the world in self-defense. Roman law didn't allow for wars of aggression. So every conquest was framed as unruly barbarians on their borders, likely in the pay of Romes enemies. So the legions marched on and on. This has always been how wars of conquest were conducted.
> 
> The Peloponnesian war was fought not over any matter of import, but over Spartas fear that Athens would one day be powerful enough to challenge them. Self-defense, you see? Alexander the Great invaded and conquered the Persian empire to free the Greek cities that had been taken before. Self-defense of his fellow countrymen.
> 
> But no-one conquers in self-defense. They do fight heroic last stands in self-defense though.
> 
> If you had to say which side in this conflict was more like Sparta or Rome or Macedonia, which would it be?


I was not really trying to imply that all sources should(n't) be accepted as propaganda, but was rather mocking the fact that every source I bring up is immediately waved aside as propaganda as I've been branded the local KGB Apparatchik. The source I brought up is a non-partisan freelance journalist with a contrarian opinion, and this latter bit is enough for it to be branded "propaganda" (hence the bias bit).

That aside I don't think the West is as neutral as portrayed. We indeed don't have the "physical" silencing methods that Russia makes use of, but I'll be damned if we don't do practically the same thing by ostracising people & companies socially through "economic sanctions" and the cancel culture approach. In the end the goals & aim are the same, it's only the methods which differ and somehow give us the illusion of being more civilised.

And while this conflict might have been presented formally as a "denazification" & defence, the intent behind it was always clear. Preservation of the circle of influence (Lugansk/Donbass) & retaliation for 'disobeyance'. While Ukraine might come forward presenting itself as an independent nation, it has always been governed/puppeteerd by either Russia or the West. Funnily enough, the current sitting president actually even did a comedy sketch about it once: see here. I personally think Zelenskyy got baited pretty hard into escalating this conflict by not turning down the NATO invitation, but each to his own. 




bostjan said:


> You know that the Uno Reverse Card doesn't work in real life, right?
> 
> The reports are that they were shot by Russian forces as they approached a Russian checkpoint. The reports could be wrong, but, what is your evidence to the contrary? Is Russia even denying this?! No, they are not denying it. You are just being arbitrarily contrary.


Your takes are getting worse as the thread progresses here, because It's funny that you mention I'm being arbitrarily contrary as your bias is just shining through in the few words you've mentioned here. You speak of "Russian forces" and a "approached a Russian checkpoint" while at no single point in the reporters declaration did he even mention "Russian" at all. You basically took the story the media ran with and you assumed it for truth. Don't you think the reporter would've been a lot more explicit about the assault if they knew it we're Russian forces. 

And once again aside from that, you can look at the official reports and you will see they were nowhere close the frontline (removed about 2KM, as there is no Russian checkpoint there AFAIK) and they barely left the UKR checkpoint. The only reports of Russian troops came from the police chief there who would probably lose a lot of influence had he mentioned: "Our patrols made a mistake and mistook the vehicle for enemy forces". 

This is the same thing as the tank in the Kiev city center discussion we had before. There is no concrete way to prove that these weren't some covert Russian troops lurking in shadows at UKR checkpoints opening fire indiscriminately on whatever leaves the gate there, but from an objective standpoint the odds sure aren't stacked in your favor so run with whichever story you need to cope.




StevenC said:


> I miss the good old days when we only had to deal with mbardu's walls of text. I am truly sorry buddy. You don't know what you've got until it gets replaced by much worse people.





Cyanide_Anima said:


> For real. Trying to address a wall of Sophistry is exhausting when that person doesn't care what the truth is and will simply just reply with garbage like "what is the truth? How can we even know what truth is? What even IS mom's spaghetti?"





Xaios said:


> \
> 
> Exactly. "If you wish to refute my bad-faith arguments, you must first invent the universe."





nightflameauto said:


> No, no. "If you wish to refute my bad-faith arguments, you must first re-invent the universe with a completely arbitrary set of laws and rules based only on your own imagination, and not adhering to any known form of reality."


Guys, if reading is too tiring, there are more than enough channels who can provide you with whichever bitesize confirmation bias you need. But considering you already seem to be convinced of "knowing the truth", you probably consoooooom your daily portions of propaganda more than regularly.


----------



## ItWillDo

BMFan30 said:


> lmfao a lot of Russian generals are dying on Ukrainian soil... The narrative that Russia is winning is something that comes from RU sites. lmfao! Have you soiled yourself yet? Even Russian generals have admitted that things aren't going according to plan but you won't hear that coming from the smelly mouth of Putin. lmfao!


You mean guys like Magomed Tushayev who has been reported dead 4-5 times now? Easy to think it's a lot when you count the same people dying over and over.


Mariupol is falling within this week from the siege, Kiev will be following shortly and once those 2 have been taken care of the rest of the country is peanuts. So I suggest we reevaluate soon?


----------



## narad

ItWillDo said:


> but I'll be damned if we don't do practically the same thing by ostracising people & companies socially through "economic sanctions" and the cancel culture approach. In the end the goals & aim are the same, it's only the methods which differ and somehow give us the illusion of being more civilised.



True. When I wanted control of Ukraine the first thing I did was dig through their old tweets looking for a racial slur.


----------



## ItWillDo

narad said:


> True. When I wanted control of Ukraine the first thing I did was dig through their old tweets looking for a racial slur.


Cute, thanks for trying.


----------



## LostTheTone

AMOS said:


> They're still effective at carpet bombing as well as laser/GPS guided weapons, as long as there's no aerial threats



You really don't understand just how big an invasion is, or how big Ukraine is, do you?

Ukraine is the size of Texas, about the size of Poland and Germany put together. It is not quite as large as countries that count huge tracts of wasteland in their land space (like Canada or Russia) but it is a significantly sized nation. The Russian army is spread across thousands of miles of countryside. And it has the Russian Air Force covering thousands of miles of airspace, as well as ground based anti air.

Air power is... Good. But it's not a war winner, not in one day, and not in one month. The NATO plan following a Russian invasion was that air power and a defense led by professional, high quality ground forces would stall the attack long enough for the US based REFORGER units to arrive and equal out the numbers. Air power matters, and it would inflict more losses on the Russians, but it would not win the war over night, not even in a month.

And, of course, flying directly to Ukrainian aid means that the third world war is already starting. And we can't even knock out the whole Russian army in one go either. But even if we could their response would be nuclear at that point. That is their doctrine. If their army seems to be defeated, that is a clear threat to the homeland and nuclear weapons should be used because they are the only ones at hand that can blunt that attack.

A much, MUCH better idea is to give the Ukrainians as many drones as we can get to them. A drone with a cluster of hellfires is a formidable and useful weapon. It also does not start a world war. They can then deploy them wherever needed, and keep inflicting casualties on the Russians.

An interesting point to note though is that the Ukrainians have largely been using drones for recon, not for strike. They have used artillery and ATGMs to hit Russians, not airborne missiles. That keeps the drones safe (because it doesn't advertise their presence) and vastly increases the lethality of their other conventional forces. These guys aren't idiots.


----------



## ItWillDo

LostTheTone said:


> You really don't understand just how big an invasion is, or how big Ukraine is, do you?
> 
> Ukraine is the size of Texas, about the size of Poland and Germany put together. It is not quite as large as countries that count huge tracts of wasteland in their land space (like Canada or Russia) but it is a significantly sized nation. The Russian army is spread across thousands of miles of countryside. And it has the Russian Air Force covering thousands of miles of airspace, as well as ground based anti air.
> 
> Air power is... Good. But it's not a war winner, not in one day, and not in one month. The NATO plan following a Russian invasion was that air power and a defense led by professional, high quality ground forces would stall the attack long enough for the US based REFORGER units to arrive and equal out the numbers. Air power matters, and it would inflict more losses on the Russians, but it would not win the war over night, not even in a month.
> 
> And, of course, flying directly to Ukrainian aid means that the third world war is already starting. And we can't even knock out the whole Russian army in one go either. But even if we could their response would be nuclear at that point. That is their doctrine. If their army seems to be defeated, that is a clear threat to the homeland and nuclear weapons should be used because they are the only ones at hand that can blunt that attack.
> 
> A much, MUCH better idea is to give the Ukrainians as many drones as we can get to them. A drone with a cluster of hellfires is a formidable and useful weapon. It also does not start a world war. They can then deploy them wherever needed, and keep inflicting casualties on the Russians.
> 
> An interesting point to note though is that the Ukrainians have largely been using drones for recon, not for strike. They have used artillery and ATGMs to hit Russians, not airborne missiles. That keeps the drones safe (because it doesn't advertise their presence) and vastly increases the lethality of their other conventional forces. These guys aren't idiots.


No bro please bro listen bro, we just deploy these 50 year old meme airplanes because you see the news said the whole army is actually just one long 50 mile convoy so we can probably just use 3 A-10's to end the war! Disregard the S400 system which would probably take all of these out 200KM before they even reach target, but it's worth a try right bro?


----------



## nightflameauto

This story seems to be everywhere, so choose your own site to look it up if the site I post isn't in your particular influence-sphere:


https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/03/who-is-maria-ovsyannikova-protester-on-russian-tv-news.html


----------



## bostjan

ItWillDo said:


> Your takes are getting worse as the thread progresses here, because It's funny that you mention I'm being arbitrarily contrary as your bias is just shining through in the few words you've mentioned here. You speak of "Russian forces" and a "approached a Russian checkpoint" while at no single point in the reporters declaration did he even mention "Russian" at all. You basically took the story the media ran with and you assumed it for truth. Don't you think the reporter would've been a lot more explicit about the assault if they knew it we're Russian forces.
> 
> And once again aside from that, you can look at the official reports and you will see they were nowhere close the frontline (removed about 2KM, as there is no Russian checkpoint there AFAIK) and they barely left the UKR checkpoint. The only reports of Russian troops came from the police chief there who would probably lose a lot of influence had he mentioned: "Our patrols made a mistake and mistook the vehicle for enemy forces".
> 
> This is the same thing as the tank in the Kiev city center discussion we had before. There is no concrete way to prove that these weren't some covert Russian troops lurking in shadows at UKR checkpoints opening fire indiscriminately on whatever leaves the gate there, but from an objective standpoint the odds sure aren't stacked in your favor so run with whichever story you need to cope


Maybe you're right. But at this point in time, there is inconclusive evidence and it all points the other way from what you are saying.

But let's not mince words here. You aren't saying "hey, maybe you guys are wrong because the evidence is not very conclusive," you are saying "your reality is dissonant with the real one," based off of, what, lack of solid evidence?

I mean, maybe you are not a person, but instead a Russian bot posting from an AI algorithm installed by Russian hackers. You can't prove that you're not a bot, so you *must* be a bot, right?


----------



## ArtDecade

ItWillDo said:


> We indeed don't have the "physical" silencing methods that Russia makes use of, but I'll be damned if we don't do practically the same thing by ostracising people & companies socially through "economic sanctions" and the cancel culture approach.



Can you imagine typing that while thinking they are remotely the same thing? 

Hey @ItWillDo - people in this thread have actually been way too polite to you. You are a bottom feeding fascist and I hope a Ukrainian that knows you in real life introduces your jaw to a curb.


----------



## Adieu

What is this, #CancelCultureIsGenocide ??

Rise up, you butthurt masses? Nationalize McDonalds Mr. Putin?


----------



## ItWillDo

bostjan said:


> Maybe you're right. But at this point in time, there is inconclusive evidence and it all points the other way from what you are saying.
> 
> But let's not mince words here. You aren't saying "hey, maybe you guys are wrong because the evidence is not very conclusive," you are saying "your reality is dissonant with the real one," based off of, what, lack of solid evidence?
> 
> I mean, maybe you are not a person, but instead a Russian bot posting from an AI algorithm installed by Russian hackers. You can't prove that you're not a bot, so you *must* be a bot, right?


Well no, the whole point of my prior argument was to point out that it's absolutely not the case that "it all points the other way from what you are saying". There is just as much, if not more, reason that the story aligns more with this being a botched UKR operation than an actual Russian offence. My arguments being all the prior ones I stated, including a full assembled article by a neutral third-party journalist, and yours mostly based on mainstream news outlets. But alas, we can keep turning in circles about this.



ArtDecade said:


> Can you imagine typing that while thinking they are remotely the same thing?
> 
> Hey @ItWillDo - people in this thread have actually been way too polite to you. You are a bottom feeding fascist and I hope a Ukrainian that knows you in real life introduces your jaw to a curb.








Stay mad


----------



## narad

bostjan said:


> I mean, maybe you are not a person, but instead a Russian bot posting from an AI algorithm installed by Russian hackers. You can't prove that you're not a bot, so you *must* be a bot, right?


A bot would probably be pro-A-10 though, based on the general consensus of the internet. He's like some bot trained on teenager Call of Duty group chat.


----------



## ArtDecade

ItWillDo said:


> Stay mad



I'm not mad. I would be enjoying watching you get hurt. I'd share a giggle with the rest of the forum.


----------



## StevenC

Imagine being deluded enough to equate cancel culture with disappearing dissenters. Or thinking it's some tool being wielded by an establishment.


----------



## oversteve

nightflameauto said:


> This story seems to be everywhere, so choose your own site to look it up if the site I post isn't in your particular influence-sphere:
> 
> 
> https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/03/who-is-maria-ovsyannikova-protester-on-russian-tv-news.html


Take this story with the grain of salt. It looks more like a setup to make people abroad pitty 'other' russians and blame it all on Putin and do not further impose sanctions that hurt 'common people in Russia'. 

According to the people working at russian tv industry all broadcasts of russian channels managed by government are either pre-recorded or transmitted with some delay exactly to prevent stuff like this happening and there's plenty of security to prevent that. So basically it can't be broadcasted without the consent of authorities. The heroine's social media pages have plenty of that support Z stuff. Newsreader not batting an eye at someone jumping and screaming behind her. Also those 'proofs' of tv broadcast recorded with a phone look pretty strange - recording your average news program without knowing something is going to happen?


----------



## nightflameauto

oversteve said:


> Take this story with the grain of salt. It looks more like a setup to make people abroad pitty 'other' russians and blame it all on Putin and do not further impose sanctions that hurt 'common people in Russia'.
> 
> According to the people working at russian tv industry all broadcasts of russian channels managed by government are either pre-recorded or transmitted with some delay exactly to prevent stuff like this happening and there's plenty of security to prevent that. So basically it can't be broadcasted without the consent of authorities. The heroine's social media pages have plenty of that support Z stuff. Newsreader not batting an eye at someone jumping and screaming behind her. Also those 'proofs' of tv broadcast recorded with a phone look pretty strange - recording your average news program without knowing something is going to happen?


I wouldn't put it past some media mogul to stage something like this for the pity views alone. I just thought it was an interesting aside from the main "shit is ugly" story we've been getting.


----------



## jaxadam

ArtDecade said:


> I'm not mad. I would be enjoying watching you get hurt. I'd share a giggle with the rest of the forum.





ArtDecade said:


> How does Trump taste? Are your lips orange afterward?





ArtDecade said:


> You are a bottom feeding fascist and I hope a Ukrainian that knows you in real life introduces your jaw to a curb.



You can take the ArtDecade out of Jacksonville, but you can't take the Jacksonville out of ArtDecade.


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> Take this story with the grain of salt. It looks more like a setup to make people abroad pitty 'other' russians and blame it all on Putin and do not further impose sanctions that hurt 'common people in Russia'.
> 
> According to the people working at russian tv industry all broadcasts of russian channels managed by government are either pre-recorded or transmitted with some delay exactly to prevent stuff like this happening and there's plenty of security to prevent that. So basically it can't be broadcasted without the consent of authorities. The heroine's social media pages have plenty of that support Z stuff. Newsreader not batting an eye at someone jumping and screaming behind her. Also those 'proofs' of tv broadcast recorded with a phone look pretty strange - recording your average news program without knowing something is going to happen?



Who knows. Never underestimate both Russian state deviousness AND state incompetence.

That newscaster is supposedly Putler's fave watch. Maybe she gets to forgo inconveniences like pre-censoring and it's legit.

Or...maybe they'll "find" some Ukrainian accounts and a conspiracy and make a show of giving her (and a bunch of unrelated political nuisances, perhaps Yashin or some stray free Navalny supporter) 15-30 years hard labor, then she changes her hair starts wearing glasses and retires to Sochi, while Yashin or whoever dies in a labor camp and everybody else "gets the message"

PS or maybe she just THINKS she's gonna be changing her hair and living in Sochi. Because fascists gonna fascist.


----------



## Adieu

Also, the whole "this is TOO suspicious" thing might be a last-ditch hail mary from the Kremlin Troll Farms...


----------



## ArtDecade

jaxadam said:


> You can take the ArtDecade out of Jacksonville, but you can't take the Jacksonville out of ArtDecade.



I went to school in Jax, but I am from Philly - the city with the biggest FU energy on the planet. So, it is like a double dose.


----------



## Cyanide_Anima

All these quasi-fascists have is the whining about cancel culture and imaginary communists. They do not care about policy. It's all Sophistry, gaslighting, and general denialism. Pathetic. You know what they say about playing chess with a pigeon, right?


----------



## Choop

Cyanide_Anima said:


> All these quasi-fascists have is the whining about cancel culture and imaginary communists. They do not care about policy. It's all Sophistry, gaslighting, and general denialism. Pathetic. You know what they say about playing chess with a pigeon, right?



Is that playing against a pigeon...or using a pigeon as one of the playing pieces?


----------



## ArtDecade

Choop said:


> Is that playing against a pigeon...or using a pigeon as one of the playing pieces?



Arguing with a fool is like playing chess with a pigeon: no matter how good you are, the bird is going to knock over the pieces, shit all over the board, and strut around like it won.


----------



## bostjan

ArtDecade said:


> I went to school in Jax, but I am from Philly - the city with the biggest FU energy on the planet. So, it is like a double dose.


True story, I was walking around Philly one fine day, and a city bus jumped the curb and the front of the bus ploughed right into my person at about 10 mph (16 km/hr). I dropped my bag, and the bus driver opened her bus door and shouted "Why you wanna get hit by my bus?"  Gotta be just about the most Philly thing, aside from getting sent to the back of the line at the lunch counter for not vocalizing your order in 10 seconds or less.


----------



## StevenC

bostjan said:


> True story, I was walking around Philly one fine day, and a city bus jumped the curb and the front of the bus ploughed right into my person at about 10 mph (16 km/hr). I dropped my bag, and the bus driver opened her bus door and shouted "Why you wanna get hit by my bus?"  Gotta be just about the most Philly thing, aside from getting sent to the back of the line at the lunch counter for not vocalizing your order in 10 seconds or less.


This really contextualises the battery throwing


----------



## ArtDecade

StevenC said:


> This really contextualises the battery throwing


This maniac speed freak is one of our mascots. A couple years ago, Gritty was sued for hitting a 13 year old. Philly is the city of brotherly love.


----------



## bostjan

Putin just passed sanctions on a bunch of US government officials, including Hilary Clinton. I'm a little puzzled at her inclusion, but I bet the QAnon people are going to be all over this.

Anyone else hear that another American journalist was killed?



StevenC said:


> This really contextualises the battery throwing



Guess I'm lucky I was never pelted with D cells.


----------



## StevenC

ArtDecade said:


> This maniac speed freak is one of our mascots. A couple years ago, Gritty was sued for hitting a 13 year old. Philly is the city of brotherly love.


I will always appreciate Philadelphia for bullying Ben Simmons


----------



## ArtDecade

StevenC said:


> I will always appreciate Philadelphia for bullying Ben Simmons



We take grit over talent. Simmons has the talent, but didn't put in the work. He is a clown.


----------



## Drew

bostjan said:


> Putin just passed sanctions on a bunch of US government officials, including Hilary Clinton. I'm a little puzzled at her inclusion, but I bet the QAnon people are going to be all over this.
> 
> Anyone else hear that another American journalist was killed?
> 
> 
> 
> Guess I'm lucky I was never pelted with D cells.


I mean, I think one of the unavoidable takeaways of 2016 was that Russia had finally begun to understand a bit more about how American politics worked, and was getting a little more politically savvy with their propaganda. I think this is a perfect example - it's possible this is as simple as Putin simply never liked Clinton, and at a minimum that's probably an added benefit... but I'd bet you a burrito that this was also a very conscious move by Putin because he knew that it would trigger all sorts of alarm bells on the American alt-right.


----------



## ArtDecade

Drew said:


> I mean, I think one of the unavoidable takeaways of 2016 was that Russia had finally begun to understand a bit more about how American politics worked, and was getting a little more politically savvy with their propaganda. I think this is a perfect example - it's possible this is as simple as Putin simply never liked Clinton, and at a minimum that's probably an added benefit... but I'd bet you a burrito that this was also a very conscious move by Putin because he knew that it would trigger all sorts of alarm bells on the American alt-right.



The alt-right gets triggered by Starbucks coffee cups, bumper stickers, and windmills. And the fact that Clinton got put on the list and Trump did not speaks clearly for the rest of the US.


----------



## profwoot

Another example of Russia outsourcing its efforts to the American right.

Turns out the biolabs fever dream started in the antivax/Qanon community, went up the (now very short) loony chain between them and Fox News, and only then got picked up by Russia as the new excuse for the war. Putin had been casting about for a new story since the initial "Zelensky is a secret nazi" thing didn't fool anybody. So props to the Republicans -- sometimes they don't parrot Russian propaganda; they create it for them.


----------



## oversteve

nightflameauto said:


> I wouldn't put it past some media mogul to stage something like this for the pity views alone. I just thought it was an interesting aside from the main "shit is ugly" story we've been getting.


Well, it's not only for the pity, more like an attempt to influence the mind of people abroad that the average Russian is a victim and has nothing to do with this war (though he has not giving a shit about Putin's rule for 20+ years or even supporting it). Also before the invasion lots of people here in Ukraine treated Russian people more or less positively especially in those regions in the eastern part where the majority of destruction is happening now and also in the southern part. But after the invasion started all that support went downhill and this might be one more attempt to lure our people into believing that it is only Putin to blame...


----------



## spudmunkey

Chilling: (the one that is visible here is 1 of 5, so it does continue)


----------



## Randy

Ah, close enough I guess.


----------



## bostjan

Slovenian Trump, Polish Pseudo-Trump, and the Czech guy I don't know that much about... nice? :/


Randy said:


> Ah, close enough I guess.
> View attachment 104762


With the number of foreign journalists getting attacked lately, I guess it's a bold move for those three "EU" PMs. But maybe Janša is looking forward to working this into his illegal arms-trafficking side-gig?


----------



## 4Eyes

Randy said:


> Ah, close enough I guess.
> View attachment 104762


they mixed two events, Biden is about to join EU leaders on Thursday. There were just three prime ministers who went to Kyiv to show support, today.


----------



## Randy

bostjan said:


> But maybe Janša is looking forward to working this into his illegal arms-trafficking side-gig?



In fairness, there's some blurred lines right now between arms-trafficking below board and arms-trafficking above board.



4Eyes said:


> they mixed two events, Biden is about to join EU leaders on Thursday. There were just three prime ministers who went to Kyiv to show support, today.



I got that, I just meant that it was a bad look considering how much Biden has been accused of being "weak" in his position toward Russia in this conflict and how lukewarm the US approach has been to this ("we can't give you the planes, that'll mean WAR!") versus these dudes (corrupt or not) taking the train into Kyiv while it's being actively shot at. The juxtaposition isn't great optics.


----------



## bostjan

Randy said:


> In fairness, there's some blurred lines right now between arms-trafficking below board and arms-trafficking above board.
> 
> 
> 
> I got that, I just meant that it was a bad look considering how much Biden has been accused of being "weak" in his position toward Russia in this conflict and how lukewarm the US approach has been to this ("we can't give you the planes, that'll mean WAR!") versus these dudes (corrupt or not) taking the train into Kyiv while it's being actively shot at. The juxtaposition isn't great optics.


I was referring to some old news: https://euobserver.com/foreign/114482 (The Slovenian PM is Janez Janša)


> By the spring of 1994, the president of the Russian Liberal-Democratic party Vladimir Zhirinovsky visited Slovenia and demanded payment for shipment of Russian gas masks totaling $9 million from the then defence minister Janez Jansa, who was in charge of arms smuggling in his country.





> In February 1995, Slovene authorities charged Dafermos, along with Slovenia's Jansa and Interior Minister Igor Bavcar, with the illegal shipment of 13,000 assault rifles and ammunition during the war in Croatia.





> Slovenia's former and likely future prime minister, Jansa, is currently facing trial for bribery in an arms deal worth $364 million and Bavcar, the former interior minister, faces charges of money laundering.



The guy has been caught with his hand in the Yugoslavian Army's (and Slovenian Army's) cookie jar a few times. The authorities just keep putting off the trial and he just keeps popping up as PM as if there's nothing to see here... anyway, I don't want to make this thread about Slovenia...


----------



## AMOS

profwoot said:


> Another example of Russia outsourcing its efforts to the American right.
> 
> Turns out the biolabs fever dream started in the antivax/Qanon community, went up the (now very short) loony chain between them and Fox News, and only then got picked up by Russia as the new excuse for the war. Putin had been casting about for a new story since the initial "Zelensky is a secret nazi" thing didn't fool anybody. So props to the Republicans -- sometimes they don't parrot Russian propaganda; they create it for them.


The Tucker Carlson supporters on my facebook page are all like "just wait and see, he's 100% spot on!" My take on this is just show me the freakin facts! Everyone has bio labs, but it requires physical proof before accusing someone of bio weapons programs, or that there are "secret bio labs" in Ukraine funded by the US Govt. But in any case it's going to be fun tonight watching Carlson trying to back peddle away from what he said.


----------



## bostjan

AMOS said:


> The Tucker Carlson supporters on my facebook page are all like "just wait and see, he's 100% spot on!" My take on this is just show me the freakin facts! Everyone has bio labs, but it requires physical proof before accusing someone of bio weapons programs, or that there are "secret bio labs" in Ukraine funded by the US Govt. But in any case it's going to be fun tonight watching Carlson trying to back peddle away from what he said.


If I were an evil US bioweapon developer, I would definitely want my evil bioweapon development lab to be in Ukraine or China, since those places have so little chance of something going horribly wrong and the governments there definitely don't tend to stick their noses into stuff. /sarcasm

We've definitely moved on to the post-use-your-brain era in politics.

But you can't disprove these whacko conspiracy theories, especially not in practice, since the people who come up with them will just bury illogical contradictions with more weird conspiracies until it's just conspiracies all the way down.


----------



## Randy

AMOS said:


> Everyone has bio labs


That's my synopsis as well. With the last two years behind us, I think its safe to say they're everywhere nobody fuckin knows what they're doing in them.  But that's an issue for another day, I think.


----------



## Randy

bostjan said:


> I don't want to make this thread about Slovenia...


Too late, this thread is officially about Slovenia.


----------



## Xaios

Randy said:


> Too late, this thread is officially about Slovenia.


IS THAT ONE OF THEM VULCAN STATES OL BOY DONNY WAS TALKIN 'BOUT!?


----------



## nightflameauto

AMOS said:


> The Tucker Carlson supporters on my facebook page are all like "just wait and see, he's 100% spot on!" My take on this is just show me the freakin facts! Everyone has bio labs, but it requires physical proof before accusing someone of bio weapons programs, or that there are "secret bio labs" in Ukraine funded by the US Govt. But in any case it's going to be fun tonight watching Carlson trying to back peddle away from what he said.


Has that creature of darkness ever back-peddled? He usually either sticks to his guns, or just utterly ignores whatever comments he's made that have been proven slapstick level stupid and moves on to his next conspiracy theory.


----------



## Cyanide_Anima

nightflameauto said:


> Has that creature of darkness ever back-peddled? He usually either sticks to his guns, or just utterly ignores whatever comments he's made that have been proven slapstick level stupid and moves on to his next conspiracy theory.


That's what makes Tucker a great American! He soldiers ever forward. Never admitting to any mistakes. No compromise. No surrender. Never worrying about accuracy. Just shoot in the dark and draw a bullseye around whatever bullet holes you find.


----------



## AMOS

nightflameauto said:


> Has that creature of darkness ever back-peddled? He usually either sticks to his guns, or just utterly ignores whatever comments he's made that have been proven slapstick level stupid and moves on to his next conspiracy theory.


He admitted in one video that he was behind Russia, I think Hannity is thinking "hmmm my show is gonna be #1 again once he's gone"


----------



## 4Eyes

Randy said:


> I got that, I just meant that it was a bad look considering how much Biden has been accused of being "weak" in his position toward Russia in this conflict and how lukewarm the US approach has been to this ("we can't give you the planes, that'll mean WAR!") versus these dudes (corrupt or not) taking the train into Kyiv while it's being actively shot at. The juxtaposition isn't great optics.


well, our prime minister was invited, too. he decided to not to go because of safety reasons (how that looks like?). on the other hand - not sure which planes you mean, only soviet era jets in EU were considered, and I only caught Ploand, who offered their MIGs to USA, so they can provide them to Ukraine - like wtf? we want to give them jets...but let someone else hand them over, because later, when even bigger shitstorm start, we can point at bad, bad U S and A... I didn't get what was the point. Obviously US denied that.


----------



## Randy

4Eyes said:


> well, our prime minister was invited, too. he decided to not to go because of safety reasons (how that looks like?). on the other hand - not sure which planes you mean, only soviet era jets in EU were considered, and I only caught Ploand, who offered their MIGs to USA, so they can provide them to Ukraine - like wtf? we want to give them jets...but let someone else hand them over, because later, when even bigger shitstorm start, we can point at bad, bad U S and A... I didn't get what was the point. Obviously US denied that.


It was a terrible offer but keep in mind Poland is the next country over and within missile range of the guys invading next door, versus the US that's on the other side of the world. Someone had a responsibility to make that deal work especially because inevitably 1.) The planes will get there 2.) The West will get dragged into this whether it happens or not. It's just a matter of how many overmatched Ukrainian soldiers and civilians die before we get there. I think the level of commitment has been shameful tbh.


----------



## AMOS

4Eyes said:


> well, our prime minister was invited, too. he decided to not to go because of safety reasons (how that looks like?). on the other hand - not sure which planes you mean, only soviet era jets in EU were considered, and I only caught Ploand, who offered their MIGs to USA, so they can provide them to Ukraine - like wtf? we want to give them jets...but let someone else hand them over, because later, when even bigger shitstorm start, we can point at bad, bad U S and A... I didn't get what was the point. Obviously US denied that.


I think Poland should have given them directly to Ukraine, they're already providing weapons so what's the big deal? Involving the U.S. is just asking for red tape to get in the way. This is like that scene in Braveheart "here you do it, I'll hold him down"


----------



## Adieu

Poland JUST wanted to force NATO bigwigs to re-affirm that they're in and won't throw them under the bus if pressed

...the response was NOT reassuring


----------



## narad




----------



## fantom

ItWillDo said:


> There is just as much, if not more, reason that the story aligns more with this being a botched UKR operation than an actual Russian offence.


So a Ukraine military operation somehow ended up with the majority of the Russian cold war arsenal and a shitload of conscripts inside Ukraine destroying Ukrainian cities. And not a single Russian city or Belarusian city has seen Ukrainian presence.

So Ukraine just invited the Russian military for a training exercise and forgot the safe word? Well shit, someone please go tell them the safe word so the Russian army stops leveling cities.


----------



## ItWillDo

fantom said:


> So a Ukraine military operation somehow ended up with the majority of the Russian cold war arsenal and a shitload of conscripts inside Ukraine destroying Ukrainian cities. And not a single Russian city or Belarusian city has seen Ukrainian presence.
> 
> So Ukraine just invited the Russian military for a training exercise and forgot the safe word? Well shit, someone please go tell them the safe word so the Russian army stops leveling cities.


That remark was not about the general conflict, it was about the shooting of the reporter. The general conflict itself is an embarrassing display of diplomacy and lack of foresight from Zelenskyy. As mentioned in the very beginning of the conflict, no one will have gained anything from this and the unnecessary loss of lives is tragic.


----------



## narad

ItWillDo said:


> That remark was not about the general conflict, it was about the shooting of the reporter. The general conflict itself is an embarrassing display of diplomacy and lack of foresight from Zelenskyy. As mentioned in the very beginning of the conflict, no one will have gained anything from this and the unnecessary loss of lives is tragic.



The US revolution was a terrible failure of diplomacy on the part of the founding fathers, who cost thousands of lives over something as petty as a lack of colonial representation in government matters and some extra costs on shitty beverages. George Washington -- D+ leader president. King George was really clear on what would happen. Tragic.


----------



## Adieu

narad said:


> The US revolution was a terrible failure of diplomacy on the part of the founding fathers, who cost thousands of lives over something as petty as a lack of colonial representation in government matters and some extra costs on shitty beverages. George Washington -- D+ leader president. King George was really clear on what would happen. Tragic.



You're inadvertently playing into Russian propaganda's favor by missing a key difference

Ukraine is a recognized independent country and legally INCAPABLE of rebelling against Russia. Whatever the hell it chooses to do within its borders is NONE of Russia's business.


----------



## ItWillDo

narad said:


> The US revolution was a terrible failure of diplomacy on the part of the founding fathers, who cost thousands of lives over something as petty as a lack of colonial representation in government matters and some extra costs on shitty beverages. George Washington -- D+ leader president. King George was really clear on what would happen. Tragic.


While it's a completely different type of conflict & geopolitical situation, an interesting little tidbit is that the Russian empire came to the aid of both George & ol' Abe respectively:








How Russian meddling impacted the American Revolution


Foreign help was critical to the success of the American Revolution. Many people know about the important roles played by France and Spain. But less well-known is the indirect help the US got from Russia. On this July 4, we explore how Russia accidentally helped the American fight for independence.




theworld.org













Is it true that Russia supported the USA during the American Civil War? If so, what form did that support take, and did it have any pract...


Answer (1 of 2): Ut is nice to read two sides of an argument and find both are correct. The Russians did nothing directly to help the US, but at the same time were willing to do so if the US was attacked. Thus the patrols of the US East Coast and the Russian ship in San Francisco willing to defen...




www.quora.com


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> You're inadvertently playing into Russian propaganda's favor by missing a key difference
> 
> Ukraine is a recognized independent country and legally INCAPABLE of rebelling against Russia. Whatever the hell it chooses to do within its borders is NONE of Russia's business.



I suspect that @narad was just being snarky, but the cause they are fighting for is actually more similar than you think. 

Just as the colonists in 1776 had an (implicit) right to self-determination, so do the Ukrainians today. One was trying to create that self-rule, the other trying to defend that existing self-rule. But the cause is the same one. 

We shouldn't get lost in the details here. There are legal technicalities of being an existing free state vs a semi-autonomous satellite, but once the shooting starts they aren't important really.


----------



## Adieu

Still, let's not feed into Russia's "policing radicals in a rebellious province" bullshit narative


----------



## LostTheTone

ItWillDo said:


> While it's a completely different type of conflict & geopolitical situation, an interesting little tidbit is that the Russian empire came to the aid of both George & ol' Abe respectively:



"Came to the aid" is completely misleading.

Everyone who supported the American revolution against Britain did so for their own interests. Those that disliked Britain the most (ie, the French) sent the most help. 

And in the Civil War, literally everyone supported the North. The South's big hope to win the war was to gain support from a European nation, specifically Britain or France. But Britain fucking hated slavery and had been fighting against it for like 50 years (*rule Britannia intensifies*) and in any case, Southern goods like cotton and tobacco were competing with British sources of those goods. The French did consider supporting the South, but they knew a loser when they saw one, and didn't want to piss off the British or the North. 

The Russian empire was a land empire - It had no meaningful way to influence anything in the Americas.


----------



## ItWillDo

LostTheTone said:


> "Came to the aid" is completely misleading.
> 
> Everyone who supported the American revolution against Britain did so for their own interests. Those that disliked Britain the most (ie, the French) sent the most help.


Generally speaking, isn't any form of governmental/political/military aid derived from a self-interest? I don't think any of those acts is done from a feeling of selflessness. 


> And in the Civil War, literally everyone supported the North. The South's big hope to win the war was to gain support from a European nation, specifically Britain or France. But Britain fucking hated slavery and had been fighting against it for like 50 years (*rule Britannia intensifies*) and in any case, Southern goods like cotton and tobacco were competing with British sources of those goods. The French did consider supporting the South, but they knew a loser when they saw one, and didn't want to piss off the British or the North.
> 
> The Russian empire was a land empire - It had no meaningful way to influence anything in the Americas.


It wasn't much indeed but in the Civil war but they did send a small naval fleet to defend key ports for the North. But anyway, it wasn't my intention to start a spin-off session on Russo-American history.


----------



## narad

Adieu said:


> You're inadvertently playing into Russian propaganda's favor by missing a key difference
> 
> Ukraine is a recognized independent country and legally INCAPABLE of rebelling against Russia. Whatever the hell it chooses to do within its borders is NONE of Russia's business.


Ha, could we stop accusing each other of playing into Russia's propaganda? There's like literally not a claim Russia has made that I'm on board with, and I imagine that's true for most of us here (who aren't being paid by Russia).

You're right it's even more ridiculous to blame this one on Ukraine, acting like they had it coming when they're their own country and free to make these decisions without threat of being invaded if it's perceived as the "wrong" one. But that's also exactly what I'm saying.


----------



## Adieu

narad said:


> Ha, could we stop accusing each other of playing into Russia's propaganda? There's like literally not a claim Russia has made that I'm on board with, and I imagine that's true for most of us here (who aren't being paid by Russia).
> 
> You're right it's even more ridiculous to blame this one on Ukraine, acting like they had it coming when they're their own country and free to make these decisions without threat of being invaded if it's perceived as the "wrong" one. But that's also exactly what I'm saying.



Then don't compare them to slave-owning provincial oligarch elites who raise rebellions to avoid taxation and glorify themselves

Their cause is FAR more honorable and morally right than the dudes on our currency

So much so that it's downright offensive to compare the Ukrainian people's defense of their homes to that Washington dick's quest to redistribute power and money from one clique of rich white male elites to another


----------



## narad

Adieu said:


> Then don't compare them to slave-owning provincial oligarch elites who raise rebellions to avoid taxation and glorify themselves
> 
> Their cause is FAR more honorable and morally right than the dudes on our currency
> 
> So much so that it's downright offensive to compare the Ukrainian people's defense of their homes to that Washington dick's quest to redistribute power and money from one clique of rich white male elites to another



Dude, if things had to be literally the same thing, there'd be no point in drawing similarities between them. I'm merely pointing out that people who are basically victim-blaming Ukraine and putting the loss of lives on Zelensky (instead of on Putin) have other points in history to try to apply this same logic, and fail miserably. Who's rich and who's white is really not close to where the point is / just that if you give the founding fathers a pass on the revolution (read: basically all americans) it's hard to reconcile that with anything other than Putin being wholly responsible for this situation. Which of course he is.


----------



## Randy

narad said:


> View attachment 104783


Herman Munster


----------



## bostjan

Randy said:


> Herman Munster


Naw, that's his son, Eddie, with a receding hairline. Herman was the previous dictator and Grandpa Munster was before him.

Last night I was watching cringe videos, as one does (don't judge me, okay!), and one of the compilations had that weird performance Putin did for some fundraiser, where he played piano and sang Blueberry Hill. So... sure it's cringe, but I think it's taken on a whole new level of surreal-ness, especially with Sharon Stone and Goldie Hawn all acting so into it in spite of the high cringe factor... anyway, if you look it up, be forewarned that the clip is potentially being used to torture Russian political prisoners with its awkwardness.

In more serious news, Zelensky, in his address to the US, seemed to be saying that Ukraine is indeed no longer pushing to join NATO.


----------



## narad

Randy said:


> Herman Munster



I'd make fun but it's too close to my current disaster of a haircut


----------



## Randy

He's got the Eddie hairline but totally flat on the top. Makes the shape of his head look totally unnatural.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Then don't compare them to slave-owning provincial oligarch elites who raise rebellions to avoid taxation and glorify themselves
> 
> Their cause is FAR more honorable and morally right than the dudes on our currency
> 
> So much so that it's downright offensive to compare the Ukrainian people's defense of their homes to that Washington dick's quest to redistribute power and money from one clique of rich white male elites to another



This is exactly what I'm talking about when I said that you continually go after people for not being sufficiently pro-Ukraine, even though they are still pretty damn pro-Ukraine.

Ukraine is defending itself from foreign invasion. Big woop. That is not so special dude. Every nation in Europe has done the same thing, and every nation in Asia, and Africa. Why should I even give a fuck about it? What is so fucking special about Ukraine that I should care more about that than the Greek war of independence?

It is one thing to say that Ukraine are in the right to defend their homes and their independence. It is another thing to say that this war is somehow completely unique and that even allusions to principles like democracy (as exemplified by the US founding fathers) are irrelevant.

Based on your attitude, Ukraine doesn't want my support. So why should I even bother caring about what happens to a small nation next door to a big powerful nation? If Ukraine's struggle has no relationship to literally anything else, and is just another squalid little post-Soviet punch up, then why should I care?

As it turns out, I care about liberal values and democracy. But it seems like you don't. Apparently you think that Madison and Jefferson and Paine and Locke and Hobbes were just evil white men who wanted to dominate the world. So if you don't care about those principles, why should my principles extend to you?


----------



## bostjan

Randy said:


> He's got the Eddie hairline but totally flat on the top. Makes the shape of his head look totally unnatural.


What could possibly look unnatural about a hairstyle inspired by combining both Mao Zedong and the early 90's "high top fade" on one man's scalp?


----------



## Adieu

LostTheTone said:


> This is exactly what I'm talking about when I said that you continually go after people for not being sufficiently pro-Ukraine, even though they are still pretty damn pro-Ukraine.
> 
> Ukraine is defending itself from foreign invasion. Big woop. That is not so special dude. Every nation in Europe has done the same thing, and every nation in Asia, and Africa. Why should I even give a fuck about it? What is so fucking special about Ukraine that I should care more about that than the Greek war of independence?
> 
> It is one thing to say that Ukraine are in the right to defend their homes and their independence. It is another thing to say that this war is somehow completely unique and that even allusions to principles like democracy (as exemplified by the US founding fathers) are irrelevant.
> 
> Based on your attitude, Ukraine doesn't want my support. So why should I even bother caring about what happens to a small nation next door to a big powerful nation? If Ukraine's struggle has no relationship to literally anything else, and is just another squalid little post-Soviet punch up, then why should I care?
> 
> As it turns out, I care about liberal values and democracy. But it seems like you don't. Apparently you think that Madison and Jefferson and Paine and Locke and Hobbes were just evil white men who wanted to dominate the world. So if you don't care about those principles, why should my principles extend to you?



No, dude

I'm just saying don't compare regular dudes defending their homes to elite slaveowners rebelling to save on taxes

In some weird colonial analogy, Ukraine would be... more like the natives.


----------



## oversteve

bostjan said:


> In more serious news, Zelensky, in his address to the US, seemed to be saying that Ukraine is indeed no longer pushing to join NATO.


His advisors doing some narratives that we don't need NATO for the last 2 days in the interviews, Zelensky himself continuosly bashing NATO for not closing the sky appealing to the people, some former officials speaking about it, Lavrov speaking today about compromises in negotiations... Didn't watch that US broadcast but if it's true then that's really disturbing. First of all that might lead to a big internal strife in short term perspective and that's exactly what Putin is looking for. In longer term the history will repeat itself and 99% Russia will atack again if we stay neutral.

On a positive side lots of people and officials already raniting here about it. Taking that step will be akin to suicide for Ze and his team so I really do hope they are just probing the grounds to see the reaction. Also the NATO direction is written in our constitution and they need 2/3 of parliament to vote for the changes and that will be pretty hard


----------



## Drew

oversteve said:


> His advisors doing some narratives that we don't need NATO for the last 2 days in the interviews, Zelensky himself continuosly bashing NATO for not closing the sky appealing to the people, some former officials speaking about it, Lavrov speaking today about compromises in negotiations... Didn't watch that US broadcast but if it's true then that's really disturbing. First of all that might lead to a big internal strife in short term perspective and that's exactly what Putin is looking for. In longer term the history will repeat itself and 99% Russia will atack again if we stay neutral.
> 
> On a positive side lots of people and officials already raniting here about it. Taking that step will be akin to suicide for Ze and his team so I really do hope they are just probing the grounds to see the reaction. Also the NATO direction is written in our constitution and they need 2/3 of parliament to vote for the changes and that will be pretty hard


What I've seen is there's some room for a compromise with an "independent" Ukraine that doesn't join NATO, but in return for dropping its bid to join NATO gets defense assurances from NATO that if Russia were to invade again then NATO would defend Ukraine. The difference between this and Ukraine joining NATO, unless I've missed something, seems mostly semantics, and yet Russian negotiators appear open to it. 

I guess from their standpoint it allows them to hold onto enough of a semblance of victory to save face, while giving Ukraine assurances that they've got NATO's backing if Russia were to try something again. Though, it could as easily be a calculated bet on Putin's part that now with emotions high and the world smitten with Ukraine's heroic defense Europe is passionate about Ukrainian self-determination., but in five year's time if he launches another assault on the country then the West will hesitate to actually commit forces in Ukraine's defense.


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> His advisors doing some narratives that we don't need NATO for the last 2 days in the interviews, Zelensky himself continuosly bashing NATO for not closing the sky appealing to the people, some former officials speaking about it, Lavrov speaking today about compromises in negotiations... Didn't watch that US broadcast but if it's true then that's really disturbing. First of all that might lead to a big internal strife in short term perspective and that's exactly what Putin is looking for. In longer term the history will repeat itself and 99% Russia will atack again if we stay neutral.
> 
> On a positive side lots of people and officials already raniting here about it. Taking that step will be akin to suicide for Ze and his team so I really do hope they are just probing the grounds to see the reaction. Also the NATO direction is written in our constitution and they need 2/3 of parliament to vote for the changes and that will be pretty hard



Maybe he's playing coy?

Negging NATO to get her to want him bad?


----------



## nickgray

oversteve said:


> In longer term the history will repeat itself and 99% Russia will atack again if we stay neutral.



The problem with NATO is that they just might be too chicken to accept Ukraine while there's any chance of threat from Russia. It might've been an unrealistic (or rather, politically driven as opposed to reality driven) goal on part of Ukraine from day one. The west's reaction on 2014 events was barely a slap on the wrist, and the sanctions on Russia didn't do jack shit, if anything, they had the opposite effect due to propaganda machine spinning it as "you see guys, the west hates us" angle. So with this in mind, what were the chances that they would join NATO? Likewise, now that the threat from Russia is neutralized for the time being, I'm expecting NATO to cool off and hearing excuses along the lines of "well, we did give them weapons and they did win, so what's the point of them joining us?". I also would not be surprised at all for EU to stall the joining process. Everyone's incredibly pro-Ukraine right now (since the public is), but it'll wear off fast.

Maybe I'm too pessimistic though. Plus we don't even know yet what the agreement will look like, so it's too early to speculate on what the future will look like. Also, with Russia being cut off, Russian bribe money is unavailable (or at least to a large extent), so I expect to see some shifts in politics.


----------



## Drew

Adieu said:


> Maybe he's playing coy?
> 
> Negging NATO to get her to want him bad?


I do think it's tactical, whatever the intentions of everyone else here may be. 

A "NATO without NATO" outcome with Ukraine independent and not a NATO member, but with commitments from NATO to treat an attack on Ukraine like an attack on a NATO member basically give Ukraine most (all, if you assume NATO's word is ironclad) of the benefits of a NATO membership without actually having to SAY they're NATO members, which is a nonstarter for the Russians. 

One of the problems here is this conflict is likely to keep escalating because there's no clear off ramp for Putin. This would give him one. I don't like it, but I like a war with no clear way to end it a lot less than I like letting Putin claim a paper victory here.


----------



## oversteve

Drew said:


> What I've seen is there's some room for a compromise with an "independent" Ukraine that doesn't join NATO, but in return for dropping its bid to join NATO gets defense assurances from NATO that if Russia were to invade again then NATO would defend Ukraine. The difference between this and Ukraine joining NATO, unless I've missed something, seems mostly semantics, and yet Russian negotiators appear open to it.
> 
> I guess from their standpoint it allows them to hold onto enough of a semblance of victory to save face, while giving Ukraine assurances that they've got NATO's backing if Russia were to try something again. Though, it could as easily be a calculated bet on Putin's part that now with emotions high and the world smitten with Ukraine's heroic defense Europe is passionate about Ukrainian self-determination., but in five year's time if he launches another assault on the country then the West will hesitate to actually commit forces in Ukraine's defense.


Unfrotunately we've already got Budapest Memorandum and you can see how much it helped us.

In short term yes but in long term it will give them an opportunity to invade us again since their goal is occupying whole Ukraine or at least bigger part of it except for some Western regions with 'nazi' population. 

Also the whole Russian political model turns around wars. When the authorities' rating somewhat drops they try to 'liberate' someone and it goes up just like this time Putin's approval jumped up from 60% to 70% when the invasion started.


----------



## bostjan

oversteve said:


> His advisors doing some narratives that we don't need NATO for the last 2 days in the interviews, Zelensky himself continuosly bashing NATO for not closing the sky appealing to the people, some former officials speaking about it, Lavrov speaking today about compromises in negotiations... Didn't watch that US broadcast but if it's true then that's really disturbing. First of all that might lead to a big internal strife in short term perspective and that's exactly what Putin is looking for. In longer term the history will repeat itself and 99% Russia will atack again if we stay neutral.
> 
> On a positive side lots of people and officials already raniting here about it. Taking that step will be akin to suicide for Ze and his team so I really do hope they are just probing the grounds to see the reaction. Also the NATO direction is written in our constitution and they need 2/3 of parliament to vote for the changes and that will be pretty hard











Zelensky signals he doesn't expect Ukraine to join NATO anytime soon | CNN


Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has dropped his clearest hint yet that he does not expect his country to join NATO anytime soon.




edition.cnn.com





Maybe, but, being in the middle of the process of joining a club where everyone defends each other, only to be invaded, and then have that club sit on the sidelines and tell you "good luck" as they sit and watch, probably will change the opinions of the government in Kiev. Maybe it's all just politics, but there is some real rationale behind everything he's saying.

This is likely going to go one of two ways: one is that other countries get involved and push the Russians out quickly, the other is that other countries do not get involved and Ukraine pushes the Russians out much much more slowly. The fat cats in their comfy leather chairs heading up NATO's decision making process probably see it as, unless anything changes, either way, Russia is going to get pushed back, so they are going the route that's cheapest and easiest for them, maybe with some half-hearted concern for how it makes them look to the rest of the world.

What I think the consequence unintended for NATO through all of this, is that they appear weak. Maybe not weak in the traditional sense, but ineffective or impotent. In the two scenarios above, either Ukraine repels Russia on its own, so then, why do they need NATO? Or... they are able to beat back the Russians with the help of other alliances, so, again, why do they need NATO? NATO is doing nothing for them. I don't think this is a light decision, but it's hard to argue against logic this air-tight.

Or, on the other hand, maybe NATO does a surprise chess move and admits Ukraine, then it's Putin's move as to whether he wants WWIII or he backs out of Ukraine or tries some sort of hybrid option that punts the WWIII decision back onto NATO's side of the field (like he tries to claim only Eastern Ukraine or whatever bullshit). And maybe that's coming, but NATO's being quiet about it in order to surprise Putin and throw him off, but either way, there are no public signs that NATO is ready.


----------



## Adieu

I still think this is media superstar Zelensky leveraging public opinion to neg NATO into being useful to him

Regadless of actual facts on the ground, he looks way WAY better in the international public eye, which puts bottom up grassroots pressure on the politicians in NATO countries to do right by him

He's basically politicking himself to military victory by putting it to a global referendum: "who do you want to win, Zelensky or Putler?", and using public reaction to get help that'll make it happen

He's running around wooing the global public like it's a primary campaign not a war


PS approving not judging, well played imho!


----------



## bostjan

This is a huge what-if scenario, but, what if NATO is waiting to see what China's move is, waiting to assess Russia's strength, and, in the mean time, formulating a surprise strategy? Both NATO and Ukraine act like they don't like each other anymore, and then time it such that, simultaneously, NATO admits Ukraine, NATO orders Russia to leave, and NATO blots out the sun in the sky with drones? It'd be like the ending of a hastily-written movie, but there's an outside chance that it could be the strategy.

Putin's claims of hypersonic nuclear missiles might be effectively lies, and it might take some time for NATO to ensure its other members near Russia aren't at significant risk of getting hit by conventional missiles.

Then again, maybe Putin really does have the hypersonic missiles and NATO's anti-missile defense might have holes in it, in which case NATO is never going to step up into Putin's face for a full-on intimidation. Hell, maybe Putin's already dead and everything we see that we think is Putin is actually a deep-fake and Russia is being _run_ by some sort of superbot it created on the internet to troll people years ago.


----------



## fantom

So Russia has been flying drones in Polish airspace. And Poland has shot some of them down. This isn't a good sign.


----------



## Adieu

fantom said:


> So Russia has been flying drones in Polish airspace. And Poland has shot some of them down. This isn't a good sign.



Hard disagree.

This is absolutely wonderful.


----------



## nightflameauto

I think the more prodding Russia does against other nations, the better the chances are the world stops sitting on their thumbs and swats Putin's regime into the ground. I mean, the collective at this point has said, "We'll just sit over here and not let Russia touch us while we see how you do," to Ukraine, but if Russia starts acting like they'll get aggressive with the rest of Europe? Expect the military equivalent of a pile-driver to be incoming.

Granted, I've never been surprised by the lack of action on the part of most governments when confronted by a dictatorial asshole with a big swinging dick, but there's only so many times Putin can say, "Do as I say or I'm gonna nuke ya," before somebody calls his bluff.


----------



## Adieu

Also, the actual dick is less-than-impressive...


----------



## bostjan

fantom said:


> So Russia has been flying drones in Polish airspace. And Poland has shot some of them down. This isn't a good sign.


More than one?

I think this will go nowhere. That drone probably cost a lot of money, but it's not like it was a jet. What's Russia going to say? "Don't shoot down our aircraft that stray into your airspace or else we will invade you?" I feel like that would just make the decision we sort of think is ultimately inevitable that much easier for NATO.


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> I still think this is media superstar Zelensky leveraging public opinion to neg NATO into being useful to him
> 
> Regadless of actual facts on the ground, he looks way WAY better in the international public eye, which puts bottom up grassroots pressure on the politicians in NATO countries to do right by him
> 
> He's basically politicking himself to military victory by putting it to a global referendum: "who do you want to win, Zelensky or Putler?", and using public reaction to get help that'll make it happen
> 
> He's running around wooing the global public like it's a primary campaign not a war
> 
> 
> PS approving not judging, well played imho!


I really do hope that is the case. The problem is that Zelensky himself is roughly a dumbed down version of Trump - lots of ambition and an awful politician, though I do admit he's a national hero now not running away from Russia's threat and playing his role of a country leader. He is very dependent on his advisors and most of them are sleazy guys. Pre-invasion they were looking at negotiations and reconciliation with Russia with a history of affairs linked to Russia (Wagnergate, buying energy from Russia/Belarus, charges of spying, threatening pro-ukrainian activists etc). They are still here behind Ze post invasion and it's somewhat concerning.


----------



## Adieu

You overestimate Trump.

That guy would be first to escape and crossdressing as a grandmother just in case


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> You overestimate Trump.
> 
> That guy would be first to escape and crossdressing as a grandmother just in case


There's a high possibility someone is holding him by the balls otherwise he would've done the same  

Just take a look at his interviews starting from presidential elections, distancing himself from people with tonns of bodyguards, actions in the likes of Putin/Lukashenko trying to look like a sole ruler neglecting the parliament and constitution, prosecuting activists and so on. And all of that changing overnight is a miracle...

Nevertheless he's doing the right thing now and I do support him for that as well as majority of other people here not very fond of his rule cause unity is what we need to win this war.


----------



## bostjan

Another group of journalists from Fox News came under fire a few hours ago, two were killed and one is seriously injured.


----------



## ArtDecade

bostjan said:


> Another group of journalists from Fox News came under fire a few hours ago, two were killed and one is seriously injured.



Putin is going to be pissed if the Russian army doesn't stop shooting their supporters.


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> There's a high possibility someone is holding him by the balls otherwise he would've done the same
> 
> Just take a look at his interviews starting from presidential elections, distancing himself from people with tonns of bodyguards, actions in the likes of Putin/Lukashenko trying to look like a sole ruler neglecting the parliament and constitution, prosecuting activists and so on. And all of that changing overnight is a miracle...
> 
> Nevertheless he's doing the right thing now and I do support him for that as well as majority of other people here not very fond of his rule cause unity is what we need to win this war.



Look, I frankly don't care if he's an Oscar-worthy actor or a real damn superhero or a dude whose instinctive autopilot reacts just right when he's terrified and confused

The point is it doesn't matter

For winning hearts and minds and milking global public opinion, he is PERFECT.

Textbooks will be written about how he played this. This is world-class PR and propaganda. Name me anyone who does better.


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> Look, I frankly don't care if he's an Oscar-worthy actor or a real damn superhero or a dude whose instinctive autopilot reacts just right when he's terrified and confused
> 
> The point is it doesn't matter
> 
> For winning hearts and minds and milking global public opinion, he is PERFECT.
> 
> Textbooks will be written about how he played this. This is world-class PR and propaganda. Name me anyone who does better.


Fully agree with that and really hope it doesn't change later.


----------



## bostjan

Instant collector's stamp: https://www.linns.com/news/us-stamp...e-stamp-design-contest-sends-russia-a-message


----------



## Drew

nightflameauto said:


> I think the more prodding Russia does against other nations, the better the chances are the world stops sitting on their thumbs and swats Putin's regime into the ground. I mean, the collective at this point has said, "We'll just sit over here and not let Russia touch us while we see how you do," to Ukraine, but if Russia starts acting like they'll get aggressive with the rest of Europe? Expect the military equivalent of a pile-driver to be incoming.
> 
> Granted, I've never been surprised by the lack of action on the part of most governments when confronted by a dictatorial asshole with a big swinging dick, but there's only so many times Putin can say, "Do as I say or I'm gonna nuke ya," before somebody calls his bluff.


I mean, Ukraine was applying to join NATO, but Poland IS a NATO state. If Putin actually strikes Poland in retaliation for Poland shooting down a drone in Polish airspace, then per the terms of the treaty that's an attack on all NATO countries. Putin rolled the dice thinking he could take Ukraine unscathed, and regardless of how this ends I think at a minimum we have to say it at least backfired a _little_ bit in that the reaction was much uglier than he expected. Going after Poland, though, that's an open act of war on NATO.


----------



## AMOS

Drew said:


> I mean, Ukraine was applying to join NATO, but Poland IS a NATO state. If Putin actually strikes Poland in retaliation for Poland shooting down a drone in Polish airspace, then per the terms of the treaty that's an attack on all NATO countries. Putin rolled the dice thinking he could take Ukraine unscathed, and regardless of how this ends I think at a minimum we have to say it at least backfired a _little_ bit in that the reaction was much uglier than he expected. Going after Poland, though, that's an open act of war on NATO.


Isn't it a violation of Poland's airspace to fly a drone in there to begin with? Poland had every right to take it out.


----------



## fantom

AMOS said:


> Isn't it a violation of Poland's airspace to fly a drone in there to begin with? Poland had every right to take it out.


Poland had every right... Not sure how much that matters. If Russia media broadcasts that NATO is shooting down military equipment, it reinforces the belief for Russians that they are at risk of being attacked by NATO. Flying drones over Poland in the first place was literally asking for Poland to start shooting at them. It's all about optics.

That's a good thing if you want NATO and Russia at war. It's a bad thing if you hope Russians will protest and stop this mess before it escalates.


----------



## Adieu

fantom said:


> Poland had every right... Not sure how much that matters. If Russia media broadcasts that NATO is shooting down military equipment, it reinforces the belief for Russians that they are at risk of being attacked by NATO. Flying drones over Poland in the first place was literally asking for Poland to start shooting at them. It's all about optics.
> 
> That's a good thing I'd you want NATO and Russia at war. It's a bad thing if you hope Russians will protest and stop this mess before it escalates.



I am of the opinion that the ONLY way to get any kind of productive protest in Russia is to re-qualify any and all "uniforms" (siloviki - cops, military, paramilitaries, spooks, etc.) AS ENEMY COMBATANTS.

Not political opponents or servants of a corrupt regime, but NAZI ENEMY COMBATANTS.

Vlasov tricolor flag = nazi occupants. Seek & destroy on sight.

Anything less is pointless.


----------



## CovertSovietBear

narad said:


> View attachment 104783


----------



## DiezelMonster

These cracks that are showing are pretty interesting, I'm sure you guys will think this is propaganda but it seems that within the internal ranks the many under Putin are starting to crumble.

This seems dangerous on so many levels, he is replacing top generals with new ones. So he seems more backed into a corner, I saw another video where a former general said that the way Putin is acting will push us closer to war with NATO.

As he gets increasingly desperate I think that drones flying into Poland was no accident but a way for him to see their response and how they respond.


----------



## Drew

AMOS said:


> Isn't it a violation of Poland's airspace to fly a drone in there to begin with? Poland had every right to take it out.


Yes, but Russia can also easily claim it was an accident and Poland struck without giving them a chance to exit airspace and "fix the mistake," and call it an "unprovoked act of war." Remember, this whole thing started when Putin vowed to "liberate and de-Nazify" an independent country with a Jewish president. We live in a post-fact world, it doesn't matter if you're lying as long as you're louder than the truth.


----------



## nightflameauto

DiezelMonster said:


> These cracks that are showing are pretty interesting, I'm sure you guys will think this is propaganda but it seems that within the internal ranks the many under Putin are starting to crumble.
> 
> This seems dangerous on so many levels, he is replacing top generals with new ones. So he seems more backed into a corner, I saw another video where a former general said that the way Putin is acting will push us closer to war with NATO.
> 
> As he gets increasingly desperate I think that drones flying into Poland was no accident but a way for him to see their response and how they respond.



Putin seems more red-faced than usual in this one. That ruddy complexion makes him look even more like a shaved troll-doll.


----------



## bostjan

DiezelMonster said:


> These cracks that are showing are pretty interesting, I'm sure you guys will think this is propaganda but it seems that within the internal ranks the many under Putin are starting to crumble.
> 
> This seems dangerous on so many levels, he is replacing top generals with new ones. So he seems more backed into a corner, I saw another video where a former general said that the way Putin is acting will push us closer to war with NATO.
> 
> As he gets increasingly desperate I think that drones flying into Poland was no accident but a way for him to see their response and how they respond.



Right, that was when they were "discussing" "whether or not" to "provide special military support," i.e. the meeting where Putin's cabinet rubber stamped his decision to invade Ukraine. He's probably visibly nervous, because, just a couple weeks before this, he had told the public that rumours that Putin was going to stage an invasion of Ukraine were propaganda by the US State Department.



Drew said:


> Yes, but Russia can also easily claim it was an accident and Poland struck without giving them a chance to exit airspace and "fix the mistake," and call it an "unprovoked act of war." Remember, this whole thing started when Putin vowed to "liberate and de-Nazify" an independent country with a Jewish president. We live in a post-fact world, it doesn't matter if you're lying as long as you're louder than the truth.



I think that, in order to have a "post-fact" society, you would have to have had some sort of period of time long enough to qualify as an era, that was based around the importance of facts.


----------



## Drew

bostjan said:


> I think that, in order to have a "post-fact" society, you would have to have had some sort of period of time long enough to qualify as an era, that was based around the importance of facts.


 


Daaaaaaamn. lol.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

What's messed up is Ukraine has like stuff that disqualified them from NATO like decentralized military and such so like even if NATO was willing the process to meet criteria and then do official joining was in no way imminent that's partly why Zelensky is saying that like this wasn't and isn't some looming event.


----------



## tedtan

Plus, if memory serves, NATO cannot accept a new member currently involved in a military conflict. Additionaly, accepting a new member requires a unanimous decision by all current members, and Germany and France (and others) have previously balked at allowing Ukraine to join.

Regardless, allowing Ukraine to join won’t be an easy, open and shut case.


----------



## ArtDecade

Ukraine should be a super, super well armed Switzerland and leave it at that.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Right, that was when they were "discussing" "whether or not" to "provide special military support," i.e. the meeting where Putin's cabinet rubber stamped his decision to invade Ukraine. He's probably visibly nervous, because, just a couple weeks before this, he had told the public that rumours that Putin was going to stage an invasion of Ukraine were propaganda by the US State Department.
> 
> 
> 
> I think that, in order to have a "post-fact" society, you would have to have had some sort of period of time long enough to qualify as an era, that was based around the importance of facts.



Nah

He doesn't care about his image

He just had SOME idea about how deep a hole Putin was digging for himself. Maybe not about the inability to win... but certainly about sanctions sanctions and more sanctions, devaluation and/or loss of investments, rise of internal repression, etc.

These guys had grown very comfortable with their chill and laid-back lifestyle of defrauding the Russian taxpayer and looting everything in sight.

His face shows the realization that his relaxed feudal lifestyle is ending before his very eyes.


----------



## DiezelMonster

Here is the real loser in all of this! This guy just wants his BIG MAC!


----------



## LostTheTone

Front page of today's Daily Mail - *UK could be Ukraine's 'protector' against future Russian attacks: Peace talks may result in West agreeing to MILITARY response if Putin invades again - as MoD buys £500m defence system to detect missiles fired at Britain and Putin reveals his 'endgame'*

The story is slightly confused exactly where the idea came from, but it seems that Ukraine is at least open to (if not actually asking for) a Western led defense coalition be put in place to provide security from Russia while allowing for Ukraine to be theoretically demilitarized. That's a creative solution to allow Russia to notionally "win" and remove the "threat" from Ukraine without ceding the whole nation to Russian control. Pragmatically, Ukraine needs to spend a lot of time and money putting itself back together anyway, and would struggle to both do that and also maintain defense spending. 

Personally, I quite like the idea. If there was to be a semi-permanent British garrison (don't worry Ukrainebro, we got you) including significant air assets and an RN detachment in the black sea... That could work. It would certainly build a lot of cultural ties, and we can ship out some Royal Engineers to help rebuilding. I've heard of worse plans. 

Also, that article alludes to Britain buying an "anti-ballistic missile system" - Does anyone know what they are talking about? I presume that it would be AEGIS Ashore, but can't find a confirmation.


----------



## Adieu

Wow, the Kremlin Troll Farm is back with a vengeance

I just got temporarily locked out of twitter for responding to Lindsey Graham's tweet




With a "shoulda punched him earlier"


----------



## narad

Adieu said:


> Wow, the Kremlin Troll Farm is back with a vengeance
> 
> I just got temporarily locked out of twitter for responding to Lindsey Graham's tweet
> 
> View attachment 104911
> 
> 
> With a "shoulda punched him earlier"



It sounds like Lindsay is suggesting to settle this with a trial by combat with Putin. My heart goes out to the Ukrainian people for the consequences of Lindsay inevitably getting his ass whooped, but I think we all kinda need this.


----------



## Adieu

narad said:


> It sounds like Lindsay is suggesting to settle this with a trial by combat with Putin. My heart goes out to the Ukrainian people for the consequences of Lindsay inevitably getting his ass whooped, but I think we all kinda need this.



Hell no we're not fielding Lindsey

We got Klitschko for that (he's the mayor of Kyiv now)


----------



## narad

Adieu said:


> Hell no we're not fielding Lindsey
> 
> We got Klitschko for that (he's the mayor of Kyiv now)



Maybe as a headliner, but let's at least open the show with Putin vs. Graham, no holds barred, in a steel cage. Two man enter, one man leaves.


----------



## Adieu

Seriously though, I wouldn't be surprised if Ukraine sends Klitschko to some bs round of talks for sheer intimidation factor... Russian kleptocrat officials might think twice before talking out of their azz if the guy across the table is 100% certified able to snap them like a twig with his bare hands

And it's not like they can "honorably" refuse to deal with him, he's a genuine major national political figure


----------



## Adieu

In other news:





...Goddamit, MOM! Srsly???


----------



## bostjan

Is that a distress symbol or something?

Any news from Xi?


----------



## Randy

Adieu said:


> Hell no we're not fielding Lindsey
> 
> We got Klitschko for that (he's the mayor of Kyiv now)


I dunno, Lindsey Graham was a JAG but he still went through combat training. All the Putin tough guy stuff looks like fluff, plus Putin is 3 years older and not looking very healthy.


----------



## bostjan

Putin knows judo and Steven Seagal's bullshido.

Lindsey's Kung Faux might not be any match.


----------



## StevenC

Adieu said:


> In other news:
> 
> View attachment 104920
> 
> 
> 
> ...Goddamit, MOM! Srsly???


And it's the right way up above the badge...


----------



## Randy

Reminds me of someone else that used to hold ego stroking rallies when he was doing a shit job but I forget who that was.


----------



## pondman

Tell it like it is.









Kyiv mayor Vitali Klitschko attacks Putin: 'He's sick, he's an unhealthy man' - EXCLUSIVE


In a wide-ranging exclusive interview with Yahoo News France, Klitschko said he has cried every day since the Russian president launched his invasion of the country.




www.aol.co.uk













Putin's dictatorship will end in disaster, says former Russian minister


Andrei Kozyrev, who served under Putin's predecessor Boris Yeltsin, also dismissed the chances of nuclear war, declaring it an 'empty threat' from Putin'.




www.aol.co.uk


----------



## Drew

Adieu said:


> In other news:
> 
> View attachment 104920
> 
> 
> 
> ...Goddamit, MOM! Srsly???


You missed the one over the badge, too.


----------



## Adieu

Drew said:


> You missed the one over the badge, too.


That one's right side up

My post was about my dear mother putting on the flag sticker UPSIDE DOWN


----------



## Drew

Adieu said:


> That one's right side up
> 
> My post was about my dear mother putting on the flag sticker UPSIDE DOWN


Oh, lol. I figured it was about her hopping on the bandwagon. 

EDIT - though, possible defense for her, at least in the states flying our flag upside down is a naval sign of distress, and I wouldn't be surprised if that's an international convention.


----------



## Adieu

Drew said:


> Oh, lol. I figured it was about her hopping on the bandwagon.
> 
> EDIT - though, possible defense for her, at least in the states flying our flag upside down is a naval sign of distress, and I wouldn't be surprised if that's an international convention.



No, I've been there for a while myself




Tried to give her one of these like on my truck, but she said it was "too vulgar" (although she then gave it to her friend, who thought it was just right)


----------



## Drew

Oh well. You win some, you lose some.


----------



## Randy




----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> View attachment 105086



The John Deere > Ivan Olen = Ivan [is a] Deer/Idiot pun is priceless


----------



## pondman

More like abduction than helping refugees.

https://www.aol.co.uk/news/ukraines-mariupol-says-russia-forcefully-030348605-104246173.html


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> Mariupol is falling within this week from the siege, Kiev will be following shortly and once those 2 have been taken care of the rest of the country is peanuts. So I suggest we reevaluate soon?


It's already Monday here, Mariupol still standing, Kyiv still far from being encircled and 'liberated', so are the other cities, russian swines obliterated little by little. So much for being an analyst... 

p.s. it's Kyiv, not Kiev, don't be a dumb*ss like the editors of those pro-russian sources who spell it that way


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> p.s. it's Kyiv, not Kiev, don't be a dumb*ss like the editors of those pro-russian sources who spell it that way



It really really helps though... you start reading some doom and gloom bullsh!t, then it says "Kiev" and you're like, lol, Russian troll propaganda almost got me


----------



## StevenC

Can someone tell me how to pronounce Kyiv, because it feels like all the journalists here have changed their pronunciation this year? It was Key-ev, now it's Keev, and I've heard some others say it should be Key-iv.


----------



## spudmunkey

Up until last month, I was pronouncing it like this, too.


----------



## nickgray

StevenC said:


> Can someone tell me how to pronounce Kyiv



Kiev is the transliteration (writing the word using a different alphabet) of the Russian name. Kyiv is the transliteration of the Ukrainian name.

Kyiv is not very pronounceable by English speakers because you don't have a similar vowel for in your alphabet (for the vowel И in Ukrainian or similarly, Ы in Russian). But you can approximate Kyiv by saying Kee - eev (eev as in beef). Whereas the Russian name would be pronounced as Kee - yev (yev as in... I don't even know... English is weird in that it has a relatively poor correspondence between how a word is written to how a word is actually pronounced).


----------



## tedtan

It had always been spelled Kiev and pronounced Kee - ev in the US until around 3 to 4 weeks ago when all the reporters changed over in support of Ukraine. So just because someone spells/pronounces it that way doesn’t mean they’re a Russian troll, they may just not be up to speed.


----------



## Adieu

The confusion is because three different TYPES of sounds are often transliterated using "y":

Y = Ukrainian "и" / Russian "ы" = a sort of muted exhaled grunt half Ee, half Uh sound... If you watch lots of porn you'd THINK you guys would perfectly know how to voice it, but apparently y'all can't get over it having its own letter

Ye/Ya/Yu = Yeah, Yah, You

Y / yy endings = ий, iй, ий, ый = almost all well known Ukrainian and Russian names ending in Y (Zelensky, Navalny, etc) actually end in a TWO-letter combination of THREE different sounds expressed with FOUR different letters and ... and yeah, they just gave up explaining things and took a short cut to avoid getting mispronounced even worse.

In this case it's the first type in Ukrainian Kyiv (Ky-iv), and the second type in Russian Kiev (Ki-yeah-v)

PS for extra shits and giggles, do not confuse with Russian "и" = Ukrainian and western "i".


Basically, the version pronounced with "Yeah" in the middle is Russified "Kiev". But the Ukrainian Kyiv version without the Yeah has a Y in it.

So yeah be very very confused.


----------



## ItWillDo

oversteve said:


> It's already Monday here, Mariupol still standing, Kyiv still far from being encircled and 'liberated', so are the other cities, russian swines obliterated little by little. So much for being an analyst...
> 
> p.s. it's Kyiv, not Kiev, don't be a dumb*ss like the editors of those pro-russian sources who spell it that way



Mariupol is almost done for. Another peace offering was offered, and once again it was rejected by the _Nazov _troops in the cities as they don't care about people suffering. The good part is, now that the civilians are finally being freed from the clutches of your fascist militias, the statements are also starting to roll in: 




I don't understand how you can admire a bunch of cowards literally treating their own, innocent blood as a human shield and cannon fodders for some clown's agenda. Not to mention that I was right about him not being in Kiev at all given his latest green screen address to the people. Brave frontline commander you've got there.

Aside from that, in English it's still Kiev and there's nothing a bunch of virtue-signaling LARPers can change about it: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/kiev


----------



## ItWillDo

Oh, maybe also interesting to know but mainstream media seems to be dropping coverage of the war REALLY hard since they surfaced some videos like the one below, where it shows your government is far from fit for NATO. People who speak up against the standing government of corrupt media figures (who is isolating parties that don't align with their vision, so much for democracy), or try to find food/medicine to provide for their family are considered marauders and tortured in medieval ways. Women, men, girls and boys all indiscriminate.


----------



## Adieu

Taping people to lampposts isn't torture, it's public shaming/temporary detention until cops show up... for looters

Americans usually just kill them instead, so uhm yeah, sooo unfair to tape them up

Key word here: looters. Not getting shot.


----------



## narad

ItWillDo said:


> Oh, maybe also interesting to know but mainstream media seems to be dropping coverage of the war REALLY hard since they surfaced some videos like the one below, where it shows your government is far from fit for NATO. People who speak up against the standing government of corrupt media figures (who is isolating parties that don't align with their vision, so much for democracy), or try to find food/medicine to provide for their family are considered marauders and tortured in medieval ways. Women, men, girls and boys all indiscriminate.




You're right. Ukraine deserves to be shelled into non-existence because some guys were taped to a pole. Russian should go after my high school next. I saw a kid get his whole head dunked in the toilet, and other such war crimes.


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> Mariupol is almost done for. Another peace offering was offered, and once again it was rejected by the _Nazov _troops in the cities as they don't care about people suffering. The good part is, now that the civilians are finally being freed from the clutches of your fascist militias, the statements are also starting to roll in:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't understand how you can admire a bunch of cowards literally treating their own, innocent blood as a human shield and cannon fodders for some clown's agenda. Not to mention that I was right about him not being in Kiev at all given his latest green screen address to the people. Brave frontline commander you've got there.
> 
> Aside from that, in English it's still Kiev and there's nothing a bunch of virtue-signaling LARPers can change about it: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/kiev



According to you It was almost done for last week. 

I don't understand how can you admire and support bunch of Russian cowards literally shelling maternity hospital, a theater and plenty of other civilian infrastructure claiming all of that are Azov bases? And again russian Anna news as a source with 'great' credibility... How about some CNN, BBC, DW etc, something non-affiliated with Russia? For example we've got local news here few days ago that those fleeing from Mariupol to Russia were stripped of their documents, brought to the Siberia regions and made to stay and work there for the next 2 years without possibility of leaving the area, but I didn't intend to post it since it has got no solid evidence atm.

Please don't be f*cktard and learn to spell it at last, it's been Kyiv for 30 years at least 
Also same place https://www.dictionary.com/browse/kyiv


----------



## ItWillDo

Adieu said:


> Taping people to lampposts isn't torture, it's public shaming/temporary detention until cops show up... for looters
> 
> Americans usually just kill them instead, so uhm yeah, sooo unfair to tape them up
> 
> Key word here: looters. Not getting shot.


Which cops? You mean the ones doing it in the first place? And they're not just looters, go through the examples and you will find that there are also people who spoke up against the regime and people who wanted the government to surrender and halt the bloodshed in a losing war.



narad said:


> You're right. Ukraine deserves to be shelled into non-existence because some guys were taped to a pole. Russian should go after my high school next. I saw a kid get his whole head dunked in the toilet, and other such war crimes.






Cool analogy again, thanks.



oversteve said:


> According to you It was almost done for last week.
> 
> I don't understand how can you admire and support bunch of Russian cowards literally shelling maternity hospital, a theater and plenty of other civilian infrastructure claiming all of that are Azov bases? And again russian Anna news as a source with 'great' credibility... How about some CNN, BBC, DW etc, something non-affiliated with Russia? For example we've got local news here few days ago that those fleeing from Mariupol to Russia were stripped of their documents, brought to the Siberia regions and made to stay and work there for the next 2 years without possibility of leaving the area, but I didn't intend to post it since it has got no solid evidence atm.
> 
> Please don't be f*cktard and learn to spell it at last, it's been Kyiv for 30 years at least
> Also same place https://www.dictionary.com/browse/kyiv


> NO BRO, ALL OF THOSE DIFFERENT TESTIMONIES DON'T COUNT IF THEY'RE NOT FROM MY PRO-WESTERN SOURCES BRO
Also, lmao using credibility and CNN/BBC in the same sentence. 

And yeah I'm pretty sure that Russia has now sent all those refugees (especially women & kids!) off to Siberia in the freezing cold to make them work in the gulags and create new tanks to hand over to the brave tractor squads of UKR.

Imagine thinking that when you're stuck in a city that's constantly in conflict because a bunch of nazi's won't let you escape as it ruins their cover, and once you finally get a glimpse of freedom & fulfilment of basic needs again, people think you would actually go into the direction of the warzone and the so called "good guys" who kept you hostage in the first place.


----------



## Adieu

ItWillDo said:


> Which cops? You mean the ones doing it in the first place? And they're not just looters, go through the examples and you will find that there are also people who spoke up against the regime and people who wanted the government to surrender and halt the bloodshed in a losing war.
> 
> 
> View attachment 105189
> 
> 
> Cool analogy again, thanks.
> 
> 
> > NO BRO, ALL OF THOSE DIFFERENT TESTIMONIES DON'T COUNT IF THEY'RE NOT FROM MY PRO-WESTERN SOURCES BRO
> Also, lmao using credibility and CNN/BBC in the same sentence.
> 
> And yeah I'm pretty sure that Russia has now sent all those refugees (especially women & kids!) off to Siberia in the freezing cold to make them work in the gulags and create new tanks to hand over to the brave tractor squads of UKR.
> 
> Imagine thinking that when you're stuck in a city that's constantly in conflict because a bunch of nazi's won't let you escape as it ruins their cover, and once you finally get a glimpse of freedom & fulfilment of basic needs again, people think you would actually go into the direction of the warzone and the so called "good guys" who kept you hostage in the first place.



"REGIME"? Ah you mean the one run by a tshirt-wearing Jewish comedian?

Terrifying stuff


----------



## Adieu

Or are all y'all still following Putin in his quest for bEnderovtsy and/or Kadyrov's manhunt for bEndera's head... because everyone is too terrified of those "democratic leaders" to tell them that:

1) it's bAndera, bEnder was a fictional Soviet conman of Ukrainian-Turkish origin and/or a fictional American robot... both from comedies btw, odd trend

2) he's been dead since the 1950's, there ain't no head to take


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> Which cops? You mean the ones doing it in the first place? And they're not just looters, go through the examples and you will find that there are also people who spoke up against the regime and people who wanted the government to surrender and halt the bloodshed in a losing war.
> 
> 
> View attachment 105189
> 
> 
> Cool analogy again, thanks.
> 
> 
> > NO BRO, ALL OF THOSE DIFFERENT TESTIMONIES DON'T COUNT IF THEY'RE NOT FROM MY PRO-WESTERN SOURCES BRO
> Also, lmao using credibility and CNN/BBC in the same sentence.
> 
> And yeah I'm pretty sure that Russia has now sent all those refugees (especially women & kids!) off to Siberia in the freezing cold to make them work in the gulags and create new tanks to hand over to the brave tractor squads of UKR.
> 
> Imagine thinking that when you're stuck in a city that's constantly in conflict because a bunch of nazi's won't let you escape as it ruins their cover, and once you finally get a glimpse of freedom & fulfilment of basic needs again, people think you would actually go into the direction of the warzone and the so called "good guys" who kept you hostage in the first place.


Yup, bro, their credibility is like pure water compared to some random russian news channel's swamp. At least they don't tell the stories of drunk black americans dancing on the APC's in Donbass pointing and shooting guns at people, that in our schools children are taught to kill the bullfinches cause they are red and so on.

Taping looters to the lamppost or making a war prisoner (while already having his wounds treated) speak some random Ukrainian word are deffinitely examples of inhuman atrocities compared to bombing civilians with 1100-pound unguided bombs.

Imagine thinking that nothing would've happened at all if Eastern 'brethren' didn't come to save them.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Adieu said:


> Wow, the Kremlin Troll Farm is back with a vengeance
> 
> I just got temporarily locked out of twitter for responding to Lindsey Graham's tweet
> 
> View attachment 104911
> 
> 
> With a "shoulda punched him earlier"


Lindsay is a god damn moron. First the Brutus thing and now this

It's feeding directly into Putin's messaging. Imagine a very senior Russian or Chinese politician openly calling for the death of Biden. It's ridiculous.


----------



## Adieu

Oh yeah, cuz Biden = Putin

Totally.

Also:
1) We're very far past caring what senior Russian officials say. We should've gotten there back when that one dude was talking about "turtle f*ckers", but now everyone has finally gotten the message. Hell, the UN walked out on Lavrov.

2) The Chinese are taking notes and greatly stressing that they want to be nothing like the Russians.


----------



## narad

oversteve said:


> Taping looters to the lamppost or making a war prisoner (while already having his wounds treated) speak some random Ukrainian word are deffinitely examples of inhuman atrocities compared to bombing civilians with 1100-pound unguided bombs.


Dude should be thrown out of the thread as is for trying to pass that off as a coherent argument. Talking about liberating old women from basements when there's countless images of whole residential blocks roasting. I guess that's where all the nazis lived together?


----------



## Flappydoodle

Adieu said:


> Oh yeah, cuz Biden = Putin
> 
> Totally.
> 
> Also:
> 1) We're very far past caring what senior Russian officials say. We should've gotten there back when that one dude was talking about "turtle f*ckers", but now everyone has finally gotten the message. Hell, the UN walked out on Lavrov.
> 
> 2) The Chinese are taking notes and greatly stressing that they want to be nothing like the Russians.


Wait, who said Putin = Biden?

Lindsay is saying really dumb shit to try and seem like some sort of badass. Openly threatening to kill or remove foreign leaders (i.e. regime change) amounts to a declaration of war if you're not careful. Obviously we are ALL hoping that someone will kill Putin and end this madness, but when you're a leader you're supposed to think/hope that, not post it on Twitter lol.

Number 2 remains to be seen. China hasn't picked a side yet. It's telling that they're not overtly backing Russia, but they're also refusing to condemn, and they've been oddly quiet since Biden's "warning" yesterday. They're also still repeating the official Russian line of "special military operation". And still, it's likely China will be bailing them out in the background. (For example, I saw that China will provide some payment systems in lieu of Visa/Mastercard which Russia has lost.) I think if we can prevent China from supplying weapons and economic aid to Russia, that's still an overall win for the West. If we can drive a bigger wedge between Russia and China, that would be awesome, but I feel like they aren't going to let that happen. China will only care when being tied to Russia is hurting their economy.


----------



## StevenC

ItWillDo said:


> Oh, maybe also interesting to know but mainstream media seems to be dropping coverage of the war REALLY hard











Home - BBC News


Visit BBC News for up-to-the-minute news, breaking news, video, audio and feature stories. BBC News provides trusted World and UK news as well as local and regional perspectives. Also entertainment, business, science, technology and health news.




www.bbc.co.uk





You sure?


----------



## ItWillDo

narad said:


> Dude should be thrown out of the thread as is for trying to pass that off as a coherent argument. Talking about liberating old women from basements when there's countless images of whole residential blocks roasting. I guess that's where all the nazis lived together?


Already policing and bringing out the cancel culture when something doesn't fit your narrative, I can almost reek the soy from here. 

And I don't know if you noticed but Mariupol is a densely populated city, and a lot of those "residential blocks roasting" are destinations of choice for the _Nazovs _to take shelter and set up weapons in: 






The fact that they don't care about civilians potentially still being inside of the buildings when actively engaging armor is of course not an issue because that also doesn't fit your narrative.


----------



## narad

ItWillDo said:


> The fact that they don't care about civilians potentially still being inside of the buildings when actively engaging armor is of course not an issue because that also doesn't fit your narrative.



Yea, they should have been more considerate about where they fight off the invading tanks. Worst neighbors ever.


----------



## ItWillDo

narad said:


> Yea, they should have been more considerate about where they fight off the invading tanks. Worst neighbors ever.


Even disregarding the snark, if they would care about loss of life yes. But obviously they don't and they put stubbornness ahead of human suffering in a siege they can't win.


----------



## narad

ItWillDo said:


> Even disregarding the snark, if they would care about loss of life yes. But obviously they don't and they put stubbornness ahead of human suffering in a siege they can't win.



Again, if you're going to apply that logic you can apply it to just about any conflict in history. Like oh those colonial Americans were so stupid for throwing away all those lives over such a silly thing as taxation and representation. How many civilians had to die for such ideological things? Which is even crazier when you apply the logic to Ukraine's pov when they're actively invaded for wanting some security against such invasions. It basically proves they were right in considering Russia a looming threat they needed protection from.


----------



## Adieu

ItWillDo said:


> Already policing and bringing out the cancel culture when something doesn't fit your narrative, I can almost reek the soy from here.
> 
> And I don't know if you noticed but Mariupol is a densely populated city, and a lot of those "residential blocks roasting" are destinations of choice for the _Nazovs _to take shelter and set up weapons in:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that they don't care about civilians potentially still being inside of the buildings when actively engaging armor is of course not an issue because that also doesn't fit your narrative.




How interesting

You've borrowed or come up with a derogatory name for Mariupol's defenders, based on Nazi + Azov... which doesn't work in either Russian OR Ukrainian and is clearly bullsh!t for western audiences

Only in Latin alphabet languages ("Nazi" being written naci = natsi in Cyrillic languages, with a different letter than z...which your side uses a lot btw)

Наци and Азов just don't look or sound the least bit alike in the local languages.

Your bosses must be so proud.

Heil PrigoZhin!!

PS ...haven't you guys shifted your efforts to BioWarfare Slavic Infertility Virus Birds developed at Ukrainian hospitals? I thought the nazi memes got sidelined as ineffective


----------



## ItWillDo

narad said:


> Again, if you're going to apply that logic you can apply it to just about any conflict in history. Like oh those colonial Americans were so stupid for throwing away all those lives over such a silly thing as taxation and representation. How many civilians had to die for such ideological things? Which is even crazier when you apply the logic to Ukraine's pov when they're actively invaded for wanting some security against such invasions. It basically proves they were right in considering Russia a looming threat they needed protection from.


Even taking the oversimplification and misunderstanding of the situation into account, how absolutely incompetent do you have to be to fail to install a security against invasions by provoking an invasion?

That aside, this is an example of how to prevent human suffering by simple surrender: 




Adieu said:


> How interesting
> 
> You've borrowed or come up with a derogatory name for Mariupol's defenders, based on Nazi + Azov... which doesn't work in either Russian OR Ukrainian and is clearly bullsh!t for western audiences
> 
> Only in Latin alphabet languages ("Nazi" being written naci = natsi in Cyrillic languages, with a different letter than z...which your side uses a lot btw)
> 
> Наци and Азов just don't look or sound the least bit alike in the local languages.
> 
> Your bosses must be so proud.
> 
> Heil PrigoZhin!!
> 
> PS ...haven't you guys shifted your efforts to BioWarfare Slavic Infertility Virus Birds developed at Ukrainian hospitals? I thought the nazi memes got sidelined as ineffective


Granted, but then again you're the expert on bullshit for western audiences so I'm checking Nazov (Ha3oB) proves to be effective. And we sidetracked US politics by resurfacing Hunter's laptop, now they can focus on the core of their country being too senile/dysfunctional to operate & the middle-management to be corrupt.


----------



## narad

ItWillDo said:


> That aside, this is an example of how to prevent human suffering by simple surrender:


Frankly the better example of preventing human suffering is not invading a country and killing the people.


----------



## mehegama

ItWillDo said:


> Even taking the oversimplification and misunderstanding of the situation into account, how absolutely incompetent do you have to be to fail to install a security against invasions by provoking an invasion?
> 
> That aside, this is an example of how to prevent human suffering by simple surrender:
> 
> 
> 
> Granted, but then again you're the expert on bullshit for western audiences so I'm checking Nazov (Ha3oB) proves to be effective. And we sidetracked US politics by resurfacing Hunter's laptop, now they can focus on the core of their country being too senile/dysfunctional to operate & the middle-management to be corrupt.



next time someone invades your country just surrender.


----------



## ItWillDo

narad said:


> Frankly the better example of preventing human suffering is not invading a country and killing the people.


Agree completely! Adding on top of that "Don't provoke a country into invading", and we're both on the same page.



mehegama said:


> next time someone invades your country just surrender.


Well I've asked it in the beginning of this conflict in this same thread, so I'll ask it here again. What is so much better about the situation in Ukraine right now than it was before the conflict started? What would the impact of an immediate surrender have been? They could've potentially lost Luhansk & the Donbass region in annexation, the Zelenskyy-regime might have been changed, but aside from that a lot of people would still be alive right now and a lot of critical, expensive infrastructure still standing as well. 

The final outcome of this conflict will probably be exactly the same, except a lot of people will have lost their lives and no one is going to have the finances to rebuild Ukraine. The Russian Federation will likely not want to invest too much into Ukraine because of lack of cooperation and to counterpoint the sanctions, and the US/EU will be knee deep trying to recover from their own sanctions & energy crisis that they won't have any budget for it either.


----------



## mehegama

ItWillDo said:


> Agree completely! Adding on top of that "Don't provoke a country into invading", and we're both on the same page.
> 
> 
> Well I've asked it in the beginning of this conflict in this same thread, so I'll ask it here again. What is so much better about the situation in Ukraine right now than it was before the conflict started? What would the impact of an immediate surrender have been? They could've potentially lost Luhansk & the Donbass region in annexation, the Zelenskyy-regime might have been changed, but aside from that a lot of people would still be alive right now and a lot of critical, expensive infrastructure still standing as well.
> 
> The final outcome of this conflict will probably be exactly the same, except a lot of people will have lost their lives and no one is going to have the finances to rebuild Ukraine. The Russian Federation will likely not want to invest too much into Ukraine because of lack of cooperation and to counterpoint the sanctions, and the US/EU will be knee deep trying to recover from their own sanctions & energy crisis that they won't have any budget for it either.


very simplistic. What would have happened if the world had not reacted to the nazis/japanese? we would live in a world like the one in the Man from the high castle or wolfenstein. You realize that even if Russia succeeds to annex these areas, the damage for them is done. Their standards of living will go back to the early 90s for years to come. I do not see much future in Putin's regime.
In any case it is easy for us all to say just surrender but when they invade in your own country, trust me not a lot of people would follow your thought process


----------



## Adieu

Yup, enjoy your sugar lines! Coming soon: button cellphones and horse carriages.


----------



## bostjan

Coming back to something that it "grounded..."

Before this <<special operation>> started, between 10-30% of residents of Donbas was to be part of Russia, and the rest not. A small group of separatists violently took over some government buildings. So how is this <<special operation>> justified? That's the same sort of numbers as if Ross Perot had declared himself the president in the 1990's, citing public support and then started blasting the hell out of day care centers and hospitals in order to enforce that.

And before that one guy brings up the US and ___(insert sovereign nation here)___., any US invasions unsanctioned by the UN were illegal, and that doesn't mean that illegal invasions are fair game. It's the political version of "but mom, Johnny gets to punch his little sister!"


----------



## IwantTacos

oh you guys are still arguing with this idiot.
even Chinese state news isn't as dumb as this guy


----------



## Adieu

You gotta drive them away, else it turns ugly quick

I just watched an industry forum block & lock an OBITUARY for a distinguished Ukrainian member of the profession because the resident Russian troll insisted his death was a provocation, cited a doctored machine translation that turned "The deceased victim was a university lecturer" (truth) into "The man was murdered by a professor" (false), and got my attempt to post a correct translation blocked.

This Putinist trash has no honor and no hard limits.


----------



## oversteve

ItWillDo said:


> Agree completely! Adding on top of that "Don't provoke a country into invading", and we're both on the same page.


Provoking by being a neutral country and already having a russian base on it's territory?


----------



## Cyanide_Anima

Dudes and Dudettes: Stop pretending that ItWillDo's fascist sympathizing, Putin dong-gobbling ass is reachable though reason. It's not. He's steering the conversation and throwing Putin's feces disguised as information at the wall and watching everyone argue over it. It's shit no matter how you try to describe it. Ignore him.


----------



## thraxil

oversteve said:


> Provoking by being a neutral country and already having a russian base on it's territory?


----------



## Drew

narad said:


> Frankly the better example of preventing human suffering is not invading a country and killing the people.


This, no shit. 

This is the geopolitical argument of taking someone's arm, using it to slap them in the face, and then asking rhem "why do you keep slapping yourself in the face? stop slapping yourself! *slap, slap* Stop hurting yourself! *slap*"

I think its pretty rich to blame the Ukrainian civilians for getting shelled because if they would just let Russia have their country there's no need to shell them. Maybe a geopolitical "she shouldn't have worn that dress" is a better analogy, but either way that's a pretty sick and depraved argument to make about the Russian wanton destruction of Ukrainian civilian life.


----------



## nightflameauto

Victim blaming is a big hobby is some circles. I think a certain someone here just got lost when looking for his fetish site.


----------



## oversteve

btw about Mariupol, here's a map of damage 3 days ago, all of that is military infrastructure or Azov bases according to Russia and ItWillDo claims...


----------



## ItWillDo

Drew said:


> This, no shit.
> 
> This is the geopolitical argument of taking someone's arm, using it to slap them in the face, and then asking rhem "why do you keep slapping yourself in the face? stop slapping yourself! *slap, slap* Stop hurting yourself! *slap*"
> 
> I think its pretty rich to blame the Ukrainian civilians for getting shelled because if they would just let Russia have their country there's no need to shell them. Maybe a geopolitical "she shouldn't have worn that dress" is a better analogy, but either way that's a pretty sick and depraved argument to make about the Russian wanton destruction of Ukrainian civilian life.


Nice strawman, but I used a different analogy a while back. It's more of a "fuck around and find out" scenario where Zelenskyy thought he actually had any support in the West. I think if the West considered him to be in the right, or to be important enough, they would've joined in.

Or perhaps the politically inexperienced, Pro-US comedian was installed during the 2014 coup, got tempted by his masters and then they left him to be put down. Who knows.



Cyanide_Anima said:


> Dudes and Dudettes: Stop pretending that ItWillDo's fascist sympathizing, Putin dong-gobbling ass is reachable though reason. It's not. He's steering the conversation and throwing Putin's feces disguised as information at the wall and watching everyone argue over it. It's shit no matter how you try to describe it. Ignore him.


Is this considered funny and/or witty in your circles? No one is forcing you to engage in the discussions here, and as you've already taken the freedom to prove, it's hardly doubtful you'd provide anything worthy of discussion.


----------



## bostjan

ItWillDo said:


> Nice strawman, but I used a different analogy a while back. It's more of a "fuck around and find out" scenario where Zelenskyy thought he actually had any support in the West. I think if the West considered him to be in the right, or to be important enough, they would've joined in.
> 
> Or perhaps the politically inexperienced, Pro-US comedian was installed during the 2014 coup, got tempted by his masters and then they left him to be put down. Who knows.
> 
> 
> Is this considered funny and/or witty in your circles? No one is forcing you to engage in the discussions here, and as you've already taken the freedom to prove, it's hardly doubtful you'd provide anything worthy of discussion.


What, exactly, did Ukraine do to Russia, to "fuck around and find out?!"

Do you think Ukraine's electoral process is less trustworthy than Russia's? If so, how? If not, then how does Russia earn the right to intervene?


----------



## ItWillDo

bostjan said:


> What, exactly, did Ukraine do to Russia, to "fuck around and find out?!"
> 
> Do you think Ukraine's electoral process is less trustworthy than Russia's? If so, how? If not, then how does Russia earn the right to intervene?


Pretext: https://www.crisisgroup.org/content/conflict-ukraines-donbas-visual-explainer

Trigger: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...e-military-response-to-aggressive-nato-russia


> The demands include a ban on Ukraine entering Nato and a limit to the deployment of troops and weapons to Nato’s eastern flank, in effect returning Nato forces to where they were stationed in 1997, before an eastward expansion.


And we can argue about the whole "muh Russians would invade anyway" scenario, I still stand by the statement that the pinnacle of diplomatic incompetence would be to escalate an invasion in order to try and prevent one.


----------



## Cyanide_Anima

It's kind of amazing that a person can write and presumably speak perfect English while simultaneously making incoherent and self-refuting points. The brain is truly remarkable.


----------



## bostjan

ItWillDo said:


> Pretext: https://www.crisisgroup.org/content/conflict-ukraines-donbas-visual-explainer
> 
> Trigger: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...e-military-response-to-aggressive-nato-russia
> 
> And we can argue about the whole "muh Russians would invade anyway" scenario, I still stand by the statement that the pinnacle of diplomatic incompetence would be to escalate an invasion in order to try and prevent one.


The first link is a map and tally of casualties, which has nothing to do with my questions.

The second link says



your source said:


> Russia’s defence minister, Sergei Shoigu, said an unnamed private US military company had acquired chemical weapons and was planning to launch a “provocation” in the east Ukrainian cities of Avdiivka and Krasny Liman. Russia’s military previously made similar claims in Syria, although the predicted attacks often did not take place.



So can we agree, then, that Russia has no justification for the <<special operation>>?!


----------



## ItWillDo

Cyanide_Anima said:


> It's kind of amazing that a person can write and presumably speak perfect English while simultaneously making incoherent and self-refuting points. The brain is truly remarkable.


I'll be able to assist you better when you provide me with said examples. 

Also, it's cute and I appreciate you changing your prose just for me but it's not necessary.


----------



## ItWillDo

bostjan said:


> The first link is a map and tally of casualties, which has nothing to do with my questions.
> 
> The second link says
> 
> 
> 
> So can we agree, then, that Russia has no justification for the <<special operation>>?!


Well, exactly. It's a visualisation of the ever ongoing conflict between Pro-Russian separatists & Ukraine in the Donbass region. Here's the full WIki experience if that's more your taste: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas

And repeated as in previous post, the "justification" would be this:


> The demands include a ban on Ukraine entering Nato and a limit to the deployment of troops and weapons to Nato’s eastern flank, in effect returning Nato forces to where they were stationed in 1997, before an eastward expansion.


----------



## LostTheTone

ItWillDo said:


> Well, exactly. It's a visualisation of the ever ongoing conflict between Pro-Russian separatists & Ukraine in the Donbass region. Here's the full WIki experience if that's more your taste: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas
> 
> And repeated as in previous post, the "justification" would be this:



So, the justification is "Russia don't like that their subjugated territories asked NATO to defend them against Russia"? And that's enough reason for Russia to invade anyone not a NATO member yet? 

Yeah, that sounds super shady that Estonia and Latvia want as many British and American troops on their land as possible.

You are arguing, in effect, that Russia gets to unilaterally re-declare itself an empire whenever it likes, and take back literally anything that it says it wants, and if anyone disagrees then they deserve to get the (suspiciously unreliable) Russian tanks sent in.


----------



## bostjan

> The demands include a ban on Ukraine entering Nato and a limit to the deployment of troops and weapons to Nato’s eastern flank, in effect returning Nato forces to where they were stationed in 1997, before an eastward expansion.



Since when does one country have the right to demand another country not join an alliance or else die?!


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Since when does one country have the right to demand another country not join an alliance or else die?!



Well quite.

Russia can, I suppose, invoke that might makes right and simply invade if they really insist. 

But the idea that they are somehow justified in this is nonsense. Beyond nonsense. Sure, a cynical invasion to assault a neighbor before they can make powerful allies. But that's purely and utterly a matter of repulsive selfishness. 

Any talk of geopolitics or strategic concerns is an absolute lie. We have missiles that can hit them from 10,000 miles away. Silos in the US can hit Russia within minutes. What difference does Ukraine make? 

No, Russia invade Ukraine because they can; because they wish to. Not because they need to.


----------



## Drew

ItWillDo said:


> Nice strawman, but I used a different analogy a while back. It's more of a "fuck around and find out" scenario where Zelenskyy thought he actually had any support in the West. I think if the West considered him to be in the right, or to be important enough, they would've joined in.
> 
> Or perhaps the politically inexperienced, Pro-US comedian was installed during the 2014 coup, got tempted by his masters and then they left him to be put down. Who knows.
> 
> 
> Is this considered funny and/or witty in your circles? No one is forcing you to engage in the discussions here, and as you've already taken the freedom to prove, it's hardly doubtful you'd provide anything worthy of discussion.


I second @bostjan's questions and I'm legitimately curious what you think Ukraine did to "deserve" invasion by Russia.

You say Russia invaded because Ukraine's NATO membership bid was a sign of "aggression." Ukraine had been working towards NATO membership since 1992 when Ukraine joined the North Atlantic Cooperation Council, 1994 when Ukraine and NATO signed a framework agreement, joining NATO has been a stated component of Ukraine's military doctrine since 2005, the US has publicly backed NATO membership since 2008, the same year a Membership Action Plan between NATO and Ukraine was laid out indicating the forms Ukraine would need to go through to become a full member of the alliance.

Was Putin somehow unaware of all of this until January of 2022 and then realized holy shit, Ukraine might become a NATO member? Is he really that oblivious? Or did he just decide that it was a convenient excuse? Because nothing in Ukraine being on path to eventually become a full NATO member was new. Why did this only now become an "act of aggression"?


----------



## bostjan

Right. If Mexico wanted to form an alliance with North Korea, would that give the USA the right to invade Mexico and just take it over?! The entire idea seems to be just completely unhinged.

Also, 1. Zelensky has said he doesn't even want to join NATO anymore, basically, because they are all cowards anyway, and 2. other countries neighbouring Russia _have_ joined NATO and were not invaded, and 3. Ukraine hadn't even joined NATO yet, so, even if the premise meant anything at all, the premise doesn't connect to the antecedent of this logical statement.

It's akin to saying "I have the right to come over to your house and kick your dog, because birds have six legs." Nothing in that justification makes sense, none of it logically connects to anything else, and there is no reason ever for me to kick anyone's dog especially at their own house, so it's just total logical garbage.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Since when does one country have the right to demand another country not join an alliance or else die?!



...and then proceed to whine that everyone wishes them ill and seeks their demise.

I WONDER *WHY*.

Hmmm. Shocking.

PS I was born in Moscow. If this Putinist crap doesn't convince me, you can bet it doesn't convince others who had no cause to ever even attempt to like Russia for no apparent reason. And it sure as hell won't convince Ukrainians in Ukraine.


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Right. If Mexico wanted to form an alliance with North Korea, would that give the USA the right to invade Mexico and just take it over?! The entire idea seems to be just completely unhinged.
> 
> Also, 1. Zelensky has said he doesn't even want to join NATO anymore, basically, because they are all cowards anyway, and 2. other countries neighbouring Russia _have_ joined NATO and were not invaded, and 3. Ukraine hadn't even joined NATO yet, so, even if the premise meant anything at all, the premise doesn't connect to the antecedent of this logical statement.
> 
> It's akin to saying "I have the right to come over to your house and kick your dog, because birds have six legs." Nothing in that justification makes sense, none of it logically connects to anything else, and there is no reason ever for me to kick anyone's dog especially at their own house, so it's just total logical garbage.



I find it helpful to get away from the hypotheticals that people throw around about Mexico or Canada or whatever. I think its helpful to look at history. 

Let's take a country like Serbia, which was sandwiched between three huge empires in the 1900s - Russia, Austria-Hungary and the Ottomans. They had just gained their independence from the Ottomans, and sought an alliance with Russia to protect them. Would the Ottomans or Austo-Hungarians have been justified in invading Serbia in 1912, just because they sought an alliance that had yet to be created?

The Russian strategy here appears to be something like playing a game of Europa Universalis; where you get wind of your conquest target trying to make some alliances so you damn the stability loss and invade today, so you don't have to fight France or Prussia or whatever and you get to keep Bohemia. It's ultra cynical. And in a video game it's cool. But in the real world it's appalling. 

That's the only word for it. Appalling.


----------



## fantom

ItWillDo said:


> Well I've asked it in the beginning of this conflict in this same thread, so I'll ask it here again. What is so much better about the situation in Ukraine right now than it was before the conflict started? What would the impact of an immediate surrender have been? They could've potentially lost Luhansk & the Donbass region in annexation, the Zelenskyy-regime might have been changed, but aside from that a lot of people would still be alive right now and a lot of critical, expensive infrastructure still standing as well.



Got it. So using this reasoning, if NATO invades Russia, Russia should just surrender territory and kick Putin out of office.

I was against NATO attacking Russia, but if this is how Russian people view decisions, I'm all for it. Sadly, you repeatedly project Russian behavior onto Ukraine and NATO and believe you are right based on state information while intentionally calling everyone who disagrees corrupt. Can you just just accept that you are very strongly biased and inconsistent with your world view due to it?


----------



## LostTheTone

fantom said:


> Got it. So using this reasoning, if NATO invades Russia, Russia should just surrender territory and kick Putin out of office.
> 
> I was against NATO attacking Russia, but if this is how Russian people view decisions, I'm all for it. Sadly, you repeatedly project Russian behavior onto Ukraine and NATO and believe you are right based on state information while intentionally calling everyone who disagrees corrupt. Can you just just accept that you are very strongly biased and inconsistent with your world view due to it?



Good point.

Let's start with Kaliningrad. And let's face it, St Petersburg is within easy reach of NATO troops in Riga. Why not? Since Russia is all about cynical expansionism, why shouldn't we just declare that we are rebuilding the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Why not? They are our bros, and we got their back.

So why doesn't NATO do this?

Oh right, because NATO is a defensive alliance. NATO is no more likely to invade Russia as it is to invade Sweden. Which just underlines how obscene claims of NATO's threat is. And it all goes to show just how right the Baltic triplets were to join, and even Finland and Sweden have sharply revised their position.


----------



## Adieu

Kaliningrad is clearly fated to be Germany again. Or maybe Poland. Soon.

Putin is too stupid to keep his shit intact.


----------



## AMOS




----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Kaliningrad is clearly fated to be Germany again. Or maybe Poland. Soon.
> 
> Putin is too stupid to keep his shit intact.



Lets split the difference and recreate Prussia!


----------



## jaxadam

LostTheTone said:


> Lets split the difference and recreate Prussia!



And there’s already a King!


----------



## vilk

Russian troll has no logical rebuttal. Cue the soy-wojak memes.


----------



## LostTheTone

jaxadam said:


> And there’s already a King!



This guys gets it! Monarchies are fun! And I think the House of Hohenzollern (which miraculously my autocomplete knows how to spell) deserves another shot.


----------



## ItWillDo

vilk said:


> Russian troll has no logical rebuttal. Cue the soy-wojak memes.


Relax, what is with you weebs being extra salty? I'll take care of your arguments as well, don't worry.



bostjan said:


> Right. If Mexico wanted to form an alliance with North Korea, would that give the USA the right to invade Mexico and just take it over?! The entire idea seems to be just completely unhinged.
> 
> Also, 1. Zelensky has said he doesn't even want to join NATO anymore, basically, because they are all cowards anyway, and 2. other countries neighbouring Russia _have_ joined NATO and were not invaded, and 3. Ukraine hadn't even joined NATO yet, so, even if the premise meant anything at all, the premise doesn't connect to the antecedent of this logical statement.
> 
> It's akin to saying "I have the right to come over to your house and kick your dog, because birds have six legs." Nothing in that justification makes sense, none of it logically connects to anything else, and there is no reason ever for me to kick anyone's dog especially at their own house, so it's just total logical garbage.


No, that doesn't make sense indeed because your example is rubbish. NATO reserves itself the right to place a "Missile Defence System" in all allied nations, so currently the setup looks close to this: 


In case Ukraine would join, I'm pretty confident the missile system would expand towards the borders of Russia as well, which is something I completely understand they wouldn't appreciate given the relations with NATO the past century.

A better comparison for the US would be Russia installing a missile system in Cuba. You know, something like the Cuban Missile crisis maybe?



fantom said:


> Got it. So using this reasoning, if NATO invades Russia, Russia should just surrender territory and kick Putin out of office.
> 
> I was against NATO attacking Russia, but if this is how Russian people view decisions, I'm all for it. Sadly, you repeatedly project Russian behavior onto Ukraine and NATO and believe you are right based on state information while intentionally calling everyone who disagrees corrupt. Can you just just accept that you are very strongly biased and inconsistent with your world view due to it?


First, I'm not Russian nor am I an ambassador for the people of Russia. I just speak from my own understanding and interpretation of everything happening. Second, let's not look too naive at things. People here, like @bostjan for example, have been speaking of (il)legal invasions like there is some kind of consent-system for war and a global entity capable of policing this. If there was a union delusional enough to attribute itself to this, it would probably be NATO and look how that's working out?

In the past conflicts this might've worked as they've been dealing with Middle Eastern nations who struggle both economically and military, but the same methods don't apply when dealing with superpowers such as Russia & China as they hold a great amount of counter-leverage (again, whether it's military or economically). Do you think NATO would be holding back this much if it was solely Belarus being the aggressor? No, they know what & who they are up against and that's why they are threading carefully.

If Ukraine's NATO mission would've provoked a comparable surrounding nation who is equal in strength, it would've likely been fair game and have a high success rate. But this was just foolish and bound to fail.


----------



## Flappydoodle

ItWillDo said:


> Agree completely! Adding on top of that "Don't provoke a country into invading", and we're both on the same page.
> 
> 
> Well I've asked it in the beginning of this conflict in this same thread, so I'll ask it here again. What is so much better about the situation in Ukraine right now than it was before the conflict started? What would the impact of an immediate surrender have been? They could've potentially lost Luhansk & the Donbass region in annexation, the Zelenskyy-regime might have been changed, but aside from that a lot of people would still be alive right now and a lot of critical, expensive infrastructure still standing as well.
> 
> The final outcome of this conflict will probably be exactly the same, except a lot of people will have lost their lives and no one is going to have the finances to rebuild Ukraine. The Russian Federation will likely not want to invest too much into Ukraine because of lack of cooperation and to counterpoint the sanctions, and the US/EU will be knee deep trying to recover from their own sanctions & energy crisis that they won't have any budget for it either.



The final outcome likely will not be the same. 

Letting Putin bully smaller countries into quick submission sends a chilling message to the rest of the world. Why stop at Ukraine then? And China, Iran, N Korea etc would all be looking on an salivating. And American and European allies (S Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Eastern Europe etc) would be panicking if they see that nobody will actually support them. The strong resistance by Ukraine and strong condemnation and sanctions are a message that rolling tanks across Europe is not acceptable any more. 

This is overall a stupid argument where is very clearly one aggressor. Nobody is saying Ukraine is perfect or behave like saints. But one country blatantly sent tanks across the border of another. One country is using unguided bombs and artillery strikes on cities. Are Ukrainians basing aspects of defence out of residential buildings? Probably. But again, there is one clear aggressor and if Russian troops went back to Russia there would be zero deaths. It’s insane to try and put the blame on Ukraine lol.


----------



## Flappydoodle

ItWillDo said:


> A better comparison for the US would be Russia installing a missile system in Cuba. You know, something like the Cuban Missile crisis maybe?



Fucking lol. Those were nuclear missiles not a missile DEFENCE system. Goodness me


----------



## narad

Flappydoodle said:


> The final outcome likely will not be the same.
> 
> Letting Putin bully smaller countries into quick submission sends a chilling message to the rest of the world. Why stop at Ukraine then? And China, Iran, N Korea etc would all be looking on an salivating. And American and European allies (S Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Eastern Europe etc) would be panicking if they see that nobody will actually support them. The strong resistance by Ukraine and strong condemnation and sanctions are a message that rolling tanks across Europe is not acceptable any more.



I mean prior to this I think most people (me at least, a child of the 80s) had pretty high expectations of the Russia military, they had a kind of scary reputation. Basically a left-over from cold war era rep. Now they just seem like a clumsy unprofessional outfit.


----------



## ItWillDo

Flappydoodle said:


> The final outcome likely will not be the same.
> 
> Letting Putin bully smaller countries into quick submission sends a chilling message to the rest of the world. Why stop at Ukraine then? And China, Iran, N Korea etc would all be looking on an salivating. And American and European allies (S Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Eastern Europe etc) would be panicking if they see that nobody will actually support them. The strong resistance by Ukraine and strong condemnation and sanctions are a message that rolling tanks across Europe is not acceptable any more.
> 
> This is overall a stupid argument where is very clearly one aggressor. Nobody is saying Ukraine is perfect or behave like saints. But one country blatantly sent tanks across the border of another. One country is using unguided bombs and artillery strikes on cities. Are Ukrainians basing aspects of defence out of residential buildings? Probably. But again, there is one clear aggressor and if Russian troops went back to Russia there would be zero deaths. It’s insane to try and put the blame on Ukraine lol.


Whataboutism but I don't understand how this is any different from America's imperialist behavior? Why do you condemn Russia for protecting its interest while it's free game for the US? Vietnam, Afghanistan, Syria, etc... Do you think all of these conflicts came from a sense of higher morality? When the US sent tanks across the border of Iraq searching for so called WMDs and razed complete cities to the ground, was it also not an aggressor? Yes it was. 

And that is just what superpowers do when they want to defend their interest. Of course Russia is the only aggressor here and I've never argued about that at all. My point all along was that there was no gain to be made from provoking Russia.



Flappydoodle said:


> Fucking lol. Those were nuclear missiles not a missile DEFENCE system. Goodness me


I'm sorry I can't realistically match you with a 1:1 example, but the concept is the same. It's a ballistic missile system located close to the borders of a superpower and posing a threat. 

And I'll also lmao at presuming it can only be used for "defence". This isn't Command&Conquer, if you fire a payload up, gravity will ensure that it goes down somewhere as well. It would be like stationing big fixed MLRS somewhere.


----------



## LostTheTone

narad said:


> I mean prior to this I think most people (me at least, a child of the 80s) had pretty high expectations of the Russia military, they had a kind of scary reputation. Basically a left-over from cold war era rep. Now they just seem like a clumsy unprofessional outfit.



Yeah man, the Red Army ain't what it used to be. 

During the Cold War, they did still have some structural problems which meant that they were (probably) never quite an individual match for Western troops and it seems that these have only been exacerbated since, and combined with new, exciting problems. 

The age old problem for Russia was that they have always been a conscript army. Their officer core was pretty damn good, or at least they have all been trained well and properly understand military concepts, but below that level there were real issues. Officers are important, but the critical element for any military force are the senior enlisted men; sergeants, corporals and squad leaders. 

I'm sure some folks who have actually served in a Western army will pipe up to affirm it, but in general in the West, Sarge is a hard bastard who has been everywhere, done everything, knows all the tricks and fucking loves his job. Most of them have been "in" for ten years or more, and many will stay in uniform from their teens until they (grudgingly) retire. They are the core driver of squad discipline and esprit de corps, conduct constant training and assessment (of the "YOU PRESS THE GREEN BUTTON, IDIOT" variety) and most importantly give the new guys a link to the history of their unit and a sense of continuity. 

The Russians don't have that, and they have also hugely devalued the prestige of the army since the Soviet era. So the guys who actually have to do the fighting are (fairly) well led at the top, but they don't have experienced combat veterans leading them on in their squads, and they don't have institutional experience of fighting modern combined arms, and they don't have anything like the moral or dedication of a western force. We have heard tell of Russian soldiers who had no idea they were actually going to fight a war. Think about that. They were sent into combat without understanding they were about to get shot at. 

Russia is basically trying to make up for the fact that their troops don't really want to fight by using firepower to overwhelm the Ukrainians. But at some point the poor bloody infantry has to go in and fight man to man, and the Russians just don't have the spirit for it. Even the Chechen and Syrian dudes don't. Those guys have fought like that before, but not against a force with radios and modern weapons.

So, the Russians have problems. They are the same problems we always suspected, but even more so. It doesn't help that along with the loss of prestige to the army has come inevitable corruption and dereliction. These logistics and fulfilment guys don't want to get out and check the tyres and lube up all the parts. Its cold and they don't get paid much, and most of them are conscripts who don't want to be there. 

And so the Russians grind to a halt. And that's all there really is to be said. It was pretty bad in Chechnya where they literally could not take Grozny without levelling it. But in Ukraine the cities are bigger and better defended, and I don't think that Russia even has enough bombs to level Kiev. So they sit and keep plinking away because that's all they can do.


----------



## bostjan

ItWillDo said:


> Whataboutism but I don't understand how this is any different from America's imperialist behavior? Why do you condemn Russia for protecting its interest while it's free game for the US? Vietnam, Afghanistan, Syria, etc... Do you think all of these conflicts came from a sense of higher morality? When the US sent tanks across the border of Iraq searching for so called WMDs and razed complete cities to the ground, was it also not an aggressor? Yes it was.
> 
> 
> I'm sorry I can't realistically match you with a 1:1 example, but the concept is the same. It's a ballistic missile system located close to the borders of a superpower and posing a threat.
> 
> And I'll also lmao at presuming it can only be used for "defence". This isn't Command&Conquer, if you fire a payload up, gravity will ensure that it goes down somewhere as well. It would be like stationing big fixed MLRS somewhere.


Bullshit.

The Cuban missile crisis was handled illegally by the USA, and the situation was two orders of magnitude more threatening than Ukraine toward Russia.

I can't go murder someone and then say "Well, Manson did it and was never convicted of murder, so it's perfectly justified."

Also, none of your arguments go beyond what I preemptively pointed out.


----------



## Flappydoodle

ItWillDo said:


> Whataboutism but I don't understand how this is any different from America's imperialist behavior? Why do you condemn Russia for protecting its interest while it's free game for the US? Vietnam, Afghanistan, Syria, etc... Do you think all of these conflicts came from a sense of higher morality? When the US sent tanks across the border of Iraq searching for so called WMDs and razed complete cities to the ground, was it also not an aggressor? Yes it was.
> 
> And that is just what superpowers do when they want to defend their interest. Of course Russia is the only aggressor here and I've never argued about that at all. My point all along was that there was no gain to be made from provoking Russia.
> 
> 
> I'm sorry I can't realistically match you with a 1:1 example, but the concept is the same. It's a ballistic missile system located close to the borders of a superpower and posing a threat.
> 
> And I'll also lmao at presuming it can only be used for "defence". This isn't Command&Conquer, if you fire a payload up, gravity will ensure that it goes down somewhere as well. It would be like stationing big fixed MLRS somewhere.



I think Afghanistan was reasonably justified due to 9/11. Iraq 2.0 probably less so. That depends how you interpret the WMD thing. Seems like it probably wasn’t justified. Vietnam I’m not sure. I wasn’t around at the time. 

However, I also don’t recall anybody saying America were saints. 

And no, a missile defence system is just that. It’s for defence and intercepting incoming missiles. It has no offensive value, either from first or second strike points of view. Now, you could argue that developing a perfect shield undermines the principles of MAD, if one country believes they’d be immune from second strike. But Russia is also boasting about (and apparently using) hypersonic missiles. So that’s a moot point. 

End of the day, I just don’t see Ukranian provocation. It was kinda pencilled in that maybe they would join NATO, at some point to be determined later. It’s so hard to believe that this is truly about fear of NATO aggression and/or any sort of self defence.

Clearly (IMO) this is some sort of personal vendetta by Putin. Trying to restore Russian glory or something. Maybe he doesn’t like the idea of democracies on his doorstep and his citizens getting any fancy ideas. Or he’s trying to make a mark by reclaiming territory. I find it so hard to wrap my head around a scenario where he is behaving rationally and the ‘prize’ of subjugating Ukraine is worth the costs.


----------



## Adieu

ItWillDo said:


> Whataboutism but I don't understand how this is any different from America's imperialist behavior? Why do you condemn Russia for protecting its interest while it's free game for the US? Vietnam, Afghanistan, Syria, etc... Do you think all of these conflicts came from a sense of higher morality? When the US sent tanks across the border of Iraq searching for so called WMDs and razed complete cities to the ground, was it also not an aggressor? Yes it was.
> 
> And that is just what superpowers do when they want to defend their interest. Of course Russia is the only aggressor here and I've never argued about that at all. My point all along was that there was no gain to be made from provoking Russia.
> 
> 
> I'm sorry I can't realistically match you with a 1:1 example, but the concept is the same. It's a ballistic missile system located close to the borders of a superpower and posing a threat.
> 
> And I'll also lmao at presuming it can only be used for "defence". This isn't Command&Conquer, if you fire a payload up, gravity will ensure that it goes down somewhere as well. It would be like stationing big fixed MLRS somewhere.



WHAT interests? You got elderly people receiving pensions of ~$60 per month ($100 if "lucky", $150 if lucky & in Moscow) and 1 million covid dead, y'all don't have the TIME or MONEY for any foreign interests. ANYWHERE.

Illegitimate leader's schizophrenic delusions =/= national interests


----------



## profwoot

Don't forget to stop responding to the Putin-fellating asshole so the interesting and informative posters don't all ghost the thread, please.


----------



## Flappydoodle

narad said:


> I mean prior to this I think most people (me at least, a child of the 80s) had pretty high expectations of the Russia military, they had a kind of scary reputation. Basically a left-over from cold war era rep. Now they just seem like a clumsy unprofessional outfit.



Yeah, a bit of that too. But man, it's been so weird to watch it unfold, and extremely hard to separate what is real and what is propaganda from either side. 

Russia also seems to be holding back in some way, so it's hard to see what they're actually trying to do. None of the western intel services can understand their reluctance to use air power.


----------



## ItWillDo

bostjan said:


> Bullshit.
> 
> The Cuban missile crisis was handled illegally by the USA, and the situation was two orders of magnitude more threatening than Ukraine toward Russia.
> 
> I can't go murder someone and then say "Well, Manson did it and was never convicted of murder, so it's perfectly justified."
> 
> Also, none of your arguments go beyond what I preemptively pointed out.


I'm not going to keep replying the same answers to each one of you individually, read the previous one. There is no realistic 1:1 comparison in history where the magnitude matches, but conceptually it's the same thing whether you want to accept it or not. And I can't I can't oblige on your remarks because you keep circling around the same concepts of legality to which I already pointed out, there is no centralised global judicial system capable of policing these kind of things. You've seen the UN council in action, they can throw around some sanctions but in the end they are ultimately power- and/or careless.



Flappydoodle said:


> I think Afghanistan was reasonably justified due to 9/11. Iraq 2.0 probably less so. That depends how you interpret the WMD thing. Seems like it probably wasn’t justified. Vietnam I’m not sure. I wasn’t around at the time.
> 
> However, I also don’t recall anybody saying America were saints.
> 
> And no, a missile defence system is just that. It’s for defence and intercepting incoming missiles. It has no offensive value, either from first or second strike points of view. Now, you could argue that developing a perfect shield undermines the principles of MAD, if one country believes they’d be immune from second strike. But Russia is also boasting about (and apparently using) hypersonic missiles. So that’s a moot point.
> 
> End of the day, I just don’t see Ukranian provocation. It was kinda pencilled in that maybe they would join NATO, at some point to be determined later. It’s so hard to believe that this is truly about fear of NATO aggression and/or any sort of self defence.
> 
> Clearly (IMO) this is some sort of personal vendetta by Putin. Trying to restore Russian glory or something. Maybe he doesn’t like the idea of democracies on his doorstep and his citizens getting any fancy ideas. Or he’s trying to make a mark by reclaiming territory. I find it so hard to wrap my head around a scenario where he is behaving rationally and the ‘prize’ of subjugating Ukraine is worth the costs.


NATO BMD is the main defensive/stationary element in their architecture, but the program itself is the IAMD which also includes counter offence strategies such as fighter jets, ships, etc... These can all be used in an attacking way if required, and aside from that provide major defensive capabilities when attacking borders. I don't think the US would be very happy if Russia or China would've installed a similar program in Mexico for example.

And in the end, you don't need to see the Ukrainian provocation if refuse to as no one is going to force you into that position. If you want to look at Russia like some big, bad bully who likes to pick on smaller countries in its vicinity, that's your choice. I'd only find it strange why Russia wouldn't have usurped Ukraine a few years ago when it was still in a much weaker military position.


----------



## ItWillDo

profwoot said:


> Don't forget to stop responding to the Putin-fellating asshole so the interesting and informative posters don't all ghost the thread, please.


----------



## Xaios

Flappydoodle said:


> Russia also seems to be holding back in some way, so it's hard to see what they're actually trying to do. None of the western intel services can understand their reluctance to use air power.


Indeed, especially considering how Russia accidentally revealed they've had about 26 thousand casualties, including 10 thousand soldiers killed: https://www.independent.ie/world-ne...ariupol-after-russian-onslaught-41472840.html (Scroll down to the "Russian toll" header.) Basically they're getting absolutely pasted on the ground, so the fact of them not using their air power makes things even more confusing.


----------



## ArtDecade

Xaios said:


> Indeed, especially considering how Russia accidentally revealed they've had about 26 thousand casualties, including 10 thousand soldiers killed: https://www.independent.ie/world-ne...ariupol-after-russian-onslaught-41472840.html (Scroll down to the "Russian toll" header.) Basically they're getting absolutely pasted on the ground, so the fact of them not using their air power makes things even more confusing.



Putin is probably worried that they will get lit up as well and his entire military complex will look like an utter joke.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Xaios said:


> Indeed, especially considering how Russia accidentally revealed they've had about 26 thousand casualties, including 10 thousand soldiers killed: https://www.independent.ie/world-ne...ariupol-after-russian-onslaught-41472840.html (Scroll down to the "Russian toll" header.) Basically they're getting absolutely pasted on the ground, so the fact of them not using their air power makes things even more confusing.


I just have no idea what to believe and it's basically impossible for any of us plebs to know

Russia says like 500 deaths, which sounds impossible

Ukraine saying 15,000, which also sounds impossible IMO

UK intelligence estimates around 7,000. That's still a shitload in 3 weeks, considering US total deaths in Iraq was around 4,500 in 20 years. But I don't know how trustworthy that number is

And that leaked number maybe saying 10,000. I'd love to believe it, but it's also reasonable to believe that it was a hack. Who really knows.


----------



## Adieu

Flappydoodle said:


> I just have no idea what to believe and it's basically impossible for any of us plebs to know
> 
> Russia says like 500 deaths, which sounds impossible
> 
> Ukraine saying 15,000, which also sounds impossible IMO
> 
> UK intelligence estimates around 7,000. That's still a shitload in 3 weeks, considering US total deaths in Iraq was around 4,500 in 20 years. But I don't know how trustworthy that number is
> 
> And that leaked number maybe saying 10,000. I'd love to believe it, but it's also reasonable to believe that it was a hack. Who really knows.



UK intelligence said 7k a week ago.

Also, since the geniuses thought they were driving in unopposed and spread out thin, nobody really knows. It's not like headcounts in a trench, even their bosses aren't sure who's dead, captured, missing, wounded, deserted, or just out of comms and wandering about somewhere.

Additionally, the Russians deployed DNR and LNR separatist conscripts, paramilitary cops, marines, paratroopers, mercs, etc., and are gonna make a point of NOT counting those even if pressed to report somewhat credible *Army* casualties.


----------



## LostTheTone

Xaios said:


> Indeed, especially considering how Russia accidentally revealed they've had about 26 thousand casualties, including 10 thousand soldiers killed: https://www.independent.ie/world-ne...ariupol-after-russian-onslaught-41472840.html (Scroll down to the "Russian toll" header.) Basically they're getting absolutely pasted on the ground, so the fact of them not using their air power makes things even more confusing.



At this point I think it is relatively clear that the Russians genuinely cannot use their air power in the way that NATO nations can.

Russian air power is genuinely less sophisticated than Western equivalents anyway. They didn't have the War On Terror to keep pumping R&D dollars into their programs, so they definitely have fallen behind. But they also don't have the kind of coordination that would be needed to make their existing assets work properly. Close support of your own units is difficult, and takes very good communications infrastructure. Maybe the air force is great, but the Russian troops on the ground don't know how to coordinate with air, even if they do have the gear to do it.

But the Russians aren't even flying coordinated formations. We don't see pictures of more than two or three planes flying together. And that points to a really big problem somewhere. Might be with air control or with the pilots, but clearly the planes are not comfortable operating together in the same air space.

Think about this - Every Russian jet is a fighter, right? They can all take air-to-air missiles, and it is standard that every mission would carry some self-defense missiles in case they encounter other fighters. And yet the Ukrainians are flying drones all the damn time. All the time. The Russians are not keeping a constant air presence, and they not even challenging to keep air superiority. That's crazy to me. This is a basic function of the air force, but they aren't doing it.

I don't believe they would be operating like this is they had a real option.


----------



## Adieu

Pretty sure they literally have NOTHING that can lock on a Bayraktar.

Just machine gun fire if they see it and get old school lucky.


----------



## LostTheTone

Adieu said:


> Pretty sure they literally have NOTHING that can lock on a Bayraktar.
> 
> Just machine gun fire if they see it and get old school lucky.



Indeed.

But that's part of the problem. They SHOULD be able to shoot them down. Drones aren't new, and the US has been worrying about them for what 20 years or so? And, like any good military, they have figured out that if they can build it so can someone else.

Maybe the missiles don't work right, or the radars, or the IR heads, but they are designed to shoot down drones and they can't. That's a problem.


----------



## Drew

ItWillDo said:


> There is no realistic 1:1 comparison in history where the magnitude matches...


I mean, a wiser man might realize that the lack of historical parallels to Russia's actions that are broadly seen as being justified is cause for concern here, but hey, all's fair in love and war, amirite?!


----------



## Adieu

Really? Have you people studied 1930's European history? Putin's speechwriters, strategists, and proagandists certainly have

Or do you mean that Hitler was far, far more powerful and scary? Yeah that part is true


----------



## sleewell

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Fascinating claimed intercepted call from Russian officer near Mykolaiv to superiors in Russia. He says:<br>- This is worse than Chechnya<br>- 50% of troops have frostbite<br>- They can’t evacuate the dead<br>- Don’t have enough tents<br>- RU plane dropped a bomb on their own position  <a href="https://t.co/3KjGrqD5jZ">pic.twitter.com/3KjGrqD5jZ</a></p>&mdash; Dmitri Alperovitch (@DAlperovitch) <a href="">March 23, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


----------



## BMFan30

fantom said:


> As much as I get it... It still isn't a good thing for society to celebrate killing people. That plays straight into the Russian narrative.


It's good to defend your own country. You would cheer and holler if the US got invaded. 

Hell, many Americans cheered and hollered when they invaded Afghanistan when it turned out that 9/11 was an inside job used to fire up the flint for the war in the Middle East. America was Afghanistan's Russia back then and every American backed it.


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> And while this conflict might have been presented formally as a "denazification" & defence, the intent behind it was always clear. Preservation of the circle of influence (Lugansk/Donbass) & retaliation for 'disobeyance'. While Ukraine might come forward presenting itself as an independent nation, it has always been governed/puppeteerd by either Russia or the West. Funnily enough, the current sitting president actually even did a comedy sketch about it once: see here. I personally think Zelenskyy got baited pretty hard into escalating this conflict by not turning down the NATO invitation, but each to his own.


How is using planes to drop missiles on apartment complexes denazification? Be clear this time and provide the sources you never actually provide unless they came from RU sites. 

To denazify would meant to identify who is in the Azov Batallion then track them down and kill them. Not to throw a Putin style temper tantrum when things haven't gone your way in the first few days that stretched to a month of bombing Ukrainian civilians?


How did Mariupol happen then? That entire city is flatter than a dessert... Were all of those stores, apartment complexes and building full of a small nazi minority in Ukraine? Seems there is more civilians than Neonazi's there... Which I repeat again... Neonazi's exist in every country, especially Russia. But Putin didn't start underneath his own nose... I get very tired of bringing these points home for you...


----------



## BMFan30

ItWillDo said:


> You mean guys like Magomed Tushayev who has been reported dead 4-5 times now? Easy to think it's a lot when you count the same people dying over and over.
> 
> 
> Mariupol is falling within this week from the siege, Kiev will be following shortly and once those 2 have been taken care of the rest of the country is peanuts. So I suggest we reevaluate soon?



I'm glad you mentioned Mariupol because I brought it up in my other reply earlier. You mind telling me how every Neonazi in Ukraine managed to fill up every building they flattened in Mariupol? 

Or has Putin just lost the plot and turned straight to genocide without a fuck given about Ukrainian civillians since the city is bombed 100%?

Please don't post anymore Tweets because they just don't show up on my end because I'm not motherfucking Rhianna or some other pop star with the attention span of a gnat... How do you go using Twitter as a source in the first place? LOL you're a laughable son of a bitch.


----------



## LostTheTone

BMFan30 said:


> How is using planes to drop missiles on apartment complexes denazification? Be clear this time and provide the sources you never actually provide unless they came from RU sites.
> 
> To denazify would meant to identify who is in the Azov Batallion then track them down and kill them. Not to throw a Putin style temper tantrum when things haven't gone your way in the first few days that stretched to a month of bombing Ukrainian civilians?
> 
> 
> How did Mariupol happen then? That entire city is flatter than a dessert... Were all of those stores, apartment complexes and building full of a small nazi minority in Ukraine? Seems there is more civilians than Neonazi's there... Which I repeat again... Neonazi's exist in every country, especially Russia. But Putin didn't start underneath his own nose... I get very tired of bringing these points home for you...



As an interesting parallel - In the Second World War, "de-Nazification" was something that happened after the war. The plan was never to literally murder everyone wearing a swastika, not even on the Soviet side. The idea was that the German forces would be defeated, followed by war crimes trials for those who had been at the top of the regime, and then finally denazification would occur by identifying officials and officers who were affiliated to the Nazi Party, and specifically the SS, who would be barred from holding future positions in government. 

And in practice only the first two really happened, the third one happened a bit but not all that much because it was actually counter-productive. A _lot_ of people in Nazi Germany were party members, because they didn't have a vast amount of choice. Like in all one party states, obtaining membership to the party is something like being a Freemason (or at least, what being a mason used to be like in England) and brought you privileges, exceptions and influential contacts. We might like to think that people would see the Nuremburg laws and decide they would never serve such a government, but of course a lot of the officials had been in their jobs during Weimar, and in any case it was the 1930s when anti-semitism was fairly common in Europe. Once the war started of course you had no choice; you either stayed in your job, or you were sent to starve on the Eastern Front, or you got shot for being a collaborator. 

In any case, it wasn't really practical to bar some of the most useful German citizens from ever working in government again. As the Russians proved 30 years earlier, when you murder or exile everyone who knows how to run things, those things stop working. 

The TL DR here is that even if we assume that the whole Azov lot are the Waffen SS, murdering them all is an unprecedented approach, and definitely not a legitimate one. If Putin wants to do a regime change war, in line with him saying that the whole government are Nazis, then it would behoove him to first actually win the war and second tell us what the plan is to remove the Nazi menace. Is he planning to jail (or execute?) people under Russian laws for crimes committed in Ukraine by Ukrainian citizens?


----------



## Adieu

What crimes? Chanting PUTIN HUILO?


----------



## oversteve

LostTheTone said:


> The TL DR here is that even if we assume that the whole Azov lot are the Waffen SS, murdering them all is an unprecedented approach, and definitely not a legitimate one. If Putin wants to do a regime change war, in line with him saying that the whole government are Nazis, then it would behoove him to first actually win the war and second tell us what the plan is to remove the Nazi menace. Is he planning to jail (or execute?) people under Russian laws for crimes committed in Ukraine by Ukrainian citizens?


Whole Azov being Nazis is just ItWillDo's wet dream. There're even people with jew and asian origins among them serving alongside white supremacists all for the sake of opposing Russia. But even if they were they are roughly 2.5k people total and currently they don't have any representatives in the parliament/government so their influence on policy is close to 0.


Adieu said:


> What crimes? Chanting PUTIN HUILO?


yup, somehow I completely forgot it's football club Metallist fans standing at the roots of Azov batallion that created the tune  

btw found an interesting article about Mariupol, Azov, I'm positive ItWillDo would've referenced it sooner or later


----------



## LostTheTone

oversteve said:


> Whole Azov being Nazis is just ItWillDo's wet dream. There're even people with jew and asian origins among them serving alongside white supremacists all for the sake of opposing Russia. But even if they were they are roughly 2.5k people total and currently they don't have any representatives in the parliament/government so their influence on policy is close to 0.



Sure, but my point was more that even if they are literally as awful as anyone can imagine... What is Putin's plan for them? Send them all to jail in Russia? Set up a kangeroo court in Ukraine to sentence them? For what crimes exactly? 

I certainly have a good deal of misgivings about them myself, and I'm sure some number of them have broken various laws that they should face justice for. But Ukrainian justice, with a Ukrainian judge and jury, to punish specific crimes that can be established with evidence. 

The trial of Saddam Hussein was not exactly a wonderful example of independent justice. There were problems with it, legally speaking. Of course it is hard to take Amnesty seriously when they say that the trial and execution were "unconstitutional" under the brand new constitution adopted 9 weeks earlier, by a brand new parliament. In any case; it is an Islamic republic so the death penalty was always possible, under the old and new constitution. And of course it was somewhat inevitable that Saddam would meet the end of a rope, and he got what he deserved. 

This is how you regime change, you know? Brutal dictator, you beat him, you put him and his cronies on trial, and you either let the locals execute him or you toss him into the tender mercies of the International Criminal Courts. Those were the only options for Saddam. 

But what is Putins plan to hold Zalensky and/or any neo-Nazis to account? 

Whatever you might think of either of those, it does not seem that the Ukrainians agree that these are evil and tyrannical people, so the locals won't be stringing anyone up. And Russia certainly won't be taking anyone to the Hague. 

So, what is the plan?

Even if we completely accept Russia's (laughable) claims about Nazis, the approach he has taken means that there can be no legitimacy anyway.


----------



## profwoot

BMFan30 said:


> It's good to defend your own country. You would cheer and holler if the US got invaded.
> 
> Hell, many Americans cheered and hollered when they invaded Afghanistan when *it turned out that 9/11 was an inside job* used to fire up the flint for the war in the Middle East. America was Afghanistan's Russia back then and every American backed it.


----------



## Dumple Stilzkin

BMFan30 said:


> It's good to defend your own country. You would cheer and holler if the US got invaded.
> 
> Hell, many Americans cheered and hollered when they invaded Afghanistan when it turned out that 9/11 was an inside job used to fire up the flint for the war in the Middle East. America was Afghanistan's Russia back then and every American backed it.


I never supported that war and there are others who didn’t as well. Way to assume.


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> The trial of Saddam Hussein was not exactly a wonderful example of independent justice. There were problems with it, legally speaking. Of course it is hard to take Amnesty seriously when they say that the trial and execution were "unconstitutional" under the brand new constitution adopted 9 weeks earlier, by a brand new parliament. In any case; it is an Islamic republic so the death penalty was always possible, under the old and new constitution. And of course it was somewhat inevitable that Saddam would meet the end of a rope, and he got what he deserved.


Iraq was actually secular under the Baath Party. I know it's difficult to believe, since everyone in the Baath Party was Muslim, but one of their core tenants was separation of religion from government. With Iraq being religiously diverse, with Christian Kurds and Chaldeans, as well as Islamic Sunnis and Shiites, the fact that the government was secular was the only way to establish an authoritarian government that wasn't constantly at war with the numerous religious minorities that controlled different regions.



BMFan30 said:


> It's good to defend your own country. You would cheer and holler if the US got invaded.
> 
> Hell, many Americans cheered and hollered when they invaded Afghanistan when it turned out that 9/11 was an inside job used to fire up the flint for the war in the Middle East. America was Afghanistan's Russia back then and every American backed it.


You mean in congress? Definitely a lot of American people were against the Afghanistan War, but I don't doubt that the majority were for it. People really wanted revenge. Turned out Afghanistan had little to do with 911, bin Laden was in Pakistan, the regime change enacted by Americans only lasted until the exact second American troops withdrew (all just as I had predicted), so I guess democracy is dumb when you don't have a hard framework around it. But, then again, there are hard rules around declaring war, and the US government skirted them all.

As for 911, I don't think it "turned out" anything. As time moves forward, there is more and more evidence of what we all knew all along, which was that the Bush administration was willfully ignorant and stubborn about everything. I'm not sure what that proves, though, beyond the fact that the Bush administration was unfit to have ever been in power, which was another thing I had been saying all along. Not that I'm some sort of Nostradamus or anything, it was all really painfully obvious and simple observations that anyone would have been able to make if the American people hadn't also chosen to be willfully ignorant at that time.


----------



## ItWillDo

BMFan30 said:


> I'm glad you mentioned Mariupol because I brought it up in my other reply earlier. You mind telling me how every Neonazi in Ukraine managed to fill up every building they flattened in Mariupol?
> 
> Or has Putin just lost the plot and turned straight to genocide without a fuck given about Ukrainian civillians since the city is bombed 100%?
> 
> Please don't post anymore Tweets because they just don't show up on my end because I'm not motherfucking Rhianna or some other pop star with the attention span of a gnat... How do you go using Twitter as a source in the first place? LOL you're a laughable son of a bitch.


My guy, I hereby grant you permission to rebrand to ItWillDoFan1 

And I'm no longer providing any additional sources or anecdotes, I've made my point and now it's just a matter of waiting and watching it unfold. But you can have the new Stonetoss comic, just to give you an idea of what's currently playing in the West:


----------



## Adieu

You DO know you can't actually murder people for simply believing in bullshit, EVEN if you manage to tie them to said belief????

Nazis this nazis that... what did your alleged nazis actually DO?

Clearly NOT MUCH, if their president is a Russian Jew who learned the Ukrainian language at the ripe age of ~40*. And they're ok with that.


*And that part's a fact, I know a lady whose friend was his Ukrainian speech tutor.


----------



## narad

From the guy that brought you other brilliant comics like:


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Iraq was actually secular under the Baath Party. I know it's difficult to believe, since everyone in the Baath Party was Muslim, but one of their core tenants was separation of religion from government. With Iraq being religiously diverse, with Christian Kurds and Chaldeans, as well as Islamic Sunnis and Shiites, the fact that the government was secular was the only way to establish an authoritarian government that wasn't constantly at war with the numerous religious minorities that controlled different regions.



Sorry, I should have phrased that better -

The _new _constitution set up Iraq as an Islamic nation, and so allowed for capital punishment because capital punishment is Halal. The _old_ constitution also allowed for capital punishment, but for strictly secular reasons.

And you are right; the only reason why what you might broadly call the Arab Socialists were able to hold their nations together was by being secular. As you say, so many minorities, none of which agree. Only a secular regime was acceptable enough to enough of them to actually hang around. You only need to look at Syria and Lebanon to see what happens without a central secular power. You either have a Saddam or an Assad or you have ISIS or Hezbollah or Phalangists.

The truly depressing part about the regime change in Iraq (and a dozen other horrible wars) is that often those states are actually as good as they are likely to get. If you wanted to go maximum cynical on how to actually effectively change these Arab countries, the best way might possibly have been to support the secret police in rooting out al-Qaeda types, instead of blaming the whole regime.

For those who want a black pill... That is actually kinda what we did do in more friendly arab nations like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi, Bahrain and Kuwait. There was a reason why Mr Bin Laden hung out in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Because he was not at all welcome in Saudi and hadn't been for a long time. In fact, the primary grievance of al-Qaeda was against the Saudis because the Saudis are... Not quite the right kind of Muslim (paraphrased) and they own the Islamic holy sites. Saudi actually has more repressive anti-Islamism laws than almost anywhere, and a very dedicated state security force.

Long story short, the middle east is the kind of headache no-one wants, and while Bashar al-Assad is a bad dude, if I had to do his job I would be exactly as tired as he always looks.


----------



## IwantTacos

Didn’t Putin win this war 2 weeks ago.


----------



## mbardu

IwantTacos said:


> Didn’t Putin win this war 2 weeks ago.



He did.
They're having naval celebratory fireworks as we speak: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60859337


----------



## fantom

BMFan30 said:


> It's good to defend your own country. You would cheer and holler if the US got invaded.
> 
> Hell, many Americans cheered and hollered when they invaded Afghanistan when it turned out that 9/11 was an inside job used to fire up the flint for the war in the Middle East. America was Afghanistan's Russia back then and every American backed it.


Defend all you want. I support it. I find it equally sad that Russian soldiers are starving on expired rations and getting frostbite due to lack of shelter as I do when I see a building getting leveled with civilians inside. Those soldiers are just pawns who are uninformed or afraid of standing up to their government.

As for 9/11, it was just as much an "inside job" as those tanks and mortars shelling your nuclear facilities. Aside from the horrible inaccuracy there...

Americans didn't support invading Afghanistan. Many Americans, including republicans, didn't want a war. Many Americans supported the government doing something to make sure the Taliban was accountable.

So I understand why you want Russian leadership accountable. I still don't think it makes sense to wish death on a bunch of ignorant 20 year olds that got tricked into this war.


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> There was a reason why Mr Bin Laden hung out in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Because he was not at all welcome in Saudi and hadn't been for a long time. In fact, the primary grievance of al-Qaeda was against the Saudis because the Saudis are... Not quite the right kind of Muslim (paraphrased) and they own the Islamic holy sites. Saudi actually has more repressive anti-Islamism laws than almost anywhere, and a very dedicated state security force.


Bin Laden moved to Afghanistan in the 70's to fight the USSR and worked for the GIP (The Saudi version of the CIA). Bin Laden is an extremist version of Athari Muslim, which is the same as the Saudi Royal Family. In fact, Bin Laden is about as close to being cut from the same cloth as anybody in comparison with the Saudis. 

Not sure where you are going with the last statement, but I either misread what you are saying and misunderstanding you or that is just blatantly false.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Back sort of on topic - the US administration is predicting "real" food shortages across Europe and even North America.


----------



## oversteve

fantom said:


> Defend all you want. I support it. I find it equally sad that Russian soldiers are starving on expired rations and getting frostbite due to lack of shelter as I do when I see a building getting leveled with civilians inside. Those soldiers are just pawns who are uninformed or afraid of standing up to their government.


Nah, one month into invasion I don't see them still being uninformed where they are and what they are doing and they always have an option to surrender. So the more of them die from frostbite and starvation the less Ukrainian soldiers will be killed by them.


----------



## AMOS

BMFan30 said:


> It's good to defend your own country. You would cheer and holler if the US got invaded.
> 
> Hell, many Americans cheered and hollered when they invaded Afghanistan when it turned out that 9/11 was an inside job used to fire up the flint for the war in the Middle East. America was Afghanistan's Russia back then and every American backed it.


When did 9/11 turn out to be an inside job? Are those silly youtube videos considered proof? I've seen all the conspiracy theories, it was Bush, it was Israel, it was the CIA. You have some proof to back this up?


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Bin Laden moved to Afghanistan in the 70's to fight the USSR and worked for the GIP (The Saudi version of the CIA). Bin Laden is an extremist version of Athari Muslim, which is the same as the Saudi Royal Family. In fact, Bin Laden is about as close to being cut from the same cloth as anybody in comparison with the Saudis.
> 
> Not sure where you are going with the last statement, but I either misread what you are saying and misunderstanding you or that is just blatantly false



Oh dude, Islamist extremists fucking HATE the Saudi royal family. It's not a sectarian thing, it's something more recent than that but they consider the Saudis to be, in effect, traitors to Islam for not being Sharia enough. There's a big list of grievances that al-Quaeda had against the Saudis.

A principle problem with the Islamists is that all of the Wahabists go kinda nuts in excommunicating each other, and all of them say they alone are the one true Muslims. It drives them crazy that the Saudis (who are theoretically also Wahabists) own Medina and Mecca but also ban the bukha (or niqab?) and allow Americans to walk on the holy sites.

This is also why so many Jihadi terrorists are originally from Saudi too. Because the people that care the most about these tedious religious arguments are the people from Saudi. The angry young men of the West end up as Proud Boys or ANTIFA, but in Saudi they find radical mosques and eventually they get beaten with a rubber hose by the secret police - The Mabaath.

It was reported recently that the Saudis executed like 80 people in one day. What crimes do you think those guys were convicted of? I'm not saying Saudi justice is especially legitimate, but most of the guys they strung up hand been caught smuggling explosives into the kingdom.

Once upon a time, during the war on terror, one of the ways of getting hardened Jihadis to talk was to tell them you would extradite them to Saudi or Jordan. Now, just how bad does being in Saudi custody have to be to make people who shurgged off months of waterboarding in a CIA black site instantly start singing?


----------



## Randy




----------



## LostTheTone

Randy said:


>




Yeah, nuclear strategy is all a bit mad, if you'll pardon the pun.

In principle, the correct way to avoid a nuclear war is to say that nuclear weapons are your first choice. Why? Because the only way to make deterrence work is to us it to avoid the whole chain of events that near certainly have to result in nuclear weapon use.

A conventional war between NATO and Russia almost certainly has to end in a nuclear exchange. Both sides say that their doctrine is to use nuclear weapons to stop an overall defeat, but as soon as the two sides are fighting one of them has to lose eventually.

Obviously I'm not a fan of this kind of statement, but nuclear deterrence also relies on there being zero perception of weakness or unwillingness to use the weapons. If you are perceived as being willing, even eager, to press the button then you never have to do it. If anyone thinks you might not actually do it, they are more likely to do things that would make you want to press the button.

This is summed up best by my favourite historic admiral - Jackie Fisher - even though he died before nuclear weapons were even theorised, and the supreme weapons of his day were dreadnought battleships. Here's what he had to say about war and peace and deterrence:

"The humanising of war? You might as well talk about the humanizing of Hell! The essence of war is violence! Moderation in war is imbecility! I am not for war, I am for peace! That is why I am for a supreme Navy. The supremacy of the British Navy is the best security for peace in the world. If you rub it in both at home and abroad that you are ready for instant war and intend to be first in and hit your enemy in the belly and kick him when he is down and boil your prisoners in oil (if you take any), and torture his women and children, then people will keep clear of you."

In effect, if you present a credible threat that war with you is so terrible as to be unthinkable, no-one is going to start a war with you.

And, well, it's not like the Russian army can is going to win a war against the NATO powers any other way, eh?


----------



## Drew

AMOS said:


> When did 9/11 turn out to be an inside job? Are those silly youtube videos considered proof? I've seen all the conspiracy theories, it was Bush, it was Israel, it was the CIA. You have some proof to back this up?


It didn't, he doesn't know what he's talking about.

It was "too good a crisis to let go to waste," perhaps... but not an inside job. Unless you want to count the fact that at one time during the cold war we did provide support to Bin Laden to fight the Russians, but that one's on us for not being more careful who we got in bed with in the Cold War.


----------



## AMOS

Drew said:


> It didn't, he doesn't know what he's talking about.
> 
> It was "too good a crisis to let go to waste," perhaps... but not an inside job. Unless you want to count the fact that at one time during the cold war we did provide support to Bin Laden to fight the Russians, but that one's on us for not being more careful who we got in bed with in the Cold War.


Our own people were probably in bed with the people that had JFK shot.


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> Oh dude, Islamist extremists fucking HATE the Saudi royal family. It's not a sectarian thing, it's something more recent than that but they consider the Saudis to be, in effect, traitors to Islam for not being Sharia enough. There's a big list of grievances that al-Quaeda had against the Saudis.
> 
> A principle problem with the Islamists is that all of the Wahabists go kinda nuts in excommunicating each other, and all of them say they alone are the one true Muslims. It drives them crazy that the Saudis (who are theoretically also Wahabists) own Medina and Mecca but also ban the bukha (or niqab?) and allow Americans to walk on the holy sites.
> 
> This is also why so many Jihadi terrorists are originally from Saudi too. Because the people that care the most about these tedious religious arguments are the people from Saudi. The angry young men of the West end up as Proud Boys or ANTIFA, but in Saudi they find radical mosques and eventually they get beaten with a rubber hose by the secret police - The Mabaath.
> 
> It was reported recently that the Saudis executed like 80 people in one day. What crimes do you think those guys were convicted of? I'm not saying Saudi justice is especially legitimate, but most of the guys they strung up hand been caught smuggling explosives into the kingdom.
> 
> Once upon a time, during the war on terror, one of the ways of getting hardened Jihadis to talk was to tell them you would extradite them to Saudi or Jordan. Now, just how bad does being in Saudi custody have to be to make people who shurgged off months of waterboarding in a CIA black site instantly start singing?


Hmm, well, yes, but also not really.

Bin Laden's gripes with the Saudis mostly boiled down to them being friendly with the USA.

The Saudis hated Saddam. But he was more of an enemy of Iran than KSA, so, since KSA and Iran were also enemies, they chose to tolerate Saddam. But then Saddam started crap with Kuwait, and that made the Saudi royal family really nervous. The US offered to zoom in and get rid of Saddam, so the Saudis agreed to let the Americans stay in KSA and build military installations there. The fact that Americans were traipsing around the holy land with their big heavy machines really rubbed Bin Laden the wrong way. That's around the time Bin Laden started criticizing the Saudi royal family, and, being brash authoritarians, the family couldn't stand for that, so things greatly escalated between Bin Laden and the Al Sauds. There were a lot of extremists in KSA, so they had to divide up between the two sides, and, being extremists, there was no half-dislike option. But rest assured, that the Saudi Royal family didn't accept the US military into their lands out of altruism or some sort of concern for global politics or even optics. They hate the USA only slightly less than Bin Laden ever did, and that's really just due to financial reasons.


----------



## DiezelMonster

Drew said:


> It didn't, he doesn't know what he's talking about.
> 
> It was "too good a crisis to let go to waste," perhaps... but not an inside job. Unless you want to count the fact that at one time during the cold war we did provide support to Bin Laden to fight the Russians, but that one's on us for not being more careful who we got in bed with in the Cold War.


Take it with a grain of salt, because of the source but there used to be a great breakdown of what lead us to 9/11 which was titled "Lucy You got a lot of splanin' to do" which was an article with many sources for each an every step that lead us to where we were then (2001)
I don't personally think it was an inside job because I'm not a tin foil hat wearing type, but I do believe that corruption, breakdown in communication, lack of communication between CIA/FBI/NSA and so forth make it appear that if we KNEW a terrorist attack was imminent we simply did nothing to stop it which could lead people to believe the USA was involved or guilty.

I really think it has more to do with inept and corrupt government than lizard pizza people doing it on purpose.

I've read, watched just about every piece of information regarding 9/11 since November of 2001 and this is my conclusion, I even got to see Noam Chomsky speak in 2001 just after his book on the subject was written.

But your mileage may vary.

And I think for those very reasons, this is why people jump to conspiracy theories in general, because our governments are so corrupt and inept, stupidity can look like guilt.

And to further include the current War we are discussing, corruption and ineptness has lead Russia to the path they are currently on, which is VERY dangerous to our whole way of life and existence. We do nothing it escalates, we do something it escalates. This is a no win situation for anyone unless we continue to funnel in weapons and private combatants to beat Russia back but as stated above, a loss is a flashpoint for Russia, then we are dealing with a direct Nuclear confrontation. I doubt we would simply let slide a tactical nuke being used on Ukrainian people to end a war for Putin to save face. But where would that leave the rest of Europe that has to deal with the fallout figuratively and actual. Again, this is a no win situation and being a complete armchair strategist (not at all actually) I can't help but think, why are we even here to begin with, why are am I worried about Nuclear War again?

Fuck this


----------



## Drew

DiezelMonster said:


> I don't personally think it was an inside job because I'm not a tin foil hat wearing type, but I do believe that corruption, breakdown in communication, lack of communication between CIA/FBI/NSA and so forth make it appear that if we KNEW a terrorist attack was imminent we simply did nothing to stop it which could lead people to believe the USA was involved or guilty.


There was a lot of speculation that this might have been the case with Pearl Harbor, based largely on the fact we intercepted communications about an impending Japanese attack the day before they struck, in New York, and most of the Pacific Fleet was off on an unscheduled training exercise the day of the attack. Parallels with 9/11 are strong, to a degree - some intercepted chatter about an attack, reports of Islamic students in an air school in the midwest who were very interested in learning to fly, but oddly disinterested in learning to land, a commercial airline, etc.

I think it's VERY easy to recognize patterns after the fact, that in the moment might not have been especially clear. I think it's also very easy to recognize patterns in _random noise_ after the fact - the human mind doesn't do well with chaos, and tries to superimpose order on random chance as some sort of evolutionary coping mechanism.

I think the alternative is probably more likely - any "evidence" of an impending attack on Pearl Harbor wasn't taken especially seriously and certainly wasn't considered time sensitive, because "everyone knows" the Japanese fleet would have to cross thousands of miles of open ocean to strike Hawaii, and because there was no evidence they already had until shells started falling. With 9/11, Al Qaeda was on the Clinton administration's radar, sure, but the Bush administration borrowed heavily from the State Department of the HW administration in the 90s, you had a bunch of incoming guys who tended think of threats in a "nation-state" model and not a "rogue lone wolf" independent actor one, and there's always a lot of turmoil and distruption across presidential administration changes. The date was chosen to be symbolic, sure, but it was also an effective choice simply because Al Qaeda struck the US at a time when our intelligence department was in changeover and it would have been relatively more likely that faint patterns would get overlooked.

Looking back at it, it's not hard to see a bunch of mistakes as a nefarious plan... but it's hard to ascribe anything to malice that can be fully explained by stupidity, too.

Still, no arguments - if you want a conspiracy theory, "we knew, but we let it happen" is much easier to believe than "we hijacked the planes, flew them into the skyscrapers, where we had also planted explosives."


----------



## bostjan

Well, there were a slew of declassified documents released last September that revealed a few things, but nothing we didn't already strongly suspect. Among them was something about the Saudi government being in regular contact with the hijackers and the CIA knowing a lot more about what the hijackers were up to than was ever previously admitted, although of the things that were outright denied by the US and the KSA, there was no new information contradicting those denials.

In other news, there are reports that Ukraine successfully retook control of Kherson. That's a major setback for Russia.

If Putin loses his mind over this and decides to launch nukes, I'd deeply hope that the people responsible for setting up the actual attack decide to resist. Putin cannot launch nukes all alone.


----------



## LostTheTone

bostjan said:


> Bin Laden's gripes with the Saudis mostly boiled down to them being friendly with the USA.



Yes, but also no. Bin Laden was trained and equipped by the Americans, remember? And the Islamists are pretty intense about this stuff. They genuinely will refuse munitions and support, because they don't see dying in a holy war to be a bad thing. His beef with the West as a whole is also down to weird and trivial stuff, including actions to stop the genocide in East Timor. 

Point being that this stuff is a mix of hardcore religion and long term grudge holding about things that almost no-one cares about today. Importantly, the Wahabi extremists don't care about Palestine really at all, but do care that Iran is the wrong kind of muslim. Islamic terrorism is almost always targeted at other Muslims, even the Shiites who definitely are not friends with America. 



bostjan said:


> Among them was something about the Saudi government being in regular contact with the hijackers and the CIA knowing a lot more about what the hijackers were up to than was ever previously admitted, although of the things that were outright denied by the US and the KSA, there was no new information contradicting those denials.



You have to be careful about saying "the Saudi government". There are most definitely people who supported the hijackers who have positions in the Saudi government, but those two are somewhat unrelated. The King was definitely not trying to arrange an attack on the US, and definitely would not appoint anyone who would support such things.

But there are multiple strands of thought within the Saudi elites, and lots of on going power struggles. Al Quaeda (and other similar groups) are a thorn in the side of the king, and so are useful for various reasons. And some people are true believers in the theology. And some Saudi elites are literal gangsters who have more venal interests. 

It's just a more extreme version of what happens elsewhere. How many billionaires in the West are connected to weird political projects that they don't like to talk about? Just about all of them. They all have trusts and foundations and PACs that quietly donate to other organisation and push for specific kinds of candidates, even in low level elections. And this is... Legal, mostly. But in Saudi where there are no elections, and everything comes down to strict power games with death as the price of losing, well, yeah it all gets a bit crazy.


----------



## tedtan

Today I'm seeing reports out of the UK and Israel that a Russian colonel was intentionally ran over and killed with a tank driven by his own troops. I suppose that summarizes how the war is going for Russia.


----------



## AMOS

tedtan said:


> Today I'm seeing reports out of the UK and Israel that a Russian colonel was intentionally ran over and killed with a tank driven by his own troops. I suppose that summarizes how the war is going for Russia.


I'm sure the tank driver was fantasizing about it being Putin. That lunatic is doing to the Ukrainian people what Stalin did in 1932-33, crush any ideas about Ukrainian nationalism or joining the west.


----------



## tedtan

Too bad it wasn’t Putin.


----------



## LostTheTone

tedtan said:


> Today I'm seeing reports out of the UK and Israel that a Russian colonel was intentionally ran over and killed with a tank driven by his own troops. I suppose that summarizes how the war is going for Russia.



Yeah, and it doesn't surprise me at all.

This is why morale and a desire to fight really matter. Because the poor fuckers you've sent out to fight now have tanks and missiles and rifles and if they decide they don't want to go attack Ukrainians today then it's going to be really hard to force them to do anything.

This is another reason why a lot of armies from despotic regimes just kinda fail when tested. You can't terrify people into fighting for you. If you teach them to fight effectively, they can fight you just as well as anyone else. So either their troops are crap who cannot fight, or they are good troops who will refuse to do nasty bullshit.


----------



## bostjan

LostTheTone said:


> Yes, but also no. Bin Laden was trained and equipped by the Americans, remember? And the Islamists are pretty intense about this stuff. They genuinely will refuse munitions and support, because they don't see dying in a holy war to be a bad thing. His beef with the West as a whole is also down to weird and trivial stuff, including actions to stop the genocide in East Timor.
> 
> Point being that this stuff is a mix of hardcore religion and long term grudge holding about things that almost no-one cares about today. Importantly, the Wahabi extremists don't care about Palestine really at all, but do care that Iran is the wrong kind of muslim. Islamic terrorism is almost always targeted at other Muslims, even the Shiites who definitely are not friends with America.
> 
> 
> 
> You have to be careful about saying "the Saudi government". There are most definitely people who supported the hijackers who have positions in the Saudi government, but those two are somewhat unrelated. The King was definitely not trying to arrange an attack on the US, and definitely would not appoint anyone who would support such things.
> 
> But there are multiple strands of thought within the Saudi elites, and lots of on going power struggles. Al Quaeda (and other similar groups) are a thorn in the side of the king, and so are useful for various reasons. And some people are true believers in the theology. And some Saudi elites are literal gangsters who have more venal interests.
> 
> It's just a more extreme version of what happens elsewhere. How many billionaires in the West are connected to weird political projects that they don't like to talk about? Just about all of them. They all have trusts and foundations and PACs that quietly donate to other organisation and push for specific kinds of candidates, even in low level elections. And this is... Legal, mostly. But in Saudi where there are no elections, and everything comes down to strict power games with death as the price of losing, well, yeah it all gets a bit crazy.


No US people trained Bin Laden. They trained some Pakistani guys, and those guys provided training to the muhajadeen, along with Bin Laden. The US also gave weapons to those same guys in Pakistan, but Bin Laden already had his own weapons by then, which he probably got from the Saudis, who got them from the USA. It may sound like the same thing, but, the key difference is that the USA had no idea who ultimately ended up with the weapons and therefore, never came face-to-face with Bin Laden.

And if enough people in the Saudi government provided support for the hijackers, and if they did so in a coordinated way, you'd easily argue that a faction of the Saudi government was responsible. If the majority knew and took no action, I think we can omit the "faction" part of that statement.

Anyway...

7 generals now, and one navy commander. That's one top ranking officer every 3 or 4 days. Maybe the Russian army is going to keep trying to look like they won't blink, but a year at this rate and they will no longer be able to operate cohesively (they're already struggling with such).


----------



## Flappydoodle

So Biden joins Lindsay Graham in the idiot pile, after new comments calling for regime change in Russia. White House, then Blinken quickly tried to backtrack. Oops. Even Boris, Macron etc are cringing and distancing themselves from it. 

And fwiw, it does look more like Ukraine can actually win this thing. Russian forces are depleted. Lots dead, but many injured, apparently given up etc. It’s hard to see that turning around into a victory. If you’re down 10%, that severely affects your fighting effectiveness. And with morale at rock bottom, it’s even less likely. On top of that, they don’t have air superiority, and they’re running out of some missiles. They’re using missiles launched from inside Russia which are having high failure rates. 

Ukraine has roughly the same amount of hardware they started with, since Russia has abandoned so many vehicles and bits of equipment. It’s apparently almost a 1:1 kill:capture ratio, which is astounding. 

Ukraine is also not simply defending. They are counter-attacking, and outright ambushing, attacking and retaking Russian positions. 

Russia is revising down their statements too. I hope once the threat to Kyiv has subsided, Ukraine can refocus on the East and recapture those areas . 

Hopefully Latvia will supply those S-300 systems. That can offer a good counter against Russian planes and some missiles.


----------



## oversteve

Flappydoodle said:


> So Biden joins Lindsay Graham in the idiot pile, after new comments calling for regime change in Russia. White House, then Blinken quickly tried to backtrack. Oops. Even Boris, Macron etc are cringing and distancing themselves from it.
> 
> And fwiw, it does look more like Ukraine can actually win this thing. Russian forces are depleted. Lots dead, but many injured, apparently given up etc. It’s hard to see that turning around into a victory. If you’re down 10%, that severely affects your fighting effectiveness. And with morale at rock bottom, it’s even less likely. On top of that, they don’t have air superiority, and they’re running out of some missiles. They’re using missiles launched from inside Russia which are having high failure rates.
> 
> Ukraine has roughly the same amount of hardware they started with, since Russia has abandoned so many vehicles and bits of equipment. It’s apparently almost a 1:1 kill:capture ratio, which is astounding.
> 
> Ukraine is also not simply defending. They are counter-attacking, and outright ambushing, attacking and retaking Russian positions.
> 
> Russia is revising down their statements too. I hope once the threat to Kyiv has subsided, Ukraine can refocus on the East and recapture those areas .
> 
> Hopefully Latvia will supply those S-300 systems. That can offer a good counter against Russian planes and some missiles.


Unfortunately not everything is as easy as it sounds, while we are getting help from overseas majority of stuff is only light weaponry enough to defend, not much to attack with besides what we've already got here so the counterattack is moving pretty slowly and only in few directions. 

Regarding other interesting things connected to the war there was a video about the 'courageos' russian editor standing with a poster 'nowar' in a suposedly live broadcast on russian state tv. Apparently she didn't get any serious prosecution from russian government and now she's whining on italian tv about how she can't get some medicine for her mother, her daughter can't pay for something with the plastic card because of sanctions etc. So that performance was basically a blatant attempt to stop implementing further sanctions on russian government through compassion towards russian people






Also since there were some discussions regarding Ukrainian history, here's a nice short video re-telling it up to 1991, it's in Ukrainian but it has English subtitles


----------



## Adieu

Flappydoodle said:


> So Biden joins Lindsay Graham in the idiot pile, after new comments calling for regime change in Russia. White House, then Blinken quickly tried to backtrack. Oops. Even Boris, Macron etc are cringing and distancing themselves from it.
> 
> And fwiw, it does look more like Ukraine can actually win this thing. Russian forces are depleted. Lots dead, but many injured, apparently given up etc. It’s hard to see that turning around into a victory. If you’re down 10%, that severely affects your fighting effectiveness. And with morale at rock bottom, it’s even less likely. On top of that, they don’t have air superiority, and they’re running out of some missiles. They’re using missiles launched from inside Russia which are having high failure rates.
> 
> Ukraine has roughly the same amount of hardware they started with, since Russia has abandoned so many vehicles and bits of equipment. It’s apparently almost a 1:1 kill:capture ratio, which is astounding.
> 
> Ukraine is also not simply defending. They are counter-attacking, and outright ambushing, attacking and retaking Russian positions.
> 
> Russia is revising down their statements too. I hope once the threat to Kyiv has subsided, Ukraine can refocus on the East and recapture those areas .
> 
> Hopefully Latvia will supply those S-300 systems. That can offer a good counter against Russian planes and some missiles.



So why the hell DON'T you want regime change in Russia?

Are you still rolling with the democratically elected leader nonsense? And even then, who gives a shit with a fascist aggressor state?

Hitler started with elections too.

The BEST end to this would be street violence in Moscow. Which, yeah, Putin probably isn't *in*, but that doesn't actually mean much.

Also...it's the one place he really really doesn't wanna nuke.


----------



## Demiurge

Adieu said:


> So why the hell DON'T you want regime change in Russia?


I don't think there's disagreement per se, but when a US politician says something to that effect, considering our history, there's concern that it signals that we're looking to do some things, possibly unilaterally, to that end. And we're not that great at it.


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> Also...it's the one place he really really doesn't wanna nuke.


I'm not even so sure in this moment.



Adieu said:


> Are you still rolling with the democratically elected leader nonsense?


IMO, there is no democratic process happening when opposition candidates are murdered on the streets of Moscow in broad daylight the moment they get a chance of gaining any traction. Do you remember the pre-stuffed ballot boxes? Even if Putin would have won anyway, there's absolutely no way to be sure if he's cheating. And if he's cheating in either of these two ways, which everyone already knows openly, then there's simply no way to get behind any sort of assumption that deals with him being democratically elected.

I'm sure you and I agree on all of that...

But...

Well, he *is* the leader, democratically elected or not, dictator or not, whatever. Any talk by another government about replacing him or whatever absolutely does not belong in public view. It's kind of surprising that there aren't already a dozen assassins stalking Lindsay Graham right now for merely suggesting the idea.


----------



## Adieu

If Putin kills Lindsey, can't we THEN finally go kill Putin?

I'm OK with that. Ukraine can give Mr. Graham some posthumous honors and a bronze statue at a train station in Mariupol or Kharkiv afterwards.

And I'm 100% sure South Carolina has some high schools named after far bigger azzholes long overdue for re-branding


----------



## Drew

Adieu said:


> So why the hell DON'T you want regime change in Russia?
> 
> Are you still rolling with the democratically elected leader nonsense? And even then, who gives a shit with a fascist aggressor state?


Honestly, I kind of respect Biden for saying this, even if it's a Pandora's box that really, really should stay closed. 

Part of the walking-back campaign was that it was an unscripted emotional reaction, along with his earlier "butcher" comment, after spending the morning talking with refugees and hearing firsthand about their escape from war torn cities in Ukraine. And, I mean... regime change is not something that should ever be uttered lightly by the head of state of a nation powerful enough to pull it off, without careful consideration of the pros and cons and as part of coordinated messaging with allies. In a moment of passion suggesting Putin needs to go, well.. that's going to carry some weight, and likely some consequences. 

But, like, does anyone seriously disagree with Biden here? That if there was a way to remove Putin and then hold free elections to replace him, that wouldn't solve a LOT of problems?


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> If Putin kills Lindsey, can't we THEN finally go kill Putin?
> 
> I'm OK with that. Ukraine can give Mr. Graham some posthumous honors and a bronze statue at a train station in Mariupol or Kharkiv afrerwards.
> 
> And I'm 100% sure South Carolina has some high schools named after far bigger azzholes long overdue for re-branding


Not sure how serious this needs to get, but...

Let's imagine for a moment that, in a realistic world, Biden makes a public statement about regime change in Russia, and then, somehow, Putin chokes on a bone or something and drops dead. Who takes his place, and how does whoever that is respond to the US? What if it's someone just like Putin, or someone worse? Is that potentially game over for life on planet Earth?

It's like a game of chess. Maybe you feel really great because you advanced your queen and pinned your opponent's rook to their king. Normally, that's a strong and threatening move. However, if you didn't think one move ahead, and your opponent just captures your queen with his knight, you are left in a very comprised situation.



Drew said:


> Honestly, I kind of respect Biden for saying this, even if it's a Pandora's box that really, really should stay closed.
> 
> Part of the walking-back campaign was that it was an unscripted emotional reaction, along with his earlier "butcher" comment, after spending the morning talking with refugees and hearing firsthand about their escape from war torn cities in Ukraine. And, I mean... regime change is not something that should ever be uttered lightly by the head of state of a nation powerful enough to pull it off, without careful consideration of the pros and cons and as part of coordinated messaging with allies. In a moment of passion suggesting Putin needs to go, well.. that's going to carry some weight, and likely some consequences.
> 
> But, like, does anyone seriously disagree with Biden here? That if there was a way to remove Putin and then hold free elections to replace him, that wouldn't solve a LOT of problems?


Ever seen "The Godfather?" "Never tell anyone outside the family what you're thinking."

In this case, what is the use of the threat itself?


----------



## Drew

bostjan said:


> Ever seen "The Godfather?" "Never tell anyone outside the family what you're thinking."
> 
> In this case, what is the use of the threat itself?


Oh, I fully agree - maybe my point didn't get across, I think it's hard to argue with Biden here, but it still is something that shouldn't have been publicly said.


----------



## High Plains Drifter

Just one guy's opinion here but regarding what what Biden said... I feel that he was speaking "in the moment". He was hyped up on this being one of his first opportunities since taking office to actually be watched and heard by so many leaders and media outlets. I think that a lot of the time Biden doesn't really have much "intent" or much of a game-plan behind what he says. It seems like his comment was simply something that he kinda just blurted out... without much thought prior to nor immediately after, regarding much consideration as to the implication nor for what all might be involved with standing by such a statement. I have no issue with what he said but I really do think that he was simply flying high on the sheer adreneline of being in the world spotlight. .


----------



## StevenC

bostjan said:


> Not sure how serious this needs to get, but...
> 
> Let's imagine for a moment that, in a realistic world, Biden makes a public statement about regime change in Russia, and then, somehow, Putin chokes on a bone or something and drops dead. Who takes his place, and how does whoever that is respond to the US? What if it's someone just like Putin, or someone worse? Is that potentially game over for life on planet Earth?
> 
> It's like a game of chess. Maybe you feel really great because you advanced your queen and pinned your opponent's rook to their king. Normally, that's a strong and threatening move. However, if you didn't think one move ahead, and your opponent just captures your queen with his knight, you are left in a very comprised situation.
> 
> 
> Ever seen "The Godfather?" "Never tell anyone outside the family what you're thinking."
> 
> In this case, what is the use of the threat itself?


Nah, regime change. Not just Putin.


----------



## Randy

__





Redirect Notice






www.google.com


----------



## Flappydoodle

oversteve said:


> Unfortunately not everything is as easy as it sounds, while we are getting help from overseas majority of stuff is only light weaponry enough to defend, not much to attack with besides what we've already got here so the counterattack is moving pretty slowly and only in few directions.
> 
> Regarding other interesting things connected to the war there was a video about the 'courageos' russian editor standing with a poster 'nowar' in a suposedly live broadcast on russian state tv. Apparently she didn't get any serious prosecution from russian government and now she's whining on italian tv about how she can't get some medicine for her mother, her daughter can't pay for something with the plastic card because of sanctions etc. So that performance was basically a blatant attempt to stop implementing further sanctions on russian government through compassion towards russian people
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also since there were some discussions regarding Ukrainian history, here's a nice short video re-telling it up to 1991, it's in Ukrainian but it has English subtitles




Well, there's a limit to how much anybody is willing to help. That worry about WW3 is still there.

Of course it would be DEEPLY satisfying to see Ukraine get a shitload of new planes, tanks and long-range anti-air. But then you're basically just doing a full-on proxy war.

And for the Russian TV lady - maybe she's just selfish or short-sighted?



Adieu said:


> So why the hell DON'T you want regime change in Russia?
> 
> Are you still rolling with the democratically elected leader nonsense? And even then, who gives a shit with a fascist aggressor state?
> 
> Hitler started with elections too.
> 
> The BEST end to this would be street violence in Moscow. Which, yeah, Putin probably isn't *in*, but that doesn't actually mean much.
> 
> Also...it's the one place he really really doesn't wanna nuke.



Maybe you hallucinated somebody saying that, but I didn't.

Putin IS the leader of Russia and he has the nuclear arsenal and military at his disposal. How he became leader doesn't matter. Having the POTUS calling for regime change of another nuclear power is very, very dangerous. Downright stupid actually.

And no, the best end will be Putin retreating with his tail between his legs, claiming some sort of hollow victory. Russia will be economically set back by a decade, or more. Their currency in tatters. Businesses reluctant to invest or do business there. Europe and others will move away from Russian oil, gas and other imports which is good for national security and for the environment too. The UK, for example, is pouring new, huge investments into wind and nuclear now. NATO becomes stronger. The EU is more united and finally appreciates American protection. EU and UK become closer. Eastern Europe is brought closer. China also becomes deterred after seeing how united the US, EU, UK and others were, and those countries also become more careful in dealing with China.

We also learned who our friends are. India is totally unreliably. As a supposed US and UK ally, they've been shit. The Middle East too is stabbing us in the back. Dubai is opening themselves up for all the sanctioned billionaires. 

So the real benefit will be a resounding strengthening of the west, and countries finally growing some balls to stand up to bad actors.



High Plains Drifter said:


> Just one guy's opinion here but regarding what what Biden said... I feel that he was speaking "in the moment". He was hyped up on this being one of his first opportunities since taking office to actually be watched and heard by so many leaders and media outlets. I think that a lot of the time Biden doesn't really have much "intent" or much of a game-plan behind what he says. It seems like his comment was simply something that he kinda just blurted out... without much thought prior to nor immediately after, regarding much consideration as to the implication nor for what all might be involved with standing by such a statement. I have no issue with what he said but I really do think that he was simply flying high on the sheer adreneline of being in the world spotlight. .



Yes, he definitely was speaking in the moment. And that's why it was a massive fuck-up. They've spent the last 48 hours desperately trying to backtrack and revise his statement. Especially frustrating when Biden was supposed to be the adult, haha


----------



## bostjan

Anything that diplomatically divides the nations of the world further is not a net positive. Decreased cooperation with India could have some pretty serious long-term ramifications for the entire world, considering that India also has nuclear weapons, India is projected to have the largest population in the world soon, and India is also barely politically stable. If India starts getting desperate for resources, there could be violent conflict with China and/or Pakistan, which also both have nuclear weapons and lots and lots of population.

The ME is a little less of a concern, but still a serious concern. You are talking about countries that are absolutely autocratic and extremely conservative with tendencies toward religious extremism in their mainstream.

I think that the main idea here, in the 21st century, is that war is costly. We look at Switzerland's prosperity in the 20th century, and see how being not at war means a strong economy and a high standard of living. Much of Ukraine's recent economic boom was directly resultant from openness with a more diverse roster of wealthy nations. Even though Russia had been involved in several wars recently, their involvement in those wars was less, relative to more recent wars in Russian history, and Russia had been seeing a span of relative economic prosperity as a result.

With the world still reeling from the economic effects of covid and feeling also a laundry list of smaller issues slowly getting out of control, only Russia was singularly ready to dive into a major war. No one else wanted to go to war, mainly for economic reasons.

Let's also not forget that there's a parallel here hardly anyone is bringing up. The world's worst flu pandemic was largely a result of World War I. Between the unsanitary conditions of war and the fact that people were travelling across the globe to fight in those unsanitary conditions and then going back home carrying diseases, WWI was the real driving factor that spread the flu to every country involved in the war. It's like Putin subconsciously wanted covid to re-emerge worse than ever.

We've got reports now of Russian soldiers killing their own officers, because they are simply losing their minds. There are reports that these soldiers are eager to surrender and go from the 100% shitty situation of being a Russian soldier in Ukraine to the only 80% shitty situation of being a prisoner-of-war. When Russian commanders aren't being stabbed in the back by the young men compelled to fight and watch their friends get butchered, Ukrainian snipers are blasting them every time they try to use the radio. Meanwhile, Russian artillery is indiscriminately targeting whatever buildings they can without a care in the world. This whole thing is a total nightmare for both sides of the conflict. Plenty of comparisons in here are being drawn with the US military in Iraq or Vietnam or Afghanistan, and sure, the US had some major fuckups and accidentally hit embassies and even a hospital or two, and had major PR disasters like Abu Ghraib, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking that what Russia is doing here is similar. No, their bombs are deliberately hitting daycares, hospitals, schools, and the like. This is scorched earth warfare, not a few mishaps over a couple decades, but hundreds of serious blunders over a few weeks. However bad the US morale in Vietnam was, it was sunshine and rainbows compared to the Russian morale in this mess. 

And, as bad as this needs to stop yesterday, there is no way it will stop anytime soon. Foreign countries don't want to get hands-on. This is going to drag on until the Russian people are miserable enough to stop it themselves through revolution or mutiny. And Putin has already planned out such a course of events, which means that it'll just take that much longer for the inevitable to happen. It's either that, or the Russian people will have to accept that the status quo standard of living in Russia is going to involve the young men in their families being sent off to slaughter, whilst the young women are left home to struggle with feeding the kids and themselves and probably their elderly relatives. It's not infinitely sustainable. The only reason it worked so long for Stalin was because the people went from starving under the reckless czar to starving under the ruthless dictator. But now that there's been two decades of economic prosperity, I don't believe people will roll over so easily.

Another thing I blame for this mess is the fact that the world has been relatively peaceful since WWII, and we are now entering the era in which WWII veterans who experienced the horrors of total war first hand are dying off from old age at a rate where there are expected to be none left in three years. Without their influence on politics, the pattern is much more likely to repeat itself.


----------



## Adieu

Hey guys, what the fuck is happening? Ukrainian delegation just came out of Turkey talks saying wildly ridiculous shit while looking rather shook...


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> Hey guys, what the fuck is happening? Ukrainian delegation just came out of Turkey talks saying wildly ridiculous shit while looking rather shook...


What did they say?

All I had heard was that the Russians said they would not cease fire, but were willing to scale back attacks, which as well all know, means nothing.


----------



## Flappydoodle

bostjan said:


> Anything that diplomatically divides the nations of the world further is not a net positive. Decreased cooperation with India could have some pretty serious long-term ramifications for the entire world, considering that India also has nuclear weapons, India is projected to have the largest population in the world soon, and India is also barely politically stable. If India starts getting desperate for resources, there could be violent conflict with China and/or Pakistan, which also both have nuclear weapons and lots and lots of population.
> 
> The ME is a little less of a concern, but still a serious concern. You are talking about countries that are absolutely autocratic and extremely conservative with tendencies toward religious extremism in their mainstream.
> 
> I think that the main idea here, in the 21st century, is that war is costly. We look at Switzerland's prosperity in the 20th century, and see how being not at war means a strong economy and a high standard of living. Much of Ukraine's recent economic boom was directly resultant from openness with a more diverse roster of wealthy nations. Even though Russia had been involved in several wars recently, their involvement in those wars was less, relative to more recent wars in Russian history, and Russia had been seeing a span of relative economic prosperity as a result.
> 
> With the world still reeling from the economic effects of covid and feeling also a laundry list of smaller issues slowly getting out of control, only Russia was singularly ready to dive into a major war. No one else wanted to go to war, mainly for economic reasons.
> 
> Let's also not forget that there's a parallel here hardly anyone is bringing up. The world's worst flu pandemic was largely a result of World War I. Between the unsanitary conditions of war and the fact that people were travelling across the globe to fight in those unsanitary conditions and then going back home carrying diseases, WWI was the real driving factor that spread the flu to every country involved in the war. It's like Putin subconsciously wanted covid to re-emerge worse than ever.
> 
> We've got reports now of Russian soldiers killing their own officers, because they are simply losing their minds. There are reports that these soldiers are eager to surrender and go from the 100% shitty situation of being a Russian soldier in Ukraine to the only 80% shitty situation of being a prisoner-of-war. When Russian commanders aren't being stabbed in the back by the young men compelled to fight and watch their friends get butchered, Ukrainian snipers are blasting them every time they try to use the radio. Meanwhile, Russian artillery is indiscriminately targeting whatever buildings they can without a care in the world. This whole thing is a total nightmare for both sides of the conflict. Plenty of comparisons in here are being drawn with the US military in Iraq or Vietnam or Afghanistan, and sure, the US had some major fuckups and accidentally hit embassies and even a hospital or two, and had major PR disasters like Abu Ghraib, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking that what Russia is doing here is similar. No, their bombs are deliberately hitting daycares, hospitals, schools, and the like. This is scorched earth warfare, not a few mishaps over a couple decades, but hundreds of serious blunders over a few weeks. However bad the US morale in Vietnam was, it was sunshine and rainbows compared to the Russian morale in this mess.
> 
> And, as bad as this needs to stop yesterday, there is no way it will stop anytime soon. Foreign countries don't want to get hands-on. This is going to drag on until the Russian people are miserable enough to stop it themselves through revolution or mutiny. And Putin has already planned out such a course of events, which means that it'll just take that much longer for the inevitable to happen. It's either that, or the Russian people will have to accept that the status quo standard of living in Russia is going to involve the young men in their families being sent off to slaughter, whilst the young women are left home to struggle with feeding the kids and themselves and probably their elderly relatives. It's not infinitely sustainable. The only reason it worked so long for Stalin was because the people went from starving under the reckless czar to starving under the ruthless dictator. But now that there's been two decades of economic prosperity, I don't believe people will roll over so easily.
> 
> Another thing I blame for this mess is the fact that the world has been relatively peaceful since WWII, and we are now entering the era in which WWII veterans who experienced the horrors of total war first hand are dying off from old age at a rate where there are expected to be none left in three years. Without their influence on politics, the pattern is much more likely to repeat itself.



It's a net positive overall because it should deter further wars. Russia started some shit, and now they are going to suffer for that decision. That's a message that China, North Korea, Syria, Iran and other dickhead countries will take seriously. If anything, China is more interlinked to the West than Russia. So any conflict and sanctions would be devastating to both sides - a sort of economic mutually assured destruction.

We (the west) have been pouring money into lots of shitty countries, hoping they'd come around and turn good. That was the approach with China for the last half century. Invite them into things, cooperate, link our economies, and eventually they'll become more friendly, more democratic etc. That was hopeless optimism, and we've seen China spend all that money on their military, expansion, aggression, doubling down on authoritarian behaviour etc. Look at the Middle East - UAE, Saudi etc. None of them have become liberal. They've taken the money and continued to be dickheads, except now they're rich dickheads. And look at Russia and the hilarious contradictory behaviour by the EU - sanctioning them, but still paying billions of dollars/euros per week for oil and gas. Western countries were naive to ever let themselves get into that situation and to outsource essential things like energy supply. I really hope that this won't happen again.

If it unites western powers and we work together and counter the dickhead countries, then this is overall a good thing. There were fractures in the US-UK-EU relationship - Brexit, Trump, Northern Ireland were obvious ones. Syrian refugees was another. Hell, there was petty squabbling over Covid vaccine passports just before Christmas. They're all put aside now because we have a bigger problem and every single country in the EU is united.

Yeah, it probably sucks to be an average Russian for the next decade. Oh well.

My predictions: I don't think the war will drag on. And I don't think Russian people will turn against Putin and kick him out. Russia is getting beaten in this war, quite badly. Attacking is harder than defending. Holding against a hostile populace is difficult. And once you've lost 15% of your fighting force, it's very unlikely you're going to recover and turn that into a victory. I think Putin is going to make his exit strategy fairly soon. They're already revising down demands, backtracking on military goals. They're leaving Kyiv. They're going to "focus on the east". That's loser, face-saving talk.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Adieu said:


> Hey guys, what the fuck is happening? Ukrainian delegation just came out of Turkey talks saying wildly ridiculous shit while looking rather shook...


??

BBC says Ukrainian negotiators were positive, agreed on plenty of things (neutral status, not joining NATO) etc. And Russia will withdraw from Kyiv. If that can all come true, that's way better than Ukraine (or anybody) was probably expecting them to get.


----------



## AMOS

You need to be very careful what you say about regime change in Russia when his country is already shitsville because of sanctions. Based on actions by the commies in the past I wouldn't rule out a pre-emptive nuclear strike against the U.S. and NATO, so Biden needs to think before opening his mouth. Russia has always gone to extremes when their back was against the wall, from shooting their own retreating soldiers to bombing their own people. They don't care as long as they win.


----------



## bostjan

Flappydoodle said:


> It's a net positive overall because it should deter further wars. Russia started some shit, and now they are going to suffer for that decision. That's a message that China, North Korea, Syria, Iran and other dickhead countries will take seriously. If anything, China is more interlinked to the West than Russia. So any conflict and sanctions would be devastating to both sides - a sort of economic mutually assured destruction.
> 
> We (the west) have been pouring money into lots of shitty countries, hoping they'd come around and turn good. That was the approach with China for the last half century. Invite them into things, cooperate, link our economies, and eventually they'll become more friendly, more democratic etc. That was hopeless optimism, and we've seen China spend all that money on their military, expansion, aggression, doubling down on authoritarian behaviour etc. Look at the Middle East - UAE, Saudi etc. None of them have become liberal. They've taken the money and continued to be dickheads, except now they're rich dickheads. And look at Russia and the hilarious contradictory behaviour by the EU - sanctioning them, but still paying billions of dollars/euros per week for oil and gas. Western countries were naive to ever let themselves get into that situation and to outsource essential things like energy supply. I really hope that this won't happen again.
> 
> If it unites western powers and we work together and counter the dickhead countries, then this is overall a good thing. There were fractures in the US-UK-EU relationship - Brexit, Trump, Northern Ireland were obvious ones. Syrian refugees was another. Hell, there was petty squabbling over Covid vaccine passports just before Christmas. They're all put aside now because we have a bigger problem and every single country in the EU is united.
> 
> Yeah, it probably sucks to be an average Russian for the next decade. Oh well.
> 
> My predictions: I don't think the war will drag on. And I don't think Russian people will turn against Putin and kick him out. Russia is getting beaten in this war, quite badly. Attacking is harder than defending. Holding against a hostile populace is difficult. And once you've lost 15% of your fighting force, it's very unlikely you're going to recover and turn that into a victory. I think Putin is going to make his exit strategy fairly soon. They're already revising down demands, backtracking on military goals. They're leaving Kyiv. They're going to "focus on the east". That's loser, face-saving talk.





Flappydoodle said:


> ??
> 
> BBC says Ukrainian negotiators were positive, agreed on plenty of things (neutral status, not joining NATO) etc. And Russia will withdraw from Kyiv. If that can all come true, that's way better than Ukraine (or anybody) was probably expecting them to get.


Russia said they'd discuss withdrawal from Kyiv with their leaders in Moscow. Since those leaders are punishing anyone who whispers the word "war" or "invasion," I have some doubt that will go anywhere presently. They might has well have made all of those promises in a sarcastic tone of voice.

So you honestly think that countries like UAE and KSA will change anything for the better because of this? I think that's rather naïve. I'm believing that Putin probably doesn't care about the average Russian, but I know for a fact that the Emirs and the King of Saudi Arabia definitely do not care about the common folk in their fealty. And Russia is going to come out of this with at the very least a black eye, but if Putin's own personal proverbial eye isn't painted black somehow from all of this, I don't expect Xi or Kim or the Ayatollah or whatever dictator to take this as a potential hard lesson. OTOH, if Putin gets deposed somehow, those leaders will just convince themselves that "this would never happen to them" or whatever, and little will change. The West is not getting hands-on, and no one who is sanctioning is trading anything with North Korea anyway, so what does any of this matter to Kim Jong Un? Anyway, he's still lobbing missiles into the sea just like before.

I guess we'll see. If you think the war will détente by next week and be over by May, I'd be all for that as a start, but it leaves a lot of questions:
1. Is the West going to watch Russia withdraw and shrug it off, thinking Putin learned his lesson or whatever and then we go back to talking about Will Smith and Covid and Biden?
2. Is Russia going to continue to pretend like this war never happened and just go back to life as usual, except with crippling sanctions in place? Then what, just focus on planting potatoes like it's 1946 or something?
3. Is Putin's pride going to allow this to happen? This war is solely because of him. So, some peace talk in Turkey without his direct involvement - and which calling it "a war" could land you 15 years in a gulag - is something he's perfectly fine with. This seems to be him trying to build his legacy or some stupid shit. I don't see how he's just suddenly going to go from arbitrarily declaring that Ukraine was never a country and belongs to him and he wants it all to burn and everything in it to die to being on board with a sudden withdrawal, even if it's the case that the Russian military absolutely could not pull off a win without a miracle. After all, he's suddenly been talking publicly about religion and quoted a verse from the Bible in order to justify the invasion - which was actually a passage of Jesus teaching pacifism, so the context is just as insane as anything else out of Putin's mouth lately.


----------



## Adieu

Flappydoodle said:


> ??
> 
> BBC says Ukrainian negotiators were positive, agreed on plenty of things (neutral status, not joining NATO) etc. And Russia will withdraw from Kyiv. If that can all come true, that's way better than Ukraine (or anybody) was probably expecting them to get.



That *IS* total capitulation.

Russia wanted Donbas, Luhansk, Crimea, no NATO, no alliances, no reparations, and "neutrality" in exchange for unenforceable security guarantees.

That's bullshit.

The way they rolled in, they never wanted to take Kyiv (THIS TIME!) unless somebody decided to chicken out and give it to them for a bluff. They never had the forces to occupy it, much less storm it.


----------



## Drew

Flappydoodle said:


> We also learned who our friends are. India is totally unreliably. As a supposed US and UK ally, they've been shit. The Middle East too is stabbing us in the back. Dubai is opening themselves up for all the sanctioned billionaires.


I mean, none of these are exactly surprising. 

India has, under Modi, become a bit more authoritarian, a bit less democratic, and, well, Tibet complicates, but they essentially share a land border with China, have some complicated history with the west, and have been trying to walk a fine line while trying to suss out a possible western decline/ascendant China scenario. Their sitting it out - and let's be honest, they're a little more susceptible to a Russian invasion than we are - isn't a huge shock. 

The UAE, meanwhile, again... we have more cordial relations with them than a lot of the Middle East, but they're a playground for the uber-rich and they know it. They're not loyal to America, they're loyal to money. 

The real surprise, as far as I'm concerned, is Germany and the strength of their response.


----------



## bostjan

The USA and China are India's biggest trading partners, but IIRC, UAE is their #3 economic partner. It's a weird relationship with the USA and China, though. They have several border disputes with China, including recent events that resulted in the deaths of a score or so Indian border patrol agents at the hands of Chinese troops, who, by international agreement, were not supposed to be carrying guns at the border. There have also been numerous heated disputes over other resources such as waterways and Oil and Gas.

I think India started out being friendly with China by being the first non-communist country to establish diplomacy with Mao, recognizing Chinese control over Tibet, etc., but those relations have gradually but steadily soured over time with China just being China and it not meshing well with Indian cultural paradigms.

But the USA, even though there's no fighting over territory, does some deals with Pakistan, which put's the US kind of in a position like it's the step-dad of India's rebellious teenage kid. Back in the 60's or 70's, when the USA was cozying up with Pakistan, India cozied up with the USSR half out of economic necessity and half to spite the US.

Maybe India (government) doesn't care either way about this conflict, but, if they piss off Russia, maybe they could lose a trade partner and face further tension with China as a result, or, if they piss off the USA, maybe they'd feel more threatened. So perhaps they (government) feel it's just best to try to stay neutral. Not to mention that India was perhaps hardest hit by covid and is still very much economically vulnerable.


----------



## Flappydoodle

bostjan said:


> Russia said they'd discuss withdrawal from Kyiv with their leaders in Moscow. Since those leaders are punishing anyone who whispers the word "war" or "invasion," I have some doubt that will go anywhere presently. They might has well have made all of those promises in a sarcastic tone of voice.
> 
> So you honestly think that countries like UAE and KSA will change anything for the better because of this? I think that's rather naïve. I'm believing that Putin probably doesn't care about the average Russian, but I know for a fact that the Emirs and the King of Saudi Arabia definitely do not care about the common folk in their fealty. And Russia is going to come out of this with at the very least a black eye, but if Putin's own personal proverbial eye isn't painted black somehow from all of this, I don't expect Xi or Kim or the Ayatollah or whatever dictator to take this as a potential hard lesson. OTOH, if Putin gets deposed somehow, those leaders will just convince themselves that "this would never happen to them" or whatever, and little will change. The West is not getting hands-on, and no one who is sanctioning is trading anything with North Korea anyway, so what does any of this matter to Kim Jong Un? Anyway, he's still lobbing missiles into the sea just like before.
> 
> I guess we'll see. If you think the war will détente by next week and be over by May, I'd be all for that as a start, but it leaves a lot of questions:
> 1. Is the West going to watch Russia withdraw and shrug it off, thinking Putin learned his lesson or whatever and then we go back to talking about Will Smith and Covid and Biden?
> 2. Is Russia going to continue to pretend like this war never happened and just go back to life as usual, except with crippling sanctions in place? Then what, just focus on planting potatoes like it's 1946 or something?
> 3. Is Putin's pride going to allow this to happen? This war is solely because of him. So, some peace talk in Turkey without his direct involvement - and which calling it "a war" could land you 15 years in a gulag - is something he's perfectly fine with. This seems to be him trying to build his legacy or some stupid shit. I don't see how he's just suddenly going to go from arbitrarily declaring that Ukraine was never a country and belongs to him and he wants it all to burn and everything in it to die to being on board with a sudden withdrawal, even if it's the case that the Russian military absolutely could not pull off a win without a miracle. After all, he's suddenly been talking publicly about religion and quoted a verse from the Bible in order to justify the invasion - which was actually a passage of Jesus teaching pacifism, so the context is just as insane as anything else out of Putin's mouth lately.


No I don’t think KSA, UAE etc will change. But I am optimistic that western dealings/reliance with those countries will change. US, EU and UK might ask some more questions and have higher standards, like ‘hey maybe having China build our nuclear reactors or 5G networks isn’t a good idea!’ KSA gets away with a lot because of oil. If western countries can reduce our dependence, KSA won’t be able to get away with as much. 

And China are absolutely deterred by the widespread condemnation of Russia. And China taking Taiwan would be MUCH harder than Russia taking Ukraine, and obviously that’s not going well for Russia. 

I don’t expect things to go back to pre-war normal. Russia should retain mostly pariah status for several more years at least. Punishment needs to be long lasting. I think some sanctions will be relaxed upon troop withdrawals. They might get McDonalds and SWIFT access back, but structural changes (like gas pipelines, moves away from Russian energy etc) are here to stay. 

There should also be a plan to rebuild Ukraine, preferably using some of the frozen Russian central bank foreign assets. 

As for Putin, it really doesn’t matter what he says. It’s not like his word means anything. He can still claim all the ‘denazification, not a country etc’ stuff on a Monday, and totally reverse position on Tuesday. It doesn’t matter to him at all. He has pride, but he’s certainly not shy, so when he wants to bail out, reverse his position etc, he will do it. And with his control over the media, they can walk away and claim victory anyway, lol.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Adieu said:


> That *IS* total capitulation.
> 
> Russia wanted Donbas, Luhansk, Crimea, no NATO, no alliances, no reparations, and "neutrality" in exchange for unenforceable security guarantees.
> 
> That's bullshit.
> 
> The way they rolled in, they never wanted to take Kyiv (THIS TIME!) unless somebody decided to chicken out and give it to them for a bluff. They never had the forces to occupy it, much less storm it.



They wanted change of leadership, puppet government and/or Ukraine simply being absorbed into Russia. 

And, end of the day, what else did you expect? Russia is fucking up royally right now, but if this drags on forever, Russia will probably still ‘win’. Or they reduce Ukraine back to the Stone Age to the point it’s not even worth anything to anybody. 

Crimea and Donbas were already gone. I don’t think even the Ukranian government seriously believed they were going to get those back. So to that extent you’re giving Russia something that they already had anyway. 

Same for NATO. You think NATO was actually seriously going to let Ukraine join? They strung Ukraine along for years but haven’t taken it seriously. Same with EU membership - there’s a LONG way to go before Ukraine would be capable of joining. So again, that’s giving up something which you never realistically had anyway - not much of a loss. 

Ukraine is putting on a brave face, no doubt. Western media is portraying them as triumphant heroes for resisting. But all these strikes destroying critical infrastructure, government buildings and civilian homes take a massive toll. 3 million people have left the country. Many won’t come back. How is Ukraine expected to recover from that? It’s going to cost hundreds of billions of € to rebuild and recover. Meanwhile, Moscow weathers some sanctions and Putin loses troops that he doesn’t care about. So there’s still more pressure on Ukraine to end this quickly. 

So I don’t see this as capitulation at all. It’s a realistic way of ending the destruction while not really giving up anything substantial.


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> That *IS* total capitulation.
> 
> Russia wanted Donbas, Luhansk, Crimea, no NATO, no alliances, no reparations, and "neutrality" in exchange for unenforceable security guarantees.
> 
> That's bullshit.
> 
> The way they rolled in, they never wanted to take Kyiv (THIS TIME!) unless somebody decided to chicken out and give it to them for a bluff. They never had the forces to occupy it, much less storm it.


Idk what they are thinking as well as many people here, also all the representatives from Ukrainian side except for Reznikov are some shady figures with questionable history but it seems like Putler won't accept any terms besides our capitulation any way and these peace talk are just for the sake of talks without any consequences (at least I do hope so beacause what was said at the press conference is way f'd up and problematic to implement according to our laws unless they tend to break them)

Regarding Kyiv withdraval - they are suffering big loses here and try to show it as them willingfully withdrawing meanwhile regrouping with majority of forces at the eastern side near Mariupol, Donetsk, Luhansk and that's probably where there next big strike will take place in a week or so.


----------



## oversteve

Flappydoodle said:


> They wanted change of leadership, puppet government and/or Ukraine simply being absorbed into Russia.
> 
> And, end of the day, what else did you expect? Russia is fucking up royally right now, but if this drags on forever, Russia will probably still ‘win’. Or they reduce Ukraine back to the Stone Age to the point it’s not even worth anything to anybody.
> 
> Crimea and Donbas were already gone. I don’t think even the Ukranian government seriously believed they were going to get those back. So to that extent you’re giving Russia something that they already had anyway.
> 
> Same for NATO. You think NATO was actually seriously going to let Ukraine join? They strung Ukraine along for years but haven’t taken it seriously. Same with EU membership - there’s a LONG way to go before Ukraine would be capable of joining. So again, that’s giving up something which you never realistically had anyway - not much of a loss.
> 
> Ukraine is putting on a brave face, no doubt. Western media is portraying them as triumphant heroes for resisting. But all these strikes destroying critical infrastructure, government buildings and civilian homes take a massive toll. 3 million people have left the country. Many won’t come back. How is Ukraine expected to recover from that? It’s going to cost hundreds of billions of € to rebuild and recover. Meanwhile, Moscow weathers some sanctions and Putin loses troops that he doesn’t care about. So there’s still more pressure on Ukraine to end this quickly.
> 
> So I don’t see this as capitulation at all. It’s a realistic way of ending the destruction while not really giving up anything substantial.


If everything is implemented the way it was presented at the press conference it's not ending the war, it's postponing it a few years at most until RuZi strike one more time without giving us an ability to prepare for it just like it was with 2 Chechen wars. But again I really do hope that all of that was said for the sake of continuing talks...


----------



## Flappydoodle

oversteve said:


> If everything is implemented the way it was presented at the press conference it's not ending the war, it's postponing it a few years at most until RuZi strike one more time without giving us an ability to prepare for it just like it was with 2 Chechen wars. But again I really do hope that all of that was said for the sake of continuing talks...


It’s possible. But Ukraine won’t sit by and let it happen. Neither will the west.


----------



## oversteve

Flappydoodle said:


> It’s possible. But Ukraine won’t sit by and let it happen. Neither will the west.


That really depends upon what's written in the documents cause we even won't be able to do joint military exercises with other countries without approval of guarantor countries and Russia should be one among them according to the words of one of the Ukrainian representatives  idk how that guy even got in this group since he was active during the reign of president Yanukovych before Maidan happened, was pro-russian and was involved in the sign of Kharkiv treaties that let the russian naval fleet stay in Crimea which basically led to it's occupation


----------



## Adieu

Well, now it seems that Putin isn't even going to agree to this ridiculous Ruscist appeasement bullshit anyway...


----------



## Flappydoodle

oversteve said:


> problematic to implement according to our laws unless they tend to break them)
> 
> Regarding Kyiv withdraval - they are suffering big loses here and try to show it as them willingfully withdrawing meanwhile regrouping with majority of forces at the eastern side near Mariupol, Donetsk, Luhansk and that's probably where there next big strike will take place in a week or so.



Well, I assume the laws are flexible given the situation. Isn't Ukraine under martial law right now?

And I agree, Russia is obviously talking about withdrawal as an excuse. Probably to regroup, refresh troops etc. UK, US stepped in immediately and said not to trust it, and they'll see it when they believe it.



oversteve said:


> That really depends upon what's written in the documents cause we even won't be able to do joint military exercises with other countries without approval of guarantor countries and Russia should be one among them according to the words of one of the Ukrainian representatives  idk how that guy even got in this group since he was active during the reign of president Yanukovych before Maidan happened, was pro-russian and was involved in the sign of Kharkiv treaties that let the russian naval fleet stay in Crimea which basically led to it's occupation



I don't know as much about the politics as you do. But I think there's some sense to sending some "friendlier" members to the negotiations. And there's also some strategic advantages to maintaining some uncertainty/ambiguity. You see Russia doing it. Putin just kinda shit on the arrangements. It's all strategy.


----------



## Adieu

They're not.

Somebody managed to ram through intent to join NATO all the way into the national CONSTITUTION (probably for this exact reason, to avoid being bullied into signing away such a possibility)


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> Well, now it seems that Putin isn't even going to agree to this ridiculous Ruscist appeasement bullshit anyway...





bostjan said:


> Russia said they'd discuss withdrawal from Kyiv with their leaders in Moscow. Since those leaders are punishing anyone who whispers the word "war" or "invasion," I have some doubt that will go anywhere presently. They might has well have made all of those promises in a sarcastic tone of voice.



See, even a dumb Detroiter can be right some of the time. 



Adieu said:


> They're not.
> 
> Somebody managed to ram through intent to join NATO all the way into the national CONSTITUTION (probably for this exact reason, to avoid being bullied into signing away such a possibility)



Since you live in the US now, maybe you are aware that constitutional amendments don't necessarily mean anything if the executive branch thinks that they don't mean anything.

In theory, the constitution is the most authoritative legal document for the nation and provides an unbending framework which all other laws and government practices must abide. In practice, it's a piece of paper.

All that said, I still suspect that Zelenskyy's talk about backing away from NATO is more of a rhetorical "well, if this is how you deal with threats, then why bother," and a simultaneous, "we could use your help, but we don't _need it," _than an outright change of direction.


----------



## Legion

bostjan said:


> The USA and China are India's biggest trading partners, but IIRC, UAE is their #3 economic partner. It's a weird relationship with the USA and China, though. They have several border disputes with China, including recent events that resulted in the deaths of a score or so Indian border patrol agents at the hands of Chinese troops, who, by international agreement, were not supposed to be carrying guns at the border. There have also been numerous heated disputes over other resources such as waterways and Oil and Gas.
> 
> I think India started out being friendly with China by being the first non-communist country to establish diplomacy with Mao, recognizing Chinese control over Tibet, etc., but those relations have gradually but steadily soured over time with China just being China and it not meshing well with Indian cultural paradigms.
> 
> But the USA, even though there's no fighting over territory, does some deals with Pakistan, which put's the US kind of in a position like it's the step-dad of India's rebellious teenage kid. Back in the 60's or 70's, when the USA was cozying up with Pakistan, India cozied up with the USSR half out of economic necessity and half to spite the US.
> 
> Maybe India (government) doesn't care either way about this conflict, but, if they piss off Russia, maybe they could lose a trade partner and face further tension with China as a result, or, if they piss off the USA, maybe they'd feel more threatened. So perhaps they (government) feel it's just best to try to stay neutral. Not to mention that India was perhaps hardest hit by covid and is still very much economically vulnerable.


A lot of this is absolutely on point.
I'm Indian. As much as I think that the present government is ratfucking fascist scum + my firm belief that the invasion of Ukraine is repugnant and abhorrent, I will acknowledge that politically India has a tightrope walk on its hands at the moment. Nothing I can add to @bostjan 's frankly perfectly accurate take here. There's a LOT of political history at play here, far more than just "India is a shit ally"


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> They're not.
> 
> Somebody managed to ram through intent to join NATO all the way into the national CONSTITUTION (probably for this exact reason, to avoid being bullied into signing away such a possibility)


It was the previous president Poroshenko and yup, it was made to prevent us turning back to Russia in case our people elected someone pro-russian. Actually Zelensky was pretty russian oriented at first, he firmly believed the war continued because Poroshenko wanted it, not Putin  tried to do some peace talks and basically stopped majority of military development programs but still even he already learned it the hard way there's not much you can do about Russia...


----------



## oversteve

Flappydoodle said:


> Well, I assume the laws are flexible given the situation. Isn't Ukraine under martial law right now?


The thing is NATO direction is written into our Constitution as Adieu mentioned and it's amendment is prohibited during martial law and it's active until russian forces leave and they obviously won't. Also I'm not sure there will be enough votes in the parliament to change it even then because there are many people opposing it.

Also Zelensky claimed all that stuff will be settled with the referendum and again according to our Constitution there can be only a whole country referendum including the occupied territories and than can't be done without Russia leaving Donbas and Crimea. 

Basically all of that can't be implemented at all unles they break the laws and that will definitely lead to some social unrest here.

But seems like it won't be the case since Putin won't even look at that.


----------



## tedtan

No, you can’t trust what the Russian negotiators say. Putin will do whatever he wants anyway.


----------



## Adieu

Besides, if he wants to retreat, he doesn't need a piece of paper. Ukraine hasn't crossed Russian borders anywhere and shows no signs of intending to so far.


----------



## pondman

Looks like Putrid needs some tough love.









Putin being misled by advisers on Ukraine – US intelligence


Reports concluded the Russian president was unaware that the military had been using and losing conscripts in Ukraine.




www.aol.co.uk


----------



## oversteve

pondman said:


> Looks like Putrid needs some tough love.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Putin being misled by advisers on Ukraine – US intelligence
> 
> 
> Reports concluded the Russian president was unaware that the military had been using and losing conscripts in Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.aol.co.uk


There was a similar local article here few weeks ago that was presented as the inside from russian FSB (federal security service). In short the idea was that they took his money and told him what he wanted to hear thinking that the full scale attack won't happen but Putin took it for granted and that's where we are now...

Also lots of russian money should've been spent on building strong pro-russian lobby here in Ukraine but obviously that was mostly stolen too by his underlings.


----------



## Adieu

Yeah, a lot of Russian stuff on the books is "dead souls" (fictitious assets only documented on paper)

Lower level officials pretend they exist to collect funds/benefits/rewards for having them, mid-level officials have their doubts but know not to stir shit and/or get a cut for not looking too closely, and top bosses are genuinely convinced that most or all of it exists. When it really really doesn't.


----------



## Metalman X

_The military intelligence
Two words combined that can't make sense...._










Russian Troops Suffer ‘Acute Radiation Sickness’ After Digging Chernobyl Trenches


SeanGallupSeveral hundred Russian soldiers were forced to hastily withdraw from the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine after suffering “acute radiation sickness” from contaminated soil, according to Ukrainian officials.The troops, who dug trenches in a contaminated Red Forest near the site...




www.yahoo.com


----------



## Drew

tedtan said:


> No, you can’t trust what the Russian negotiators say. Putin will do whatever he wants anyway.


Who does that remind us of.


----------



## Drew

bostjan said:


> Since you live in the US now, maybe you are aware that constitutional amendments don't necessarily mean anything if the executive branch thinks that they don't mean anything.
> 
> In theory, the constitution is the most authoritative legal document for the nation and provides an unbending framework which all other laws and government practices must abide. In practice, it's a piece of paper.


Probably worth expanding upon this a little - one of the biggest takeaways from the Trump era, for me, is constitutional checks and balances have value, but their value REALLY depends on the willingness of other parties within the government to enforce them. Trump came to power and simultaneously had little concern for checks and balances, and parties around him had little interest in holding him accountable. That's something we as a country might need to spend some time thinking about - at a minimum, maybe giving the GAO some actual enforcement powers instead of relying on the Executive branch to enforce actions that often as not are addressed at the executive branch. 

But to the question at hand, technically there's no reason why a constitutional objective of joining NATO could be inconsistent with a treaty indicating pursuit of NATO membership will be deferred until some as-of-yet unspecified time.


----------



## profwoot

Drew said:


> Probably worth expanding upon this a little - one of the biggest takeaways from the Trump era, for me, is constitutional checks and balances have value, but their value REALLY depends on the willingness of other parties within the government to enforce them. Trump came to power and simultaneously had little concern for checks and balances, and parties around him had little interest in holding him accountable. That's something we as a country might need to spend some time thinking about - at a minimum, maybe giving the GAO some actual enforcement powers instead of relying on the Executive branch to enforce actions that often as not are addressed at the executive branch.
> 
> But to the question at hand, technically there's no reason why a constitutional objective of joining NATO could be inconsistent with a treaty indicating pursuit of NATO membership will be deferred until some as-of-yet unspecified time.


I've been disappointed in the lack of effort to enact laws to formalize the "norms" that Trump demonstrated are actually what make the country run. As with anything else the dems want to do, if it doesn't happen in the next few months it's not going to happen until the republicans are back in power and the situation gets even worse.


----------



## AMOS

I wonder if this is factual.








Putin’s Soldiers Caught on Tape Lamenting Losses and Blasting His Army of ‘Stupid Morons’


As the Russian president signs a decree to call up another 134,500 conscripts, his troops in Ukraine want out.



www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## bostjan

Drew said:


> Probably worth expanding upon this a little - one of the biggest takeaways from the Trump era, for me, is constitutional checks and balances have value, but their value REALLY depends on the willingness of other parties within the government to enforce them. Trump came to power and simultaneously had little concern for checks and balances, and parties around him had little interest in holding him accountable. That's something we as a country might need to spend some time thinking about - at a minimum, maybe giving the GAO some actual enforcement powers instead of relying on the Executive branch to enforce actions that often as not are addressed at the executive branch.
> 
> But to the question at hand, technically there's no reason why a constitutional objective of joining NATO could be inconsistent with a treaty indicating pursuit of NATO membership will be deferred until some as-of-yet unspecified time.


Same here. I think we took for granted that government only fulfills its duties to the people if the people hold the government accountable for such. Luckily, the government didn't implode by any stretch, but it was a not-so-subtle reminder that there's no magical guarantee.

Many people here have brought up the Ukraine constitution. And the wording in it since the amendment a couple years ago is quite strong about Ukraine's path toward joining NATO and the EU. I don't think anyone would read it and think "meh, there must be a loophole," but I think we've all come across a strongly worded letter of intent before that ended up ultimately inaccurate for whatever reason.


----------



## Drew

profwoot said:


> I've been disappointed in the lack of effort to enact laws to formalize the "norms" that Trump demonstrated are actually what make the country run. As with anything else the dems want to do, if it doesn't happen in the next few months it's not going to happen until the republicans are back in power and the situation gets even worse.


I think it's coming, to a degree, but yeah, not as fast as I wanted either.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Real talk: when the bombs are flying, your pieces of paper don’t matter for shit

Look at Putin: wanting to change gas payments to his shitty currency, ignoring contracts. They’re also going to allow non-authorised imports of western goods - ie illegal sales from other countries, and counterfeit goods. I hope this is a horrible move that backfires because nobody will trust again, but they also have losers like India and dicks like China who will keep dealing with them. 

After 9/11 the patriot act and other things shit on the US constitution. Second amendment is constantly infringed. NSA carried out widespread spying with zero oversight for 15+ years. Presidents performed tons of military actions without congressional approval. 

So in reality, Zelensky is trying to end this and keep his country intact. If it means ignoring some written stuff, I reckon he’ll do it in a heartbeat. Eventually he will lose western support if it becomes clear he’s trying to fight an impossible fight.


----------



## LostTheTone

News from this morning - lRussia accuses Ukrainian attack helicopters of 'striking oil facility INSIDE Russia': Video appears to show rockets fired from aircraft blowing up storage depot 20 miles from the border 

Interesting indeed.

Obviously the usual caveats apply, but if this is true... Well it makes sense since Russian logistics are a joke, and striking fuel depots will make it much worse. So, makes sense for Ukraine to do it.

But if this was a helicopter led attack... Man that is a searing indictment of the Russian airforce. Choppers are slow and don't have much range. Apparently the Russians aren't even flying combat air patrol around their critical logistics, and don't have any SAMs set up either. 

Super good to see proactive moves from Ukraine too. If they do enough of this stuff Russia won't actually be able to extract its heavy equipment, and in turn that means Putin can't declare victory in the east and go home.


----------



## Adieu

OF COURSE they're not flying combat air patrol. They can't afford to.

It's a huge border and Ukraine is known to have received vast numbers of shoulder-fired anti-aircraft kit.


----------



## oversteve

LostTheTone said:


> News from this morning - lRussia accuses Ukrainian attack helicopters of 'striking oil facility INSIDE Russia': Video appears to show rockets fired from aircraft blowing up storage depot 20 miles from the border
> 
> Interesting indeed.
> 
> Obviously the usual caveats apply, but if this is true... Well it makes sense since Russian logistics are a joke, and striking fuel depots will make it much worse. So, makes sense for Ukraine to do it.
> 
> But if this was a helicopter led attack... Man that is a searing indictment of the Russian airforce. Choppers are slow and don't have much range. Apparently the Russians aren't even flying combat air patrol around their critical logistics, and don't have any SAMs set up either.
> 
> Super good to see proactive moves from Ukraine too. If they do enough of this stuff Russia won't actually be able to extract its heavy equipment, and in turn that means Putin can't declare victory in the east and go home.


Officially it's not us  also according to Russia all our air force was destroyed on the first day of invasion

But in reality that might be anything, there are some speculations that it might even be russians bombing themselves in order to implement local martial law and mobilize some population since they lack troops and looks like Belarus is not sending forces after all. But seems like sofar they didn't decide themselves how to call it since some russian officials said it was UA attack, others said it was an accident...

Funny thing is that our local trolls started spamming boards and forums in Belgorod few days ago with messages about saboteurs, bomb markings etc and then this happens and people there now are literally shitting bricks


----------



## LostTheTone

oversteve said:


> Officially it's not us  also according to Russia all our air force was destroyed on the first day of invasion
> 
> But in reality that might be anything, there are some speculations that it might even be russians bombing themselves in order to implement local martial law and mobilize some population since they lack troops and looks like Belarus is not sending forces after all. But seems like sofar they didn't decide themselves how to call it since some russian officials said it was UA attack, others said it was an accident...
> 
> Funny thing is that our local trolls started spamming boards and forums in Belgorod few days ago with messages about saboteurs, bomb markings etc and then this happens and people there now are literally shitting bricks



It is always difficult to analyze things from inside despotic regimes. As ever, they have been lying to us for so long that even when things seem reasonable we have to question them.

It doesn't seem very Russian to tell the truth about this kind of attack, but then I don't really buy it was a false flag or sabotage either. None of those options seem to have some advantage for Russia really. If they want to clamp down on people do they really need an excuse? 

Wheels within wheels, eh?


----------



## Flappydoodle

oversteve said:


> Officially it's not us  also according to Russia all our air force was destroyed on the first day of invasion
> 
> But in reality that might be anything, there are some speculations that it might even be russians bombing themselves in order to implement local martial law and mobilize some population since they lack troops and looks like Belarus is not sending forces after all. But seems like sofar they didn't decide themselves how to call it since some russian officials said it was UA attack, others said it was an accident...
> 
> Funny thing is that our local trolls started spamming boards and forums in Belgorod few days ago with messages about saboteurs, bomb markings etc and then this happens and people there now are literally shitting bricks


Alex Jones really nailed the term perfectly - it’s an information war

Russia immediately blames Ukraine. Maybe it gives them an excuse to cancel peace talks, or escalate violence, or send more troops now that the motherland is attacked. 

At the same time, it makes them look super incompetent. 

Ukraine won’t confirm or deny. If it was them, that’s a hell of a morale booster. It also makes strategic sense. But maybe they want to avoid feeding into Russian propaganda so they deny it. 

Who knows.


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> Officially it's not us  also according to Russia all our air force was destroyed on the first day of invasion
> 
> But in reality that might be anything, there are some speculations that it might even be russians bombing themselves in order to implement local martial law and mobilize some population since they lack troops and looks like Belarus is not sending forces after all. But seems like sofar they didn't decide themselves how to call it since some russian officials said it was UA attack, others said it was an accident...
> 
> Funny thing is that our local trolls started spamming boards and forums in Belgorod few days ago with messages about saboteurs, bomb markings etc and then this happens and people there now are literally shitting bricks



Sternenko is calling for a BNR referendum & election of him as President of the new Belgorod People's Republic

Somebody somewhere must be shitting bricks

It's a joke so far but stranger things have been known to happen


----------



## LostTheTone

Flappydoodle said:


> Alex Jones really nailed the term perfectly - it’s an information war
> 
> Russia immediately blames Ukraine. Maybe it gives them an excuse to cancel peace talks, or escalate violence, or send more troops now that the motherland is attacked.
> 
> At the same time, it makes them look super incompetent.
> 
> Ukraine won’t confirm or deny. If it was them, that’s a hell of a morale booster. It also makes strategic sense. But maybe they want to avoid feeding into Russian propaganda so they deny it.
> 
> Who knows.



"How about we blow up our own shit, then tell everyone it was our inferior enemies who struck a deadly blow against us?"

"But how does that help us win the war Ivan?"

"What war?"


----------



## High Plains Drifter

Fuel depot hit was either accidental or came from Ukraine imo. I just don't see Russia taking out something so vital to their progress/ success.


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> Sternenko is calling for a BNR referendum & election of him as President of the new Belgorod People's Republic
> 
> Somebody somewhere must be shitting bricks
> 
> It's a joke so far but stranger things have been known to happen


Belgorod is not the only city under troll attack so I won't be surprised if something else blows up in few days 



High Plains Drifter said:


> Fuel depot hit was either accidental or came from Ukraine imo. I just don't see Russia taking out something so vital to their progress/ success.


I had a similar thought, their government organized some terrorist attacks with plenty of victims before invading Chechnya so following their 'logic' they should've sacrificed people instead of wasting fuel. Also there were helicopters so probably not so accidental.

We were discussing attack on Chernobyl a few weeks ago and guess what? There are already plenty of cases of radiation illness among russian forces. After all it's not a healthy thing digging trenches in radioactive forests...


----------



## bostjan

High Plains Drifter said:


> Fuel depot hit was either accidental or came from Ukraine imo. I just don't see Russia taking out something so vital to their progress/ success.


...or is that just what Putin wants you to think? 

I'm joking, but also I don't even know anymore. I'm still kind of in a state of disbelief that Putin went from all bark and no bite to chewing off his own ass. I know it's been 8 years but for some reason it doesn't seem like it.


----------



## PK317

oversteve said:


> also according to Russia all our air force was destroyed on the first day of invasion


Well, according to Russia, they already destroyed more military equipment than Ukraine ever had


----------



## LostTheTone

PK317 said:


> Well, according to Russia, they already destroyed more military equipment than Ukraine ever had



"President Putin, I am happy to report that our army is 147% effective. We have destroyed 100% of the Ukrainian army, and also another 47% of their army."

"Excellent. Next week let's try to make that 165%. You are a much better intelligence officer than the one I had shot."


----------



## Drew

Flappydoodle said:


> Alex Jones really nailed the term perfectly - it’s an information war


Alex Jones is an idiot who's currently facing fines of $25,000 a day, increasing by $25,000 every day he doesn't comply, for failing to testify in his Sandy Hook defamation trial, claiming he's under doctor's orders not to sit to testify or work, but meanwhile is still busy working on his podcast while the trial he's refusing to be deposed in is going on. Let's not give him too much credit.


----------



## Drew

oversteve said:


> We were discussing attack on Chernobyl a few weeks ago and guess what? There are already plenty of cases of radiation illness among russian forces. After all it's not a healthy thing digging trenches in radioactive forests...


Despite the news stories of the last 48 hours, those actually haven't been confirmed, and the fact Russia is pulling troops back from Chernobyl, per US intelligence, is consistent with their broader military actions and doesn't seem to be driven by concern for radiation. The International Atomic Energy Agency is looking into reports, as if containment is really that bad in the area then something's likely gone wrong we don't yet know about, but so far it's just rumors of radiation sickness.


----------



## ArtDecade

Propaganda is an information war and that predates Alex Jones by centuries.


----------



## Adieu

Drew said:


> Despite the news stories of the last 48 hours, those actually haven't been confirmed, and the fact Russia is pulling troops back from Chernobyl, per US intelligence, is consistent with their broader military actions and doesn't seem to be driven by concern for radiation. The International Atomic Energy Agency is looking into reports, as if containment is really that bad in the area then something's likely gone wrong we don't yet know about, but so far it's just rumors of radiation sickness.



Afaik, there are plenty of strictly off-limits spots in the Chernobyl zone still, and digging by hand, driving tracked vehicles without being buttoned up w/ AC recirculation, and certainly things like eating or drinking local can and will still make you sick or even eventually dead

You don't have to breach the dome or damage anything to catch some rays in the area. Simple stupidity is enough.

Disclaimer: My information is ~15 years out of date, but from what I know of half lives, that's not nearly enough to change the picture with some of the nastier isotopes


----------



## bostjan

Right, well, whatever hazards are in that area, if 25 years wasn't enough time to make a significant difference in their concentrations, 40 years very likely wouldn't either.


----------



## Drew

Adieu said:


> Afaik, there are plenty of strictly off-limits spots in the Chernobyl zone still, and digging by hand, driving tracked vehicles without being buttoned up w/ AC recirculation, and certainly things like eating or drinking local can and will still make you sick or even eventually dead
> 
> You don't have to breach the dome or damage anything to catch some rays in the area. Simple stupidity is enough.
> 
> Disclaimer: My information is ~15 years out of date, but from what I know of half lives, that's not nearly enough to change the picture with some of the nastier isotopes


...though, while if I've learned anything from this experience is never to underestimate Russian military bull-headed stupidity, you kinda feel like they HAVE to have known enough not to entrench themselves in the extremely radioactive bits, you know?


----------



## AMOS

I just got banned on facebook for saying this, what's wrong with this world when you can't even bad mouth an evil dictator?
"Russia continues to bomb Ukrainian cities even though there's a cease fire. Ukraine bombs oil depot in Russia, Russia claims attack will jeopardize the cease fire




Putin belongs on the side of a milk carton. I guess no one got the memo that Russia can bomb civilians but no one is allowed to bomb them, someone please shoot that egocentric narcissistic psychopath"


----------



## Cyanide_Anima

You probably got reported by a Trumpist.


----------



## AMOS

Cyanide_Anima said:


> You probably got reported by a Trumpist.


No, it was pretty instant. I'm guessing it was my use of the word "shoot" red flags go up I guess.


----------



## AMOS

Honestly? I've seen worse language used towards Trump and nothing happened to them of course. Whether something is considered free speech or hate speech comes down to which side of the fence they sit on.


----------



## StevenC

I talked to some people I know who worked at IAEA, and they don't really buy the story of radiation poisoning.

Like worked as nuclear scientists.


----------



## Adieu

AMOS said:


> I just got banned on facebook for saying this, what's wrong with this world when you can't even bad mouth an evil dictator?
> "Russia continues to bomb Ukrainian cities even though there's a cease fire. Ukraine bombs oil depot in Russia, Russia claims attack will jeopardize the cease fire
> 
> 
> 
> Putin belongs on the side of a milk carton. I guess no one got the memo that Russia can bomb civilians but no one is allowed to bomb them, someone please shoot that egocentric narcissistic psychopath"



Well, that *is* disinformation, although seemingly accidental

There ain't no ceasefire.


----------



## Adieu

StevenC said:


> I talked to some people I know who worked at IAEA, and they don't really buy the story of radiation poisoning.
> 
> Like worked as nuclear scientists.



Nobody was stupid enough to roll around riding on tracked armor columns kicking up dust before.


----------



## High Plains Drifter

Jesus... thought @StevenC said "IKEA" and I was like "oh surely they'd know". Sorry.. Carry on.


----------



## StevenC

Adieu said:


> Nobody was stupid enough to roll around riding on tracked armor columns kicking up dust before.


They're pretty confident digging trenches wouldn't be very dangerous.


----------



## AMOS

Adieu said:


> Well, that *is* disinformation, although seemingly accidental
> 
> There ain't no ceasefire.


On the "news" they mentioned that Russia said it could jeopardize the cease fire. How stupid does Putin think people are? yeah let's have a cease fire and we'll continue to bomb you, no one will know..


----------



## Adieu

AMOS said:


> On the "news" they mentioned that Russia said it could jeopardize the cease fire. How stupid does Putin think people are? yeah let's have a cease fire and we'll continue to bomb you, no one will know..



The *talking about* *maybe discussing* a *potential* FUTURE ceasefire

Which most observers think is just a cheap attempt to convince the West to not hand over heavy weapons and add sanctions while they *pretend* to talk


----------



## AMOS

Let's let Ukraine borrow our Navy for a couple weeks.


----------



## LostTheTone

AMOS said:


> Let's let Ukraine borrow our Navy for a couple weeks.



Kyiv is 700km inland


----------



## tedtan

LostTheTone said:


> Kyiv is 700km inland


Yeah, but the US navy has 11 aircraft carriers, so if the Ukrainians can figure out how to fly US fighters jets…


----------



## AMOS

tedtan said:


> Yeah, but the US navy has 11 aircraft carriers, so if the Ukrainians can figure out how to fly US fighters jets…


And many, many Destroyers, Frigates, Cruisers and Subs that carry a bunch of Cruise Missiles.


----------



## Drew

AMOS said:


> Honestly? I've seen worse language used towards Trump and nothing happened to them of course. Whether something is considered free speech or hate speech comes down to which side of the fence they sit on.


Nah, remember, Trump _loved_ Putin, and has been praising him left and right since the war started. Had you talked about shooting Clinton I'd say maybe you had a point, but I think it was just the fact you had advocated shooting _anyone_. I suspect the anti-Trump contingent you're thinking of has said some pretty insulting things about him, but hasn't actually advocated shooting him or stabbing him or anything like that.


----------



## Adieu

tedtan said:


> Yeah, but the US navy has 11 aircraft carriers, so if the Ukrainians can figure out how to fly US fighters jets…



Hmmm... teach newbies to land on carriers instead of survival or mission skills.

Great idea.


----------



## tedtan

Adieu said:


> Hmmm... teach newbies to land on carriers instead of survival or mission skills.
> 
> Great idea.


No one actually thinks there is time to teach the Ukraininan pilots to fly the US planes, let alone landing them on a carrier.

Don’t be so autistically literal.


----------



## Flappydoodle

ArtDecade said:


> Propaganda is an information war and that predates Alex Jones by centuries.



Yes obviously. Im not saying he invented or discovered it. I’m just saying that coining the term ‘infowar’ was super accurate. 

I also don’t buy this story about radiation sickness. That sounds like Ukrainian propaganda and nobody reputable has substantiated it. Both sides, including western intelligence, promote whatever message they think is helpful. That’s just how this is played. 

Note how Azov battalion is over-emphasised in Russian news and basically never mentioned, or is downplayed, in western news. BBC the other day simply said it was ‘right wing’, whereas Russia says they’re actual Nazis. Or this issue of shooting prisoners in the legs. Russia holds it up as evidence of barbaric Ukrainians. BBC said the video is not definitive. (However, it’s pretty damn obvious to me that it is real.)

See all the ‘Putin is mad at his advisors’ stuff pushed in the headlines in the last 48 hours. You have to be really dumb not to see that as obvious coordinated western propaganda designed to weaken Putin. (That is regardless of whether it’s true or not. I guess it probably is true. But none of us have any way of verifying what Putin is thinking!)

So really, it’s very hard to trust anything we are hearing right now at face value. The full extent of things will only come out in the future. Like right now they’re discovering mass graves, shot up civilian cars etc outside Kyiv. That will be convincing evidence of war crimes committed by Russia.


----------



## oversteve

StevenC said:


> I talked to some people I know who worked at IAEA, and they don't really buy the story of radiation poisoning.
> 
> Like worked as nuclear scientists.


Russian troops stayed in the area called Red forest. Long story short trees there received bigest part of radiation when Chernobyl exploded, then were cut down and burried in the ground there so the soil is the main source of radioation. Now the forest has a background radiation ranging from 0.1 mSv to 10 mSv per hour. For comparison average X-Ray scan is around 0.12 mSv and CT scan is 5-15mSv so staying in this area is somewhat equivalent to doing an X-Ray every hour up to living inside opearting CT machine. And all of that without taking digging into radioactive soil and breathing radioactive dust into consideration cause those measurements were taken by drones in the air in calm conditions. Radiation illness starts from accumulated dose of 500-1000 mSv, the troops stayed there for around 3 weeks that is 500+ hours so it's an easy math further on. Maybe your friends meant staying at the plant and not in the forest.


----------



## LostTheTone

Flappydoodle said:


> Yes obviously. Im not saying he invented or discovered it. I’m just saying that coining the term ‘infowar’ was super accurate.



Yeah, Alex Jones is loopy but when he's off camera he has a pretty keen sense for how things work. His barometer for reality is... Poorly calibrated... But he has read his Orwell, and he gets that he who controls the past controls the future and he who controls the present controls the past. InfoWars itself could be described entirely as a culture jamming endeavour with an anti-news agenda. 

And the best place to see this is to look at Jeffery Epstein. Whatever else you can say about Jones, he was the only person on earth who reported (correctly) that Epstein was at the center of a child sex trafficking ring that catered to the rich and famous, back when that sex trafficking ring was still in operation. Back before most people had heard of Epstein, Jones (correctly) pointed out that it was seriously alarming that this mysterious billionaire somehow managed to turn a federal life sentence (for, y'know, pimping out children) into 13 months of work release. But no-one else in the media wanted to talk about it. 

There was a definite conspiracy of silence. In a very real sense, those who controlled the past decided that this Epstein chap was not a story, and so no story existed. And even to this day, when we know for a fact that mainstream reporters had the story and wanted to run it only to be spiked by orders from their higher ups, people who ask "What about Epstein's little black book?" are treated like conspiracy theorists. Remember folks, there was definitely a kiddy-pimp-to-the-stars, but it's not in the public interest to find out who any of the clients were. The history of Epstein is already written and it says "Epstein killed himself, please stop asking questions."

And, InfoWars itself has latterly become the subject of an InfoWar where they are entirely defined by the things the media say about them. Which is extremely meta, and probably the sort of thing that would lead Jones to shout "I KNEW IT!".

Which is all a long way round to saying that yes... All of this reporting in Ukraine is beyond suspect. It's not exactly hard for two sides that use mostly the same equipment to just fake stuff. 

And the narratives around what is happening at the top of Russian government are suspiciously homogenous, which at least indicates a lack of sources. 

The thing about supposed war crimes is that, if you have reached a Jonesy level of paranoia, you have to ask yourself whether there is some potential for double-reverse-black-propaganda here. Like, if you were in the Ukrainian intelligence/PR team, spreading stories about war crimes by Ukrainians that you can later prove to be false might not actually be a bad idea. It means that at a later date you can mass debunk loads of stuff, including any real war crimes, by conclusively showing that something big and famous was Russian disinformation. 

I mean... That is ultra cynical. But these guys have been controlling the narrative really well.


----------



## bostjan

Why is no one believing the story about radiation sickness?


----------



## Drew

bostjan said:


> Why is no one believing the story about radiation sickness?


Because rumors swirl in the middle of a war, because it's not really necessary to explain Russia's actions in the area, and because it's not really material to the overall war. I don't know if I'd say I "don't believe it," exactly, so much as I don't think its important enough to worry about.


----------



## AMOS

Drew said:


> Nah, remember, Trump _loved_ Putin, and has been praising him left and right since the war started. Had you talked about shooting Clinton I'd say maybe you had a point, but I think it was just the fact you had advocated shooting _anyone_. I suspect the anti-Trump contingent you're thinking of has said some pretty insulting things about him, but hasn't actually advocated shooting him or stabbing him or anything like that.


Facebook has turned into Mr Rogers neighborhood, who wouldn't want to see Putin taken out right now? it would more than likely end the war. They just like controlling what you say, that's not how Free Speech works.


----------



## Drew

AMOS said:


> Facebook has turned into Mr Rogers neighborhood, who wouldn't want to see Putin taken out right now? it would more than likely end the war. They just like controlling what you say, that's not how Free Speech works.


It's less about Putin specifically and more about their having policies in place prohibiting threats of violence or advocating killing _anyone_, no matter how richly thery might deserve it. 

But, they're also a private company, with private agreements between themselves and their users. You have a constitutionally protected right to free speech within certain bounds (libel, hate speech, etc), but that means the _government_ can't stop you from saying you want to shoot Putin. It doesn't mean that Facebook can't, as a private business, tell you that if you want to tell the world you think Putin should be shot, you have to do it somewhere else.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Why is no one believing the story about radiation sickness?



Because people see some measurements of air quality in an administrative building parking lot in the zone and are like, duuude, getting a CT scan is so much worse

The facts that contamination patterns are uneven, that flora and fauna absorbs and retains radiation in wildly different ways, that this AND some countermeasures deployed create radioactive AF sections of soil, etc are "utterly defeated" by some graph that says the parking lot ain't so bad

Or maybe it's the presence of plants and animals... which totally disregards the fact that much of this wildlife has had 18-35 *generations* to go through super-harsh natural selection for radiation resistance...while soldiers had ONE generation that BARELY selected for radiation, and officers 35 & over had none.


----------



## oversteve

someone tried to denazify a few washing machines


----------



## narad

oversteve said:


> someone tried to denazify a few washing machines




They were being used for ethnic cleansing.


----------



## Randy

Bucha


----------



## narad

Randy said:


> Bucha



Fuck those guys. Where's that other poster talking about the Russians coming in and helping old women out of their basements?* Now we got mass graves for hundreds of bodies.

* Not really asking for him to come back and spout more BS


----------



## Adieu

Well, call me a pessimist, but I am not the least bit surprised. Appalled, yes. Not surprised.

Impoverished scared fascists predictably war crime against the defenseless and anybody who lived better than they did (which is pretty much everyone)

And Putin did a fucking phenomenal job of keeping a whole generation impoverished, ignorant, and hateful


----------



## Adieu

This is a fucking CAMO CHURCH OF THE ARMED FORCES with a goddamn monument to some kind of explosive device (shell? nuclear warhead? IDFK but what's the difference)




What can you expect of people who grew up on this sort of shit and without indoor plumbing


----------



## oversteve




----------



## oversteve

Russia is requesting UN security council meeting due to provocations of Ukrainian radicals in Bucha  I don't even know what to say here


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> Russia is requesting UN security council meeting due to provocations of Ukrainian radicals in Bucha  I don't even know what to say here


UN now has two choices: kick em the hell out or lose the last shreds of its very faint credibility


----------



## AMOS

Poor Russia, the deserve to attack anyone they want without anyone retaliating.


----------



## oversteve




----------



## ramses

oversteve said:


>




This is like a medieval army. 

... and they are part of the UN Human Rights Council ...

Nothing makes sense.


----------



## nickgray

ramses said:


> ... and they are part of the UN Human Rights Council ...



UN Human Rights Council is an absolute joke. If you think Russia as a member is bad, fucking Eritrea is a member. Eritrea. Also China, Somalia, Uzbekistan, Venezuela...


----------



## AMOS

nickgray said:


> UN Human Rights Council is an absolute joke. If you think Russia as a member is bad, fucking Eritrea is a member. Eritrea. Also China, Somalia, Uzbekistan, Venezuela...


They butcher Christians daily in Africa, UN brushes it under the carpet as usual


----------



## Xaios

AMOS said:


> They butcher Christians daily in Africa, UN brushes it under the carpet as usual


Who's "they"?


----------



## AMOS

Xaios said:


> Who's "they"?


Corrupt Warlords, Al-Qaeda. Nigeria’s Islamic Jihadists killed 3,000 Christians in 2021, Boko Haram killed over 4,000 in 2014. If you add up the numbers in the last decade it's pretty sizeable.


----------



## StevenC

nickgray said:


> UN Human Rights Council is an absolute joke. If you think Russia as a member is bad, fucking Eritrea is a member. Eritrea. Also China, Somalia, Uzbekistan, Venezuela...


As with many UN bodies, it's important to note that the seats rotate. Not that this makes it better, but it's not like Eritrea was given an eternal deciding voice on human rights.


----------



## mbardu

AMOS said:


> Corrupt Warlords, Al-Qaeda. Nigeria’s Islamic Jihadists killed 3,000 Christians in 2021, Boko Haram killed over 4,000 in 2014. If you add up the numbers in the last decade it's pretty sizeable.



"Brushes it under the carpet"









Operation Serval - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org













Operation Barkhane - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





Some of those countries in the UN are jokes, but close to your examples, not everything is entirely ignored either


----------



## AMOS

mbardu said:


> "Brushes it under the carpet"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Operation Serval - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Operation Barkhane - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some of those countries in the UN are jokes, but close to your examples, not everything is entirely ignored either


In most of those cases they were focused on Al Qaeda gaining new footholds in Mali and other parts of West Africa, they weren't really retribution for atrocities against Christians. I'm a Christian myself but I don't know why we send missions there, it's high risk for us, and a higher risk for them. Similar to being a practicing Christian in Pakistan, I know a couple guys that moved from there to here because their churches kept getting bombed.


----------



## mbardu

AMOS said:


> In most of those cases they were focused on Al Qaeda gaining new footholds in Mali and other parts of West Africa, they weren't really retribution for atrocities against Christians. I'm a Christian myself but I don't know why we send missions there, it's high risk for us, and a higher risk for them. Similar to being a practicing Christian in Pakistan, I know a couple guys that moved from there to here because their churches kept getting bombed.



"they were focused on Al Qaeda gaining new footholds in Mali and other parts of West Africa, they weren't really retribution"

Well yeah...the point _is _to avoid future atrocities, and _is not_ really about "retribution" or "vengeance".
Which....is kinda better, isn't it? Especially when "retribution" or "vengeance" usually come with collateral damage and loss of goodwill (see: Irak, Afghanistan etc).

Nonstop retribution or vengeance is how a lot of that stuff _doesn't _stop...and it's not very Christian either.
Unless we're talking the American modern conservative definition of "Christian".


----------



## AMOS

mbardu said:


> "they were focused on Al Qaeda gaining new footholds in Mali and other parts of West Africa, they weren't really retribution"
> 
> Well yeah...the point _is _to avoid future atrocities, and _is not_ really about "retribution" or "vengeance".
> Which....is kinda better, isn't it? Especially when "retribution" or "vengeance" usually come with collateral damage and loss of goodwill (see: Irak, Afghanistan etc).
> 
> Nonstop retribution or vengeance is how a lot of that stuff _doesn't _stop...and it's not very Christian either.
> Unless we're talking the American modern conservative definition of "Christian".


Someone is watching too much MSNBC


----------



## mbardu

AMOS said:


> Someone is watching too much MSNBC



Is someone still watching MSNBC, really?

Last time I saw their talking heads by accident on YT, they were almost as insufferable as the Fox news ones (and that's saying something).
Don't know how anyone watches that.


----------



## Flappydoodle

bostjan said:


> Why is no one believing the story about radiation sickness?



It just sounds very implausible to me. You need a shitload of radiation to get acute radiation sickness. And the IAEI has pretty much debunked it as much as they can without calling BS on the story. 

A bit like your bombers over Taiwan story, there’s probably some element of truth, and then a whole lot of misrepresentation and exaggeration. 



Adieu said:


> UN now has two choices: kick em the hell out or lose the last shreds of its very faint credibility



No such thing. If you kick Russia out of the UNSC, then you need to scrap the entire thing. Then we have no forum for international diplomacy. 

The UN is not some sort of governing power with the ability to do things. It’s made up of members. There are 5 permanent members who hold ultimate power - UK, France, USA, Russia and China. If those 5 don’t agree, the UN isn’t acting on anything in any major way. But IMO it’s still better than having no such forum for diplomacy. 



nickgray said:


> UN Human Rights Council is an absolute joke. If you think Russia as a member is bad, fucking Eritrea is a member. Eritrea. Also China, Somalia, Uzbekistan, Venezuela...



It’s a rotating membership. It’s not like an endorsement of those countries or a reward for a good record in the area.

And there’s also some sort of hope (naive optimism maybe) that inviting countries to engage on topics may stimulate them to change their ways. So the Eritrean government and diplomats will have to generate reports and statistics about poverty and economic impact of undereducated women, and impacts of early marriage etc etc. If you’re lucky, they take some to heart and improve their country a bit. Again, if not this, then what? Bomb them into compliance? Or sanction a country that’s already an impoverished shithole? It accomplishes nothing.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Sadly, sanctions seem to be blunted, right?

Roubles are pretty much recovered to pre-war levels. 

Some companies pulled out, or suspended but have the possibility of return. I haven’t read much impact of this beyond not having McDonald’s. 

Germany and others still resisting energy sanctions. Guess they’ve reached their maximum tolerance. I’d have hoped the civilian executions and rapes might have forced further sanctions, but it seems not. 

Is there any real impact on the ground in Russia now? I know interest rates went up. Anything else?


----------



## oversteve

Flappydoodle said:


> Sadly, sanctions seem to be blunted, right?
> 
> Roubles are pretty much recovered to pre-war levels.
> 
> Some companies pulled out, or suspended but have the possibility of return. I haven’t read much impact of this beyond not having McDonald’s.
> 
> Germany and others still resisting energy sanctions. Guess they’ve reached their maximum tolerance. I’d have hoped the civilian executions and rapes might have forced further sanctions, but it seems not.
> 
> Is there any real impact on the ground in Russia now? I know interest rates went up. Anything else?


Regarding the rouble it's not exactly the case, the exchange rate is more or less artifical and you can't properly buy it.

The Implemented sanctions are not enough since they are estimated to severely affect Russian economy in 3-6 month or so so implementing energy sources embargo, pohibiting their ships from entering ports and completely blocking swift would be a real boost. Seems like even Germany and Italy are more or less ready after what happened in Bucha but then there's Hungary's Orban... 

Nevertheless current sanctions already give some proper results. The tanks production stopped. Also they lack high precision gps modules which basically means no more or at least way less Kalibr rockets and similar stuff built in the nearest future. And that's not the end of it.

The prices already grew up on many things, for example a pack of regular A4 class C paper costs aroun $9-10 there and the same pack in Ukraine is roughly $3. 

Also Russia themselves already did a few crazy things that will ruin their trade reputation like nationalazing planes leased in foreighn countries.


----------



## bostjan

Flappydoodle said:


> It just sounds very implausible to me.


----------



## AMOS

It's time for NATO and the rest of the world to enter Ukraine and force out the Russian military completely. We can't cower to every lunatic that threatens the use of nuclear weapons. Who's next North Korea? Putin obviously isn't playing with a full deck, and the UN Security Council doesn't have the courage to come to this conclusion. What Putin's troops are doing to civilians is what the SS did, it's what Stalin's NKVD did during the Great Purge. History is repeating itself, wake up world!


----------



## nightflameauto

It's tough to swallow that the west just shakes a finger and throws up sanctions while these atrocities continue to pile up. I get that the possibility of a nuclear strike is a terrible thing to consider, but I would think even with that threat looming, there should be a limit to how much death, rape, torture and destruction we should allow any asshole with a superweapon to do before we say, "No. That's enough."

Each day this continues is one more step further into, "We really don't give a fuck about anything anymore."


----------



## bostjan

nightflameauto said:


> It's tough to swallow that the west just shakes a finger and throws up sanctions while these atrocities continue to pile up. I get that the possibility of a nuclear strike is a terrible thing to consider, but I would think even with that threat looming, there should be a limit to how much death, rape, torture and destruction we should allow any asshole with a superweapon to do before we say, "No. That's enough."
> 
> Each day this continues is one more step further into, "We really don't give a fuck about anything anymore."


Did we actually ever, though? I know we said we did, but did we actually care or did we only care about saying we cared?

Not even two decades after the Holocaust, Guatemala, two borders away from us, was mass murdering Mayans by the tens of thousands for the sake of ethnic cleansing. It took the UN 30 years to respond, and then, even at that point, all they did was "make recommendations."

"Never again" quickly became "pretty please don't or we may get mildly irritated."


----------



## nightflameauto

bostjan said:


> Did we actually ever, though? I know we said we did, but did we actually care or did we only care about saying we cared?
> 
> Not even two decades after the Holocaust, Guatemala, two borders away from us, was mass murdering Mayans by the tens of thousands for the sake of ethnic cleansing. It took the UN 30 years to respond, and then, even at that point, all they did was "make recommendations."
> 
> "Never again" quickly became "pretty please don't or we may get mildly irritated."


It's a fair point. We do tend to turn a blind eye when things start going to shit in other countries unless said country has a handy resource we're dying to get our hands on. Er, I mean, strategically invest in cooperative extraction of said resources with the Right and Justified Moral Upstanding Citizens Being Attacked.

Who we'll turn into tomorrow's scandalous dictators. But I'm sure that's an accident. We're not smart enough to do that shit on purpose.


----------



## Drew

Flappydoodle said:


> Roubles are pretty much recovered to pre-war levels.


Give it a few days/weeks to shake out - it's still off a bit more than 10%, but a lot of the recent surge happened when Putin announced he would require purchasers of Russian oil to pay for it with rubles beginning 4/1, which ultimately he blinked on. It's still probably more likely than not to happen, but the sticking point was Russia wanted rubles to be purchased at their official FX rate, not the much lower market spot rate, and a compromise on the latter is my guess where this will shake out.

This matters, because the point of this was to force the west to buy rubles to prop up the currency, and a lot of the run-up after the 24th was based on the expectations that the West WOULD start purchasing rubles from Russia, supporting their currency. That's very much in flux now, and the US is hitting back by severely restricting the ability of Russia to pay US-domiciled Russian bondholders in dollars through the US banking infrastructure, forcing them to get creative with their FX reserves that support their currency, and increasing the likelihood of a Russian sovereign default.

EDIT - also, a 10% move in a currency in a month is still a pretty huge move - that's about how much the dollar fell from Trump's election to the 2018 lows, over a year and a half, on concerns the Trump administration might try to intentionally weaken the dollar to make US exports more competitive overseas. 10% since February only seems small when you consider it was down closer to 47% at the low.


----------



## Adieu

Flappydoodle said:


> Sadly, sanctions seem to be blunted, right?
> 
> Roubles are pretty much recovered to pre-war levels.
> 
> Some companies pulled out, or suspended but have the possibility of return. I haven’t read much impact of this beyond not having McDonald’s.
> 
> Germany and others still resisting energy sanctions. Guess they’ve reached their maximum tolerance. I’d have hoped the civilian executions and rapes might have forced further sanctions, but it seems not.
> 
> Is there any real impact on the ground in Russia now? I know interest rates went up. Anything else?



They're NOT.

The RUR to USD rate is fake, you can't buy dollars with it. Like, LITERALLY. It's the central bank rate but they won't sell you dollars.

Actual dollars are sold for 200-and-change RUR


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> They're NOT.
> 
> The RUR to USD rate is fake, you can't buy dollars with it. Like, LITERALLY. It's the central bank rate but they won't sell you dollars.
> 
> Actual dollars are sold for 200-and-change RUR


Putin basically flipped the chart upside down smirked. I wouldn't invest in the ruble right now, even for half a penny. There's a chance this tactic of pinning the value and winking to investors might work out, but I'd say that it's not much better than an ice cube's chance. Like anything else, the market depends on what people believe it will do; I'm pretty sure virtually everyone sees through the tactic, but sometimes weird bullshit ploys end up working out.


----------



## AMOS

Has anyone considered Russia is trying to incite NATO into attacking? it could be they already have a counter attack plan ready to go along with China, Belarus, N. Korea and Iran.


----------



## bostjan

AMOS said:


> Has anyone considered Russia is trying to incite NATO into attacking? it could be they already have a counter attack plan ready to go along with China, Belarus, N. Korea and Iran.


Possible. I'd ask what they could possibly have to gain in the end, but, ultimately, it seems like their battle strategy came from a bad teen fiction writer. Just imagine a poorly written story where a bunch of evil dictators are sitting around a table with blacklights in a smoky room. 

Putin: "First, vwee invade. Ze people vweell greet us whis open arms as liberators against Nazi oppression."
Kim: "Yeah yeah, heh heh, and then you should like shoot a missile into the ocean and stuff... heh heh, missiles are cool!"
Ayatollah: "Shut up beavis!"
Putin: "No, maybe is good idea, or maybe just threaten to shoot missile if zhey sanction us."
Kadyrov: "Can we have a genocide?"
Putin: "No, vwee cannot. How people would react the zhis?"
Xi: "Meh, as long as you genocide a group no one knows too much about, I think no one will blink."
Kadyrov: (Exhales smoke) "Whoah, what if we say that the genocide isn't real, man, like, because, you know, how can anybody even tell what even is real, you know?"
Lushenko: "Is good idea. Maybe also vwee steal some Ukrainian air conditioners."
Putin: "Hmm, ze vwest is not going to like very much invasion to steal air conditioners."
Kadyrov: "But what if we tell them, like, the invasion isn't real, man. Because, like... Umm, you know, like, what even is real?"
Kim: "Heh heh. This sucks. You guys are bungholes. I'm going home."
Putin: "Hmm, good idea, Beavis. Zhen vwee go home! Maybe vwee also mail stolen air conditioners!"
Lukashenko: "Aww, I really wanted new air conditioner."


----------



## Drew

AMOS said:


> Has anyone considered Russia is trying to incite NATO into attacking? it could be they already have a counter attack plan ready to go along with China, Belarus, N. Korea and Iran.


VERY early on, when the initial reports of the war were surprisingly bad, I did get a little paranoid that since it was so hard to believe the Russian campaign could be going _this_ badly, that maybe their objective was something other than a military victory. 

Today, it's not impossible, but I'm far less inclined to believe this. It's gone on too long, they've done probably-irreparable damage to their military's reputation, they've lost thousands of troops by even conservative estimates and, what, eight or nine generals, plus any number of tanks and at least one warship. We're hit the point along Occam's Razor where the simplest explanation is just that they fucked up. 

Beyond that, I'm not sure who would back them. 

China - sympathetic, but trying to walk a fine line of at least having plausible deniability to any claims that they're not neutral here. And while Russia mostly wants to tip over the US-centric western order, China wants to merely replace the US at the top of the heap. War with all of NATO would not advance their interests.
Belarus - too small for anyone to give a shit about. 
North Korea - too geoggraphically removed, moving ground troops would involve crossing China and Kazakhstan and then part of Russia to reach Ukraine, so a land war is out of the question. Their nuclear capabilities are untested, and even if they've sorted out delivery (unproven) and have a working warhead design (also unclear), their contributions to a nuclear war would pale compared to what Russia can do acting alone. It's hard to see what North Korea could bring to the table to offer Russia aside from common cause. 
Iran - more plausible as the last few months have probably bolstered the relationship between Tehran and Moscow. It would be easier for Iran to move troops into Ukraine as well, though they'd still be on the wrong side of the country to strike back against a NATO assault. Nuclear options here have similar issues as North Korea, as it's unclear if they have an operational warhead and delivery system. 

And, while I kinda glossed over it here... it doesn't make sense for Russia to solicit allies to aid in a nuclear strike on Ukraine, as it's too close to Russia itself. Building an alliance for a nuclear assault is basically going straight to global nuclear halocost, and Putin's crazy, but I have a hard time believing he's that crazy. And, honestly, I'm not sure how much use having two nuclear allies where it's unclear if nuclear missiles they file will even reach their targets, and detonate when they do, really is to Russia. 

If they wanted to play that game, an increasingly authoritarian India might be their best bet... but again, I can't see Modi going there.


----------



## AMOS

Drew said:


> VERY early on, when the initial reports of the war were surprisingly bad, I did get a little paranoid that since it was so hard to believe the Russian campaign could be going _this_ badly, that maybe their objective was something other than a military victory.
> 
> Today, it's not impossible, but I'm far less inclined to believe this. It's gone on too long, they've done probably-irreparable damage to their military's reputation, they've lost thousands of troops by even conservative estimates and, what, eight or nine generals, plus any number of tanks and at least one warship. We're hit the point along Occam's Razor where the simplest explanation is just that they fucked up.
> 
> Beyond that, I'm not sure who would back them.
> 
> 
> If they wanted to play that game, an increasingly authoritarian India might be their best bet... but again, I can't see Modi going there.


India are on pretty good terms with Russia, but not with China, And India regularly trains with the U.S. Military. China has sworn to protect Pakistan from India. It's a hell of a game they're all playing, we can only hope the war ends soon. Hopefully this Russian pullback to the south and east is a measure simply to occupy those areas and prevent Ukraine from taking them back.


----------



## oversteve

AMOS said:


> India are on pretty good terms with Russia, but not with China, And India regularly trains with the U.S. Military. China has sworn to protect Pakistan from India. It's a hell of a game they're all playing, we can only hope the war ends soon. Hopefully this Russian pullback to the south and east is a measure simply to occupy those areas and prevent Ukraine from taking them back.


Not exactly, they are trying to take the South-Eastern part like in their Novorosiya project to occupy a land route to Crimea and if possible other regions on the coast


----------



## AMOS

Patton was right.


----------



## Adieu

AMOS said:


> Has anyone considered Russia is trying to incite NATO into attacking? it could be they already have a counter attack plan ready to go along with China, Belarus, N. Korea and Iran.



China?

Lol.

China is watching and savouring his fall. They're sick and tired of the stuck-up asshole who doesn't know his place.

As to Iran, it is DELIGHTED because Putin doing the crazy is their golden ticket out of sanctions. They would never, ever participate.

Also...


----------



## AMOS

Adieu said:


> China?
> 
> Lol.
> 
> China is watching and savouring his fall. They're sick and tired of the stuck-up asshole who doesn't know his place.
> 
> As to Iran, it is DELIGHTED because Putin doing the crazy is their golden ticket out of sanctions. They would never, ever participate.
> 
> Also...


Russia and China have been in a Strategic Partnership for several years already, this seems to solidify where they stand, unless they're masking their true intentions from Russia








China calls Russia its chief 'strategic partner' despite war


China is calling Russia its “most important strategic partner" as Beijing continues to refuse to condemn the invasion of Ukraine despite growing pressure from the U.S. and EU to use its influence to urge Moscow to pull back




abcnews.go.com


----------



## Adieu

AMOS said:


> Russia and China have been in a Strategic Partnership for several years already, this seems to solidify where they stand, unless they're masking their true intentions from Russia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China calls Russia its chief 'strategic partner' despite war
> 
> 
> China is calling Russia its “most important strategic partner" as Beijing continues to refuse to condemn the invasion of Ukraine despite growing pressure from the U.S. and EU to use its influence to urge Moscow to pull back
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abcnews.go.com



Not in the least

They just know Putin sells them deeply discounted lumber and gas if they tickle his ego


----------



## BigViolin

China IMO is playing an economic long game. They will say whatever appeases whoever but as far as any real action in the short term, I doubt it. Why go to war when you can just slowly buy up what you want?


----------



## AMOS

BigViolin said:


> China IMO is playing an economic long game. They will say whatever appeases whoever but as far as any real action in the short term, I doubt it. Why go to war when you can just slowly buy up what you want?


That makes sense, but China hasn't been building all those man made islands because they enjoy the island life, they want air superiority in the South China Sea at a time of their choosing. it will help them control the shipping lanes and potentially control much of the worlds resources.


----------



## Flappydoodle

AMOS said:


> It's time for NATO and the rest of the world to enter Ukraine and force out the Russian military completely. We can't cower to every lunatic that threatens the use of nuclear weapons. Who's next North Korea? Putin obviously isn't playing with a full deck, and the UN Security Council doesn't have the courage to come to this conclusion. What Putin's troops are doing to civilians is what the SS did, it's what Stalin's NKVD did during the Great Purge. History is repeating itself, wake up world!


Are you volunteering to be part of that war? Because I’m definitely not. 

And yes, North Korea probably is next. They’ve been getting away with worse than Ukraine for decades. Mass starvations. Torture. Brainwashing. 

UNSC can’t come to any conclusion. Russia is a permanent member with veto power. 


nightflameauto said:


> It's tough to swallow that the west just shakes a finger and throws up sanctions while these atrocities continue to pile up. I get that the possibility of a nuclear strike is a terrible thing to consider, but I would think even with that threat looming, there should be a limit to how much death, rape, torture and destruction we should allow any asshole with a superweapon to do before we say, "No. That's enough."
> 
> Each day this continues is one more step further into, "We really don't give a fuck about anything anymore."


A lot more death, rate and torture until we’re willing to throw away all human progress with nuclear war. Brutal truth is that Ukraine just isn’t that important. It’s mostly symbolic that the EU/NATO is pushing back to support a democracy and to hurt a strategic rival/enemy. (And rightly so). The appetite for a massive war and potential annihilation in Europe is zero. We’ll just hand over Ukraine on a silver platter if need be. 

And globally, plenty of death, destruction and other bad stuff happens all the time. There are executions, kidnappings and torture across S America, Africa and the Middle East. Hell, China is actively trying to exterminate some demographics of their society in an actual genocide. Nobody wants war over it. 


Adieu said:


> They're NOT.
> 
> The RUR to USD rate is fake, you can't buy dollars with it. Like, LITERALLY. It's the central bank rate but they won't sell you dollars.
> 
> Actual dollars are sold for 200-and-change RUR


Gotcha. That makes sense, thank you. 


AMOS said:


> Has anyone considered Russia is trying to incite NATO into attacking? it could be they already have a counter attack plan ready to go along with China, Belarus, N. Korea and Iran.


Would be pointless. And NATO simply won’t get involved. We’ve made it abundantly clear. 


BigViolin said:


> China IMO is playing an economic long game. They will say whatever appeases whoever but as far as any real action in the short term, I doubt it. Why go to war when you can just slowly buy up what you want?


This is absolutely correct. China is clearly very uncomfortable with this war. They don’t want to get lumped with Russia, because sanctions would hurt them badly. Their trade with the West is much much larger than trade with Russia. And the status quo benefits China every day. Their economy grows. Trade links grow. Their military grows. Power over their own population grows. Their global influence grows. Why would they want to change things with a war?


----------



## Xaios

Drew said:


> North Korea - too geoggraphically removed, moving ground troops would involve crossing China and Kazakhstan and then part of Russia to reach Ukraine


_Technically_, North Korea and Russia share a small land border. It's across the Tumen river, southwest of Vladivostok. There's even a rail bridge across it, which means that getting troops from NK into Russia wouldn't require any extra infrastructure, and you can then drive straight north out of the Primorye region, then head west along the southern parts of the Far East and Siberia. Looks like there's basically road all the way.

It would still be hilariously dumb for them to even try and it's nowhere near being the fastest route, but they could technically bypass China and Kazakhstan altogether if they wanted to.


----------



## Adieu

Xaios said:


> _Technically_, North Korea and Russia share a small land border. It's across the Tumen river, southwest of Vladivostok. There's even a rail bridge across it, which means that getting troops from NK into Russia wouldn't require any extra infrastructure, and you can then drive straight north out of the Primorye region, then head west along the southern parts of the Far East and Siberia. Looks like there's basically road all the way.
> 
> It would still be hilariously dumb for them to even try and it's nowhere near being the fastest route, but they could technically bypass China and Kazakhstan altogether if they wanted to.



Pretty sure you can't move NK troops across Russia by rail. It takes over a week.

They'll desert.


----------



## Adieu

And it's just getting nastier.... Belarus started shooting at people who sabotage the railway system (to disrupt Russian military deliveries and deployments)


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> Pretty sure you can't move NK troops across Russia by rail. It takes over a week.
> 
> They'll desert.


"Dear Putin, here are 10 000 350 North Korean troops. Please feed them as soon as they arrive, because they have not had anything but dirt to eat for a few weeks. Your best bud, Kim."

It looks like Russia might run out of friends if they keep this up. And, knowing what little I know about Putin's personal philosophy, I don't think he cares. The problem for him, though, might be that, before the "special military operation," people were generally afraid of Russia's military power, but now, the Russian army is just looking poorly trained and even more poorly equipped.


----------



## Adieu

Btw, the shooting saboteurs might not seem too surprising to Americans, but oddly enough, opening fire to injure/kill is a HUGE DEAL in states with a mostly-Soviet legal system. Belarus/Russia/etc cops aren't trained to shoot lightly unless actively shot at, and when they do, shit's REALLY hitting the fan.


----------



## Drew

AMOS said:


> That makes sense, but China hasn't been building all those man made islands because they enjoy the island life, they want air superiority in the South China Sea at a time of their choosing. it will help them control the shipping lanes and potentially control much of the worlds resources.


Yeah, again, China doesn't want to disrupt the world order, they just want to supplant the US at its top. For the time being that requires them to walk a very fine line, not abandoning Russia but also paying just enough support to the US and UN not to create enemies there either. 

Also, not for nothing, based on what state-affiliated agencies were saying from within China about how there was no chance Putin would actually invade in the immediate runup to war, Putin plainly never told Russia's "most important strategic partner" that they DID intend to invade, which Xi can't exactly have been thrilled about.


----------



## AMOS

Drew said:


> Yeah, again, China doesn't want to disrupt the world order, they just want to supplant the US at its top. For the time being that requires them to walk a very fine line, not abandoning Russia but also paying just enough support to the US and UN not to create enemies there either.
> 
> Also, not for nothing, based on what state-affiliated agencies were saying from within China about how there was no chance Putin would actually invade in the immediate runup to war, Putin plainly never told Russia's "most important strategic partner" that they DID intend to invade, which Xi can't exactly have been thrilled about.


I thought Putin did notify China, Xi asked him to wait until after the Olympics


----------



## Drew

AMOS said:


> I thought Putin did notify China, Xi asked him to wait until after the Olympics


There's some intelligence disagreement over this in the US, to be fair, but pretty much every state-affiliated spokesperson in China was publicly saying war was impossible before the invasion. A decent synopsis: 









Ukraine: Did China Have a Clue? • Stimson Center


A careful examination of the events suggests that China was, in fact, played.




www.stimson.org





If this was a ruse, it was one that involved a whole lot of people in China having to publicly apologize for being wrong, which is... not a very common occurance in communist China. There's plenty of subsequent evidence that they were pretty uncomfortable with what Russia had done, notably their calls for de-escalation and their abstaining rather than voting against the UN security council motion against Russia after the invasion, which is a very different stance than their pre-olympic joint statement of mutual support to carve up spheres of influence in their backyards. 

Yes, there's room for interpretation... but to me, it looks a lot like when China signed that joint statement with Russia, Xi didn't _really_ believe that Putin was going to launch a wide-scale assault on Ukraine.


----------



## bostjan

Zelenskyy is arguing that, if the UN is unable to take any action against Russia due to Russia's permanent membership on the UN Security Council with veto power, then the UN should dissolve itself. It wouldn't be unprecedented, as I'm sure most you you know that the UN was formed after the League of Nations failed to prevent WWII.

In fact, the final speech given at the League of Nations:



Robert Cecil said:


> Let us boldly state that aggression wherever it occurs and however it may be defended, is an international crime, that it is the duty of every peace-loving state to resent it and employ whatever force is necessary to crush it, that the machinery of the Charter, no less than the machinery of the Covenant, is sufficient for this purpose if properly used, and that every well-disposed citizen of every state should be ready to undergo any sacrifice in order to maintain peace ... I venture to impress upon my hearers that the great work of peace is resting not only on the narrow interests of our own nations, but even more on those great principles of right and wrong which nations, like individuals, depend.
> 
> The League is dead. Long live the United Nations.


is almost uncannily applicable to this situation.


----------



## AMOS

Russia has a big war machine, it's going to take a long time to expend what they have, so it's going to take a while for the sanctions to affect their war machine. Being they're committing war crimes they should be barred from having veto power.


----------



## ToolmasterOfBrainerd

You all are prolific! It took a month and a half, but I finally caught up to the front of this thread. I think I started around page 15. Lots of interesting information here.

Whew.

There hasn't been a post from @BMFan30 in awhile... you okay?


----------



## pondman

Putin was incensed Russian troops weren't welcomed with flowers In Ukraine, says oligarch


He went "insane," said Mikhail Khodorkovsky, one-time CEO of Russian oil giant Yukos.




www.aol.co.uk


----------



## Flappydoodle

AMOS said:


> Being they're committing war crimes they should be barred from having veto power.



And who, exactly, is going to bar them?


----------



## AMOS

Flappydoodle said:


> And who, exactly, is going to bar them?


The UN can put it to a vote, there has to be a limit to what members can get away with before they're removed


----------



## Shoeless_jose

AMOS said:


> The UN can put it to a vote, there has to be a limit to what members can get away with before they're removed



I think the point is. That in the UN any motion can be vetoed by Russia so literally would have to form new body without them essentially.


----------



## tedtan

Given they’re involved in the war in Ukraine courtesy of Putin’s aggression, exclude Russia from voting and vetoing the vote of others.

If they don’t have the balls to change the rules to fit the situation, dissolve the UN and found a similar body without Russia (or China, North Korea, Iran, Syria, and other bad actors) having more than a token presence.


----------



## AMOS

Dineley said:


> I think the point is. That in the UN any motion can be vetoed by Russia so literally would have to form new body without them essentially.


I know what the point is, it's dumb! So a permanent member can nuke anyone they want then veto any UN resolutions against them. it's not just dumb, it's very dumb. The UN needs to grow a pair.


----------



## bostjan

tedtan said:


> Given they’re involved in the war in Ukraine courtesy of Putin’s aggression, exclude Russia from voting and vetoing the vote of others.
> 
> If they don’t have the balls to change the rules to fit the situation, dissolve the UN and found a similar body without Russia (or China, North Korea, Iran, Syria, and other bad actors) having more than a token presence.


I think it's clear that's where we are at. There is literally no procedure for outlining how to remove a permanent member from the security council anywhere in the UN's constitution, nor anywhere in their bylaws for that matter, so, in order to remove Russia, the UN would have to pass an amendment outlining the procedure for how to remove Russia, without Russia vetoing it. Maybe that's worth a try, but I think it'd be stupid to expect Russia to decide to sit on their veto for that one.

I think that, for 25-ish years, we just got too relaxed. When Putin annexed Crimea, the West was like "Oh no! You can't do that!" and Russia said , so the West was like "fine, here are some sanctions!". Then, this year, Russia outright invades Ukraine and threatens Kiev, commits war crimes, etc., and the West is like "Oh no! You can't do that!" ...

And even if the UN dissolves over this, which, I think at this point, totally depends on what happens next, but either way, what comes of it? We make a "United Planetary Earth Nations" or UPEN, without the "bad guy" nations, so it's basically NATO+, and then that organization votes that Russia is bad and wrong and then pats itself on the back? Then, a few decades from now, UPEN has allowed new Iran and new Cuba and new Russia to join, and we do it all over again?

And what's the alternative? Have NATO start flying over Ukraine to stop Russia? Maybe Russia backs down, or maybe, instead of backing down, they start counter-attacking NATO, the war heats up faster than a Kielbasa in the microwave and the next thing you know somebody's submarine is launching nukes. Then, a month later the survivors are pelting each other with stones over bottles of water on the surface while, deep underground, in a bunker somewhere, Putin is eating caviar with a silver spoon, satisfied that he "showed the world who was boss."

Or, alternatively, citing Russia's unbridled aggression and NATO's inaction, someone like Elon Musk decides to start developing the world's first private nuclear arsenal. Once the world's governments find out, Musk already has an H bomb and the capability to launch it via SpaceX. Out of fear of WW3 starting in all of the confusion, no one acts quickly and other corporations take advantage and start developing their own stockpiles, and, a couple months later, the western world is all slaves owned by nuclear-capable companies dead set on conquering the planet or destroying it.

Or, maybe while no one is paying attention to the poorer nations, someone somewhere will sneeze covid on a cat that has FIP, then the sick cat will get in a fight with a rapid badger that later attacks a swan that has bird flu, which then lands in some lonely bath-salt-addicted farmer's land, and, the next thing you know, we have the real life version of 28 days later, and due to all of the mess of misinformation from the war and the last pandemic, coupled with all of the fucked politics everywhere, no one takes the reports seriously until it's too late.

I hate to sound like a broken record, but, not matter how emotional we get over this stuff, the options for international response to Russia are complicated and the stakes are high. Maybe we are left with two options, and both are equally as bad as the do-nothing outcome.


----------



## Adieu

Flappydoodle said:


> And who, exactly, is going to bar them?



Lawyers

They were never "there" to begin with.

USSR was.

But USSR =/= RSFSR (now called Rossiya, often mistranslated as "Russia")

Ukraine was NOT legally subordinate or lower status to RSFSR within the USSR, they were constitutionally equal "republics" (sort of like American States)

Ukraine could be given the seat.... so, technically, could Latvia Estonia Lithuania or Belarus or any of the ex-Soviet 'stans, although with their significantly smaller populations that might be seen as making it a bit too ridiculous.

However, even putting them on rotation by population or something... could easily give Ukraine the next 10-13 years of the seat after Rossiya held it for 31.


----------



## tedtan

bostjan said:


> I think it's clear that's where we are at. There is literally no procedure for outlining how to remove a permanent member from the security council anywhere in the UN's constitution, nor anywhere in their bylaws for that matter, so, in order to remove Russia, the UN would have to pass an amendment outlining the procedure for how to remove Russia, without Russia vetoing it. Maybe that's worth a try, but I think it'd be stupid to expect Russia to decide to sit on their veto for that one.
> 
> I think that, for 25-ish years, we just got too relaxed. When Putin annexed Crimea, the West was like "Oh no! You can't do that!" and Russia said , so the West was like "fine, here are some sanctions!". Then, this year, Russia outright invades Ukraine and threatens Kiev, commits war crimes, etc., and the West is like "Oh no! You can't do that!" ...
> 
> And even if the UN dissolves over this, which, I think at this point, totally depends on what happens next, but either way, what comes of it? We make a "United Planetary Earth Nations" or UPEN, without the "bad guy" nations, so it's basically NATO+, and then that organization votes that Russia is bad and wrong and then pats itself on the back? Then, a few decades from now, UPEN has allowed new Iran and new Cuba and new Russia to join, and we do it all over again?


If there is no mechanism present in the UN’s constitution and/or bylaws to prevent a bad actor from vetoing votes involving its own bad actions, that is a serious oversight by the framers of the UN constitution and bylaws. Or, perhaps, the US wanted to be able to act unilaterally so allowed others permanent members veto power so it could have veto power, which would be extremely short sighted - the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend today, let alone tomorrow.





bostjan said:


> And even if the UN dissolves over this, which, I think at this point, totally depends on what happens next, but either way, what comes of it? We make a "United Planetary Earth Nations" or UPEN, without the "bad guy" nations, so it's basically NATO+, and then that organization votes that Russia is bad and wrong and then pats itself on the back? Then, a few decades from now, UPEN has allowed new Iran and new Cuba and new Russia to join, and we do it all over again?
> 
> And what's the alternative? Have NATO start flying over Ukraine to stop Russia? Maybe Russia backs down, or maybe, instead of backing down, they start counter-attacking NATO, the war heats up faster than a Kielbasa in the microwave and the next thing you know somebody's submarine is launching nukes. Then, a month later the survivors are pelting each other with stones over bottles of water on the surface while, deep underground, in a bunker somewhere, Putin is eating caviar with a silver spoon, satisfied that he "showed the world who was boss."
> 
> Or, alternatively, citing Russia's unbridled aggression and NATO's inaction, someone like Elon Musk decides to start developing the world's first private nuclear arsenal. Once the world's governments find out, Musk already has an H bomb and the capability to launch it via SpaceX. Out of fear of WW3 starting in all of the confusion, no one acts quickly and other corporations take advantage and start developing their own stockpiles, and, a couple months later, the western world is all slaves owned by nuclear-capable companies dead set on conquering the planet or destroying it.
> 
> Or, maybe while no one is paying attention to the poorer nations, someone somewhere will sneeze covid on a cat that has FIP, then the sick cat will get in a fight with a rapid badger that later attacks a swan that has bird flu, which then lands in some lonely bath-salt-addicted farmer's land, and, the next thing you know, we have the real life version of 28 days later, and due to all of the mess of misinformation from the war and the last pandemic, coupled with all of the fucked politics everywhere, no one takes the reports seriously until it's too late.
> 
> I hate to sound like a broken record, but, not matter how emotional we get over this stuff, the options for international response to Russia are complicated and the stakes are high. Maybe we are left with two options, and both are equally as bad as the do-nothing outcome.


Those are the worst case options, which indeed are pretty bad.

But a body such as the UN, and its members, should only adhere to the “no regime change” to the extent that the regime in question is a good actor. In the case of a bad actor, regime change can be accomplished with smaller scale actions by the intelligence and special forces communities without large scale war. And while it won’t guarantee that nuclear weapons are not used, it greatly reduces the chance that they will be used.

Also, while people can argue that not going after regime change helps secure regime in other countries, that is not necessarily the case. That’s akin to arguing that a criminal won’t commit a crime against another criminal because of some criminal code. We know this isn’t true because it happens every day - a criminal is a criminal because they don’t obey the laws. And just as a criminal is a criminal, a bad actor is a bad actor.

So no, this isn’t a perfect solution, but it beats large scale war and it also beats doing nothing beyond shaking our heads, wringing our hands and clucking our tongues like a little old lady.


----------



## bostjan

tedtan said:


> If there is no mechanism present in the UN’s constitution and/or bylaws to prevent a bad actor from vetoing votes involving its own bad actions, that is a serious oversight by the framers of the UN constitution and bylaws. Or, perhaps, the US wanted to be able to act unilaterally so allowed others permanent members veto power so it could have veto power, which would be extremely short sighted - the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend today, let alone tomorrow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those are the worst case options, which indeed are pretty bad.
> 
> But a body such as the UN, and its members, should only adhere to the “no regime change” to the extent that the regime in question is a good actor. In the case of a bad actor, regime change can be accomplished with smaller scale actions by the intelligence and special forces communities without large scale war. And while it won’t guarantee that nuclear weapons are not used, it greatly reduces the chance that they will be used.
> 
> Also, while people can argue that not going after regime change helps secure regime in other countries, that is not necessarily the case. That’s akin to arguing that a criminal won’t commit a crime against another criminal because of some criminal code. We know this isn’t true because it happens every day - a criminal is a criminal because they don’t obey the laws. And just as a criminal is a criminal, a bad actor is a bad actor.
> 
> So no, this isn’t a perfect solution, but it beats large scale war and it also beats doing nothing beyond shaking our heads, wringing our hands and clucking our tongues like a little old lady.


We've known that the UN was impotent since days one.

But here's the thing - it has to be. Hear me out: if you made the UN have the power to lord over the decisions of other nations, even when it comes only to disputes between members, it acts as a meta-government that subverts the powers of the governments of the member nations. Those same governments have to vote to ratify membership in such an organization. So, when you boil it down, the governments of nations have to fork over their power to the organization in order for the organization to exist. And that's why it failed as the League of Nations. The USA and other powerful nations didn't want a bunch of French people dictating what they could and could not do. So only a handful of countries joined and stayed. Then, when the Nazis started taking over Europe, the concessions that the LoN made in order to attract nations into joining made it completely powerless to do anything to stop the war and it was steamrollered. After WWII, the UN was formed really only because there was pervasive fear motivating nations to give up a little of their own power in order to obtain securities. However, the USSR and the USA wouldn't join unless they had the power to tell the UN to F off no matter how many votes it had to do something either of them didn't like. Therefore the Cold War, proxy wars, and now the War in Ukraine, sorry "Special Military Fuck Putin." 

The point that Zelenskyy made that Ukraine has just as much right to that permanent membership and veto power is logically strong, but practically useless. Ukraine gave up their nukes because the USA and USSR promised to protect them from foreign invasions. Well, Russia invaded and the USA decided that economic sanctions qualify as holding up their end of the "protection." If this sort of thing had happened between businesses, you'd call it a protection racket. But these aren't businesses, these are two of the world's superpowers.

I think that it had been proposed before, but I cannot remember the details, that there will continue to be wars between nations until there is some sort of big nasty war that nearly destroys the planet, and then there will be some sort of international organization tasked with the sole purpose of preventing wars, and only then will it be given enough power to prevent war. But, even then, if the two nations with the most military power decide to go to war, what's the organization going to do to prevent it? Go to war with both of those countries? And if so, then with what army?

Human life on the planet follows the ideal gas law. The population expands to fit the food supply. If our food supply is tied to energy, and energy is tied to oil, and oil is a finite resource that will run out some day, we will inevitably end up back in a state of war for resources as people begin to starve as oil runs out. Unless we figure something else out, which looks possible, but maybe not likely. Once the human population settles back down to something sustainable post-bubble, maybe societies will be better prepared to live in peace, but I'm not so sure. Human history was chocked full of murders and wars for millennia. We think we have grown and developed past it, but our society is highly dependent upon technology and out technology is highly dependent upon unsustainable resources.

Why bother thinking about all of this? Because some day this conflict will end, but I think the bigger picture is that conflicts like these are going to be very likely to continue. And there's nothing we can do to stop them from happening. Maybe it's okay to say "I don't know" instead of trying to have the answer to everything.


----------



## Drew

AMOS said:


> I know what the point is, it's dumb! So a permanent member can nuke anyone they want then veto any UN resolutions against them. it's not just dumb, it's very dumb. The UN needs to grow a pair.


So, waaaaaaaay back at the start of the war, I alluded to how Ukraine was laying the groundwork to do just that. 

Technically speaking, Russia doesn't have a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. The five countries that do are the US, the UK, China, France, and the USSR. China's seat originally belonged to The Republic of China, which after they lost the civil war forming the People's Republic of China, fled to Taiwan. PRC was formally recognized as the surviving state and heir to the ROC seat on the security council via a vote in 1971, but while Russia has in practice been recognized as the surviving state and heir to the Soviet Union's seat, it was never actually put to a vote by the UN in the General Assembly, so this is a matter of convention, not law. 

So, Ukraine, in response to the Russian invasion, requested a copy of the General Assembly Resolution naming the Russian Federation the legal successor stake to the USSR. 

Worth noting is that the process of giving the ROC seat to the PRC actually started with a resolution passed in _1961_, and the US managed to slow-roll the handing over of Taiwan's seat to Communist China for a full ten years even with broad support from the rest of the UN. With significantly more opposition to Russia than PRC was experiencing in the 60s, even if they ultimately kept the UN Security Council seat, expecting the process to drag on for more than ten years where they weren't entitled to a vote is not exactly unreasonable. 

So far this hasn't gone anywhere, but there's no reason it couldn't.


----------



## tedtan

bostjan said:


> We've known that the UN was impotent since days one.
> 
> But here's the thing - it has to be. Hear me out: if you made the UN have the power to lord over the decisions of other nations, even when it comes only to disputes between members, it acts as a meta-government that subverts the powers of the governments of the member nations. Those same governments have to vote to ratify membership in such an organization. So, when you boil it down, the governments of nations have to fork over their power to the organization in order for the organization to exist. And that's why it failed as the League of Nations. The USA and other powerful nations didn't want a bunch of French people dictating what they could and could not do. So only a handful of countries joined and stayed. Then, when the Nazis started taking over Europe, the concessions that the LoN made in order to attract nations into joining made it completely powerless to do anything to stop the war and it was steamrollered. After WWII, the UN was formed really only because there was pervasive fear motivating nations to give up a little of their own power in order to obtain securities. However, the USSR and the USA wouldn't join unless they had the power to tell the UN to F off no matter how many votes it had to do something either of them didn't like. Therefore the Cold War, proxy wars, and now the War in Ukraine, sorry "Special Military Fuck Putin."
> 
> The point that Zelenskyy made that Ukraine has just as much right to that permanent membership and veto power is logically strong, but practically useless. Ukraine gave up their nukes because the USA and USSR promised to protect them from foreign invasions. Well, Russia invaded and the USA decided that economic sanctions qualify as holding up their end of the "protection." If this sort of thing had happened between businesses, you'd call it a protection racket. But these aren't businesses, these are two of the world's superpowers.
> 
> I think that it had been proposed before, but I cannot remember the details, that there will continue to be wars between nations until there is some sort of big nasty war that nearly destroys the planet, and then there will be some sort of international organization tasked with the sole purpose of preventing wars, and only then will it be given enough power to prevent war. But, even then, if the two nations with the most military power decide to go to war, what's the organization going to do to prevent it? Go to war with both of those countries? And if so, then with what army?
> 
> Human life on the planet follows the ideal gas law. The population expands to fit the food supply. If our food supply is tied to energy, and energy is tied to oil, and oil is a finite resource that will run out some day, we will inevitably end up back in a state of war for resources as people begin to starve as oil runs out. Unless we figure something else out, which looks possible, but maybe not likely. Once the human population settles back down to something sustainable post-bubble, maybe societies will be better prepared to live in peace, but I'm not so sure. Human history was chocked full of murders and wars for millennia. We think we have grown and developed past it, but our society is highly dependent upon technology and out technology is highly dependent upon unsustainable resources.
> 
> Why bother thinking about all of this? Because some day this conflict will end, but I think the bigger picture is that conflicts like these are going to be very likely to continue. And there's nothing we can do to stop them from happening. Maybe it's okay to say "I don't know" instead of trying to have the answer to everything.


The ideal utilization of the UN would be to address issues diplomatically in order to stop wars and, if diplomacy fails, then the UN should step in to prevent, or at least minimize, war and the damage that results therefrom.

But even if that is not possible, the UN still has value as a diplomatic and educational institution. But:

1) The UN’s budget should be reduced to reflect its actual value; and

2) The individual members should still effect regime change as needed to prevent, or at least minimize, war and the damage that results therefrom. And in Putin’s case, we’ve known that he is a problem for decades, so he should have been removed back at the time of the 2nd Chechen war/the Georgian war 15+ years ago.

But I’m speaking in terms of what should be, not of what is.


----------



## Flappydoodle

AMOS said:


> The UN can put it to a vote, there has to be a limit to what members can get away with before they're removed


Who would set those limits?

And how would it be enforced?

What would removing Russia accomplish?


tedtan said:


> Given they’re involved in the war in Ukraine courtesy of Putin’s aggression, exclude Russia from voting and vetoing the vote of others.
> 
> If they don’t have the balls to change the rules to fit the situation, dissolve the UN and found a similar body without Russia (or China, North Korea, Iran, Syria, and other bad actors) having more than a token presence.


Well, by that definition, the US should have been excluded for many wars and invasions in the last 60 years. 

And forming a UN for ‘good guys’ only - isn’t that basically just NATO, or a slight variation thereof? And the bad guys would presumably form their own forum and it would be even less productive than the status quo. Good guy UN voted X on Taiwan and bad guy UN voted Y. Useless. 

The whole point is/was to get all countries to engage on issues. So that means Eritrea on human rights and everything else that seems stupid at face value.


AMOS said:


> I know what the point is, it's dumb! So a permanent member can nuke anyone they want then veto any UN resolutions against them. it's not just dumb, it's very dumb. The UN needs to grow a pair.


Who precisely needs to grow a pair? There is no ‘the UN’. It’s made up of members. 

I’m seeing so much misunderstanding of what the UN is and does. It isn’t a government. It doesn’t have any authority to overthrow leaders, go to war or arrest people. 

And frankly yes, nuclear power gives you carte blanche to do whatever the fuck you want. Might makes right. Always has and probably always will. Putin, US etc don’t give a fuck about UN votes, because they can always veto. 

Even nuclear-armed countries without veto power like Israel, Pakistan or India give no fucks because who is going to enforce anything in reality? Give that land back! Or what? Err…




Adieu said:


> Lawyers
> 
> They were never "there" to begin with.
> 
> USSR was.
> 
> But USSR =/= RSFSR (now called Rossiya, often mistranslated as "Russia")
> 
> Ukraine was NOT legally subordinate or lower status to RSFSR within the USSR, they were constitutionally equal "republics" (sort of like American States)
> 
> Ukraine could be given the seat.... so, technically, could Latvia Estonia Lithuania or Belarus or any of the ex-Soviet 'stans, although with their significantly smaller populations that might be seen as making it a bit too ridiculous.
> 
> However, even putting them on rotation by population or something... could easily give Ukraine the next 10-13 years of the seat after Rossiya held it for 31.


Let’s even say we can do that. It’s a nice moral victory to expel the bad guys. What does it accomplish? Now Ukraine can veto stuff. They can help pass resolutions condemning non-member Russia as a naughty boy. Who will enforce anything against them and their 4,000 nuclear weapons? 


tedtan said:


> If there is no mechanism present in the UN’s constitution and/or bylaws to prevent a bad actor from vetoing votes involving its own bad actions, that is a serious oversight by the framers of the UN constitution and bylaws. Or, perhaps, the US wanted to be able to act unilaterally so allowed others permanent members veto power so it could have veto power, which would be extremely short sighted - the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend today, let alone tomorrow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those are the worst case options, which indeed are pretty bad.
> 
> But a body such as the UN, and its members, should only adhere to the “no regime change” to the extent that the regime in question is a good actor. In the case of a bad actor, regime change can be accomplished with smaller scale actions by the intelligence and special forces communities without large scale war. And while it won’t guarantee that nuclear weapons are not used, it greatly reduces the chance that they will be used.
> 
> Also, while people can argue that not going after regime change helps secure regime in other countries, that is not necessarily the case. That’s akin to arguing that a criminal won’t commit a crime against another criminal because of some criminal code. We know this isn’t true because it happens every day - a criminal is a criminal because they don’t obey the laws. And just as a criminal is a criminal, a bad actor is a bad actor.
> 
> So no, this isn’t a perfect solution, but it beats large scale war and it also beats doing nothing beyond shaking our heads, wringing our hands and clucking our tongues like a little old lady.



Crimes have people to enforce. Police. Lawyers. Juries. Judges. 

Nuclear armed countries do not. It’s as simple as that. 

The whole point was to have a forum for diplomacy, no matter how different your opinions or how much of a dick the other guy is. If you just kick people out because they’re dicks, it makes the entire organisation even more worthless than it already is. The UN is only worth whatever the member countries think it’s worth. For developing countries it’s really important to achieve recognition and get help. For the 5 big guys, there is no actual consequence of anything but it’s a way to try and promote your worldview. 

And fwiw, any coordinated attempt to remove or replace a leader IS an act of war. Doesn’t matter whether it’s by intelligence agencies or bombs.


----------



## bostjan

Russia got booted from the UN Human Rights Commission. The votes they had counted on against their removal almost all ended up abstaining instead, which greatly upset Putin.


----------



## oversteve

There is news circulating in our media that russian representative spread notes with threats to the other countries' representives to make them vote against.

Meanwhile Russian troops shelled Kramatorsk railway station where civil evecaution took place and claimed they shelled UA troops there. There appears to be plenty of victims. And few moments later they publish the news it's UA troops shelling the railway station


----------



## tedtan

oversteve said:


> There is news circulating in our media that russian representative spread notes with threats to the other countries' representives to make them vote against.


I’ve heard that here in the US, too.


----------



## bostjan

oversteve said:


> There is news circulating in our media that russian representative spread notes with threats to the other countries' representives to make them vote against.
> 
> Meanwhile Russian troops shelled Kramatorsk railway station where civil evecaution took place and claimed they shelled UA troops there. There appears to be plenty of victims. And few moments later they publish the news it's UA troops shelling the railway station


In case there is anyone out there who still thinks that Russia might be telling the truth, try this thought experiment:

Say that you are the defence minister, and this report comes in that one of your country's missiles blew up a bunch of kids waiting for the train to take them away from the war your country initiated, and you actually don't believe the reports to be true, but this is moments after it happened. Which response is appropriate to give to the media:
A) "Those kids were Ukrainian militants and got what was coming to them!"
B) "No, those were Ukrainian militants who did this!"
C) "What?! This is the first I've heard of such a thing, let me look into it!"
or D) "Those people were Ukrainian militants and got what was coming to them! What's that? Oh, they were kids? Umm... well, oh yeah, it was Ukrainian militants who did this! Oh, what do you say, the missiles used were Russian military OTR-21, which Ukraine doesn't have? Well, I say, 'they cannot prove this.' Huh, they intercepted one of those missiles and can prove it was Russian military? They must have captured it and used it to blow up their own children just to cause us the inconvenience of having to explain this to you!"

If you answered D, congratulations, you are possibly the kind of person who would make a good Russian diplomat. For the rest of us, though, C is the only logical answer that doesn't make you look guilty right away.


----------



## oversteve

captured russian guy with nazi tattoo, anarchist tattoo and wearing an orthodox cross  idk what's in his head but itwilldo should be satisfied with that


----------



## ArtDecade

itwilldo choked on Putiin and hasn't been seen in weeks.


----------



## Steo

Russia throwing her Weight around with Finland it seems.








Finland Hit by Cyber Attack, Airspace Breach as NATO Bid Weighed







www.bloomberg.com


----------



## bostjan

oversteve said:


> captured russian guy with nazi tattoo, anarchist tattoo and wearing an orthodox cross  idk what's in his head but itwilldo should be satisfied with that
> 
> View attachment 106189


I'm sure there exists some nonzero number of nazis in any sufficiently large group of people.

I think the proof of Russian aggression is abundantly clear already. Conspiracy theories about false flags and so forth are not only very heavily stretching logic, but intelligence had already reported that this was exactly how Russia would respond to reports. Absent any evidence or any sound logical argument, I think anyone should be more apt to trust the simpler explanation of Russian aggression rather than some sort of secret double-cross where the West makes up a story about what Russia plans to do, including the way they tend to argue that they are not doing it, plant tons of Russian missiles and tanks in Ukraine, slaughter their own innocent people just for the photo ops, and then allow Russia to say exactly the thing that they said Russia would say so that they can say that they said that Russia would say it. Generally, if the sentence explaining the conspiracy theory in a nutshell is too ridiculous to follow along, it's probably too ridiculous to be real. But, hey, if @ItWillDo has proof of some sort that this is all fake, I'd love to see it.


----------



## AMOS

The conspiracy theorists that were sure I was going to eat some crow, suddenly became very silent on social networking sites. First it was okay to invade because Ukraine was corrupt, then it was secret bio weapons labs, now it's crickets. First thing I thought of was, who isn't corrupt as far as Govt's go? Isn't Russia at the top of the heap? If you have a successful campaign against Putin, that means you'll vanish and end up in prison.


----------



## oversteve

bostjan said:


> I'm sure there exists some nonzero number of nazis in any sufficiently large group of people.


I know there's plenty of them, I mean it's a mix of all these contradictory things in one guy's head that bothers me


----------



## wheresthefbomb

oversteve said:


> I know there's plenty of them, I mean it's a mix of all these contradictory things in one guy's head that bothers me



Some of those categories are explicitly mutually exclusive


----------



## Kaura

Steo said:


> Russia throwing her Weight around with Finland it seems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Finland Hit by Cyber Attack, Airspace Breach as NATO Bid Weighed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bloomberg.com



Got a bit worried yesterday because my bank had some problems with some people's accounts showing zero money or not showing up the account at all but mine was fine luckily.

Also, this meme.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

Wish Russia would engage at UN level like hell send in peacekeepers from countries that like aren't super adjacent to the conflict so it isn't just like dropping renamed NATO into Ukraine.

Either way this is just such a clusterfuck.


----------



## Flappydoodle

AMOS said:


> The conspiracy theorists that were sure I was going to eat some crow, suddenly became very silent on social networking sites. First it was okay to invade because Ukraine was corrupt, then it was secret bio weapons labs, now it's crickets. First thing I thought of was, who isn't corrupt as far as Govt's go? Isn't Russia at the top of the heap? If you have a successful campaign against Putin, that means you'll vanish and end up in prison.



The "funny" part being that Ukraine was not realistically going to be granted EU or NATO membership. As you say, too corrupt. So this whole invasion is pointless and has done nothing but galvanise the west, make Ukraine/Zelensky into heroes, and make us quickly move away from Russian energy. Oops.



Dineley said:


> Wish Russia would engage at UN level like hell send in peacekeepers from countries that like aren't super adjacent to the conflict so it isn't just like dropping renamed NATO into Ukraine.
> 
> Either way this is just such a clusterfuck.



What country is going to volunteer their troops for that operation?


----------



## Adieu

Dineley said:


> Wish Russia would engage at UN level like hell send in peacekeepers from countries that like aren't super adjacent to the conflict so it isn't just like dropping renamed NATO into Ukraine.
> 
> Either way this is just such a clusterfuck.



Have you been confused by Russian propaganda?

Any potential peacekeepers in Ukraine could be there solely for the purpose of killing Russian army. Because there ain't any other threat to peace there.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

Adieu said:


> Have you been confused by Russian propaganda?
> 
> Any potential peacekeepers in Ukraine could be there solely for the purpose of killing Russian army. Because there ain't any other threat to peace there.




I understand that completely just felt the chances of Russia just saying "sorry we were wrong" and leaving is slim to none. 

So some way they could semi save face and it's not just NATO coming in. I know it was a weird nonsense speck of an idea but in no way am I saying that Ukraine is causing aggression.


----------



## Adieu

Dineley said:


> I understand that completely just felt the chances of Russia just saying "sorry we were wrong" and leaving is slim to none.
> 
> So some way they could semi save face and it's not just NATO coming in. I know it was a weird nonsense speck of an idea but in no way am I saying that Ukraine is causing aggression.



Peace without the destruction of Russian military capabilities or a coup in Moscow is impossible

Putin's entire political system is built on the ideology of toxic masculinity and militant nationalism. He can't compromise, his own fans will eat him alive.

He needs to be CRUSHED for Ukraine to be safe.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

Adieu said:


> Peace without the destruction of Russian military capabilities or a coup in Moscow is impossible
> 
> Putin's entire political system is built on the ideology of toxic masculinity and militant nationalism. He can't compromise, his own fans will eat him alive.
> 
> He needs to be CRUSHED for Ukraine to be safe.




Yeah I understand what you are saying just what is ideal/necessary isn't always attainable. 

Whatever you can rig together to put an end to this without mass lives lost on either side is what is really ideal. In no way trying to say fault on equal sides but I'm sure families of conscripted soldiers who never see them again would not take solace in knowing that Russia's actions were wrong so their death is okay.

Again I fully agree with you what would happen as a perfect solution just in a world with perfect solutions this doesn't happen in the first place.

Anyways I'll shut up I know you have much closer ties to this conflict and I'd hate to say something dumb while essentially trying to agree with you


----------



## Randy

ArtDecade said:


> itwilldo choked on Putiin and hasn't been seen in weeks.


I'd say that's impossible but they claim you can drown in a teaspoon of water, so I guess it's plausible.


----------



## Adieu

Dineley said:


> Yeah I understand what you are saying just what is ideal/necessary isn't always attainable.
> 
> Whatever you can rig together to put an end to this without mass lives lost on either side is what is really ideal. In no way trying to say fault on equal sides but I'm sure families of conscripted soldiers who never see them again would not take solace in knowing that Russia's actions were wrong so their death is okay.
> 
> Again I fully agree with you what would happen as a perfect solution just in a world with perfect solutions this doesn't happen in the first place.
> 
> Anyways I'll shut up I know you have much closer ties to this conflict and I'd hate to say something dumb while essentially trying to agree with you



I have ties on both ends, moreso in Russia than Ukraine.

And I can assure you that any pause without destruction of Putin and his war machine will cause more misery later. Maybe even nuclear war.

This war isn't a misunderstanding or conflict of armies or interests. It's Putin's fucking crusade. And, sadly, he has a lot of true believers who cannot be talked down even if he wanted to.

Any concessions or partial victories will mean he comes back in autumn or next year.


----------



## Stuck_in_a_dream

Here's the frustrating part for me. I'm not a conspiracy theorist or care for two shits to debunk their claims, thing is, the decision makers in the west, supported by the best intelligence services on the planet, know what is going on, and the real Russian intentions. Yet, the response is not enough to stop this crime, and now as Russia prepares for a second act, not long after discoveries of atrocities & war crimes that have been committed during the 1st wave, what is the bottom line here? 

Seems to me that w/ a nuclear Russia, the message from the west is that they can only reside to sanctions unless it's a NATO country being invaded. So, are we in for a looooong conflict that can potentially spread to other (non-NATO) countries? There are already signs of economic recession looming, now w/ this crap, what are we in for? Are we witnessing a WWII re-run? I would like anyone who strongly objected to Biden's remarks that Putin should not stay in power to answer these questions.


----------



## Shoeless_jose

I think everyone pretty much agrees he shouldn't stay in power just removing him or attempting to could still backfire horribly.


----------



## Adieu

Stuck_in_a_dream said:


> Here's the frustrating part for me. I'm not a conspiracy theorist or care for two shits to debunk their claims, thing is, the decision makers in the west, supported by the best intelligence services on the planet, know what is going on, and the real Russian intentions. Yet, the response is not enough to stop this crime, and now as Russia prepares for a second act, not long after discoveries of atrocities & war crimes that have been committed during the 1st wave, what is the bottom line here?
> 
> Seems to me that w/ a nuclear Russia, the message from the west is that they can only reside to sanctions unless it's a NATO country being invaded. So, are we in for a looooong conflict that can potentially spread to other (non-NATO) countries? There are already signs of economic recession looming, now w/ this crap, what are we in for? Are we witnessing a WWII re-run? I would like anyone who strongly objected to Biden's remarks that Putin should not stay in power to answer these questions.



Depends.

Should Putin somehow manage to start succeeding, knowing what we know of him, he would press on towards Western Ukraine. At which point, IMHO, Poland almost surely and maybe the Baltics too will enter whether or not NATO approves.

Simply because the rhetoric in Moscow has been "we need to attack Poland too" and NATO hasn't been inspiring much confidence. They don't want a re-run in the suburbs of Warsaw.


----------



## bostjan

Stuck_in_a_dream said:


> Here's the frustrating part for me. I'm not a conspiracy theorist or care for two shits to debunk their claims, thing is, the decision makers in the west, supported by the best intelligence services on the planet, know what is going on, and the real Russian intentions. Yet, the response is not enough to stop this crime, and now as Russia prepares for a second act, not long after discoveries of atrocities & war crimes that have been committed during the 1st wave, what is the bottom line here?
> 
> Seems to me that w/ a nuclear Russia, the message from the west is that they can only reside to sanctions unless it's a NATO country being invaded. So, are we in for a looooong conflict that can potentially spread to other (non-NATO) countries? There are already signs of economic recession looming, now w/ this crap, what are we in for? Are we witnessing a WWII re-run? I would like anyone who strongly objected to Biden's remarks that Putin should not stay in power to answer these questions.


Good point.

However, devising a foreign policy tied solely to emotion is a horrible idea. Likewise, tying foreign policy solely to logic is generally not a great approach, either.

And don't get me wrong; Russia are 100% the bad guys in this story. Their premise is bad and they are following a bad path from that premise to no-one-knows-where.

But. From a foreign relations perspective, logically, this situation is a complete mess for anyone and everyone. For NATO, well, NATO's mission statement is to provide military security for member nations of NATO. Ukraine is not a member nation of NATO, so this doesn't fall under the category of "NATO *has* to do something." How does NATO deal with Russia invading other countries? Well, did NATO intervene in Georgia any more in any way? No, so, umm, well, honestly, NATO's most logical choice is to dust off their jets and run some drills and beef up their forces in Eastern Europe.

What about the USA? It's even more complicated. The USA has a treaty with Ukraine to protect it. But, as has been brought up here, Russia and the USA are on equal footing with that treaty. So, if Russia and Ukraine are both supposed to protect Ukraine from any third-party invasions, what does that mean, in terms of the treaty, if Ukraine is invaded by Russia? Clearly that wasn't something the people who wrote up that treaty had thought about. If the USA invades Ukraine in order to push the Russians out (who have stated their justification of this invasion as something necessary in order to protect Ukraine from Nazis or whatever), then, no matter whose intentions are better, it just makes a huge misinformation war mess internationally. Maybe there's some loop-hole sort-of angle if Belarus is actively involved and the USA shows up to protect Ukraine from Belarus, but either way, it's a mess for the USA and probably not ultimately great for Ukraine, either, to have two foreign armies fighting each other there.

I think that nobody knows what to expect if Russia starts attacking NATO countries, either on purpose or an accident, simply because the Russian invaders seem incompetent enough that anyone could believe that such an attack could be an accident, yet, the Russian leadership is unscrupulous enough that anyone could believe that such an attack could be intentional and framed as an accident. But, at least, in that case, NATO would have the diplomatic green light to do something.

But I said it back in the early 2000's: with the US's history of invading Iraq for clearly bullshit reasons, and then abusing the situation with horrible incidents like Abu Ghraib, if something like this happened with China or Russia invading another country, we would have limited our options in terms of how the world sees us morally and diplomatically. Well, here we are. Now that the war crimes are fairly evident, it might be a different story if the USA unilaterally decides to jump into the fray, but prior to that point, it would have possibly led to the erosion of diplomatic relations in the West. Probably as time goes on and more Russian atrocities are discovered, international outrage will get more focused on Russia, especially as the USA continues to use restraint and stays on board with UN/EU/NATO gameplans.


----------



## profwoot

Seems to me that a lot of Americans might be finally having to realize that Team America World Police is bad policy. I appreciate Biden's response to this. He's clearly affected emotionally by it, but also understands that emotion can't dictate policy, especially when it comes to putting American lives (and the world) at risk. His job is to do what's best for the United States. As soon as Russia invades a NATO member, I think that probably means open war and brace for apocalypse. Until then, the current course remains the only sensible one.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Stuck_in_a_dream said:


> Here's the frustrating part for me. I'm not a conspiracy theorist or care for two shits to debunk their claims, thing is, the decision makers in the west, supported by the best intelligence services on the planet, know what is going on, and the real Russian intentions. Yet, the response is not enough to stop this crime, and now as Russia prepares for a second act, not long after discoveries of atrocities & war crimes that have been committed during the 1st wave, what is the bottom line here?
> 
> Seems to me that w/ a nuclear Russia, the message from the west is that they can only reside to sanctions unless it's a NATO country being invaded. So, are we in for a looooong conflict that can potentially spread to other (non-NATO) countries? There are already signs of economic recession looming, now w/ this crap, what are we in for? Are we witnessing a WWII re-run? I would like anyone who strongly objected to Biden's remarks that Putin should not stay in power to answer these questions.


Sure, the West know what's up. But the reality:

1. Russia has 4,000+ nuclear weapons and Putin can use them. Their doctrine even openly supports first strike use. This is a country which poisoned a guy with radioactive material and used nerve agents in the UK. Putin has successfully controlled the nuclear narrative where there's genuine worry that he "could" use them. And that's enough to make most countries back off.

2. Sanctions brutal enough to actually cripple Russia would also be immensely damaging to the West. Most of them simply aren't willing to pay that price. EU can't instantly wean itself off Russian gas without causing a massive recession.

3. Ukraine simply isn't important enough. Most people in the EU or USA probably didn't know where it was, or anything about it, before this conflict. It's a fairly corrupt former soviet place. And Russia already got the most important and useful part (Crimea). Nobody is willing to go to war for Ukraine.

4. There are long-term views to think about. Whatever weapons you pour into Ukraine - whose hands will they be in when this is over? Russia could hand over captured Javelins to Al Qaeda, ISIS, or domestic terrorists in the UK, France etc. Then they can shoot down planes as they take off from airports. So we have to be responsible and can't just have a free-for-all situation.

5. Is it in anybody's interest to have all-out proxy war? Probably not.


----------



## neurosis

Flappydoodle said:


> EU can't instantly wean itself off Russian gas without causing a massive recession.


In my opinion this is the point that will prove decisive for the future though. If more countries manage to shift their energy plans and move away from this business, what will Russia do? I agree with most of what you covered in that list but it also paints a picture where independence from dealing with them is entirely impossible without risking becoming a target ourselves... (speaking of the EU, possibly USA).


----------



## AMOS

Dineley said:


> I think everyone pretty much agrees he shouldn't stay in power just removing him or attempting to could still backfire horribly.


Unless the populace of his own country does it.


----------



## Adieu

Flappydoodle said:


> Sure, the West know what's up. But the reality:
> 
> 1. Russia has 4,000+ nuclear weapons and Putin can use them. Their doctrine even openly supports first strike use. This is a country which poisoned a guy with radioactive material and used nerve agents in the UK. Putin has successfully controlled the nuclear narrative where there's genuine worry that he "could" use them. And that's enough to make most countries back off.
> 
> 2. Sanctions brutal enough to actually cripple Russia would also be immensely damaging to the West. Most of them simply aren't willing to pay that price. EU can't instantly wean itself off Russian gas without causing a massive recession.
> 
> 3. Ukraine simply isn't important enough. Most people in the EU or USA probably didn't know where it was, or anything about it, before this conflict. It's a fairly corrupt former soviet place. And Russia already got the most important and useful part (Crimea). Nobody is willing to go to war for Ukraine.
> 
> 4. There are long-term views to think about. Whatever weapons you pour into Ukraine - whose hands will they be in when this is over? Russia could hand over captured Javelins to Al Qaeda, ISIS, or domestic terrorists in the UK, France etc. Then they can shoot down planes as they take off from airports. So we have to be responsible and can't just have a free-for-all situation.
> 
> 5. Is it in anybody's interest to have all-out proxy war? Probably not.



Wait, what?

If Russia wanted to give stuff "to Al Qaeda or ISIS", there's nothing stopping them. Regardless of this war's outcome and economic sanctions, they'll still have a humongous stockpile of shit that goes boom by terrorist/militia standards... so no, sending NLAWs to Ukraine doesn't change anything *EVEN IF* Russia somehow magically got their hands on some of then

Besides, Ukraine isn't planning on losing

Also, EU knows where it is on account of it being next door.

And so so many other things wrong with what you said.


----------



## Adieu

AMOS said:


> Unless the populace of his own country does it.



Devil's advocate: What makes you so sure he'll believe their sincerity? Maybe his reaction to a genuine grassroots coup in Moscow is to hide in a bunker and nuke Washington and Brussels?

Until now, he's been left alone figuring he was safer un-poked. But now that he's not having his best day month or year ever and somebody or something will eventually come for him... he might well start seeing western agents everywhere (well, he has for years now, but everybody figured he was just bullshitting and politicking)

And if so, maybe a SEAL Team sent now would be far more reliable than leaving it up to fate?


----------



## AMOS

Adieu said:


> Devil's advocate: What makes you so sure he'll believe their sincerity? Maybe his reaction to a genuine grassroots coup in Moscow is to hide in a bunker and nuke Washington and Brussels?
> 
> Until now, he's been left alone figuring he was safer un-poked. But now that he's not having his best day month or year ever and somebody or something will eventually come for him... he might well start seeing western agents everywhere (well, he has for years now, but everybody figured he was just bullshitting and politicking)
> 
> And if so, maybe a SEAL Team sent now would be far more reliable than leaving it up to fate?


The Italians got ahold of Mussolini and his wife somehow, the rest is history.


----------



## Adieu

Not what I meant.

Just that Putin may well see escalations where they don't even exist. Appeasing him is useless.


----------



## Drew

Bloomberg news headlines today that Putin thinks negotiations are at a "dead end," and is doubling down on war efforts. Put a new general in charge of the operation, who made a name for himself turning around Russia's efforts in Syria. 

On the measure, this certainly puts a little more pressure on NATO.


----------



## Flappydoodle

neurosis said:


> In my opinion this is the point that will prove decisive for the future though. If more countries manage to shift their energy plans and move away from this business, what will Russia do? I agree with most of what you covered in that list but it also paints a picture where independence from dealing with them is entirely impossible without risking becoming a target ourselves... (speaking of the EU, possibly USA).



Well, the EU is thankfully protected by France, UK and USA nuclear weapons. So nothing will happen unless shit REALLY hits the fan. Then we have bigger concerns than recessions.

It seems like moving away from Russia is happening anyway. Even if Putin withdraws tomorrow lots of European countries already set things in motion to reduce dependence. It makes sense, because Putin might just change his mind again tomorrow. He's lost any sort of good will or trust now. Even the UK Conservative party is announcing huge investment in nuclear, renewables etc - great for the environment, economy and makes us energy independent.



Adieu said:


> Wait, what?
> 
> If Russia wanted to give stuff "to Al Qaeda or ISIS", there's nothing stopping them. Regardless of this war's outcome and economic sanctions, they'll still have a humongous stockpile of shit that goes boom by terrorist/militia standards... so no, sending NLAWs to Ukraine doesn't change anything *EVEN IF* Russia somehow magically got their hands on some of then
> 
> Besides, Ukraine isn't planning on losing
> 
> Also, EU knows where it is on account of it being next door.
> 
> And so so many other things wrong with what you said.



Sure, Russia could have done it, but they didn't have much reason. With the west pouring weapons into Ukraine, now they have a reason - just to spite us. Lavrov even said this, that the west should be careful sending weapons because they don't know wether those weapons are going to end up in the hands of terrorists. Russia are basically acting like terrorists here. Their foreign minister even said there's no point having a world is Russia is not a power in that world, and this seems to be the approach they're taking.

There's no magic about Russia getting their hands on the weapons we sent. Things get abandoned all the time. Places get captured along with equipment. Soldiers surrender along with equipment. Ukraine has picked up plenty of Russian equipment when soldiers desert, and I'm sure Russian is picking up some Ukrainian equipment too. We're putting literally thousands of hand-held anti-air launchers into a war zone. It's absolutely impossible that anybody is tracking and accounting for them.

Ukraine might not be planning on losing, but I don't realistically see them "winning". Unless NATO is willing to actually step in and we have all-out proxy way, I just don't see how it's possible for Ukraine to "win" (which I would define as Russia leaving and Ukraine keeping all its land, leaders and policies). Ukraine is outnumbered and outgunned and Russia gives zero fucks about casualties of civilians or even their own troops. Better tactics and defensive advantage will only get you so far. Russia can just keep sending more soldiers until Ukraine has no bullets left, and keep bombing, starving and laying siege to cities until Ukraine surrenders. It won't be a "win" for Russia really, but I can't see a win for Ukraine either, though I'll be happy to be proven wrong.

And sure, the EU knows, but this is the same EU that also strung Ukraine along in membership (quick Wikipedia says since 2002) and NATO membership without actually taking it seriously. (And rightfully so, if we're honest. It's a country which is clearly not ready for EU membership - one requirement being that you have to meet social, political and economic standards. Is Ukraine even close to those?) 

Even now, what do we have from EU leaders? We have some harsh words, justified outrage, a billion Euros of support etc, but EU countries are absolutely not willing to get involved at a deeper level or to hurt themselves in the process. They're still funding Russia with 1B per day. So there's a level of willingness, which is certainly not 100%. And that's what I mean - Ukraine simply isn't important enough that anybody is going to stick their neck out.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Drew said:


> Bloomberg news headlines today that Putin thinks negotiations are at a "dead end," and is doubling down on war efforts. Put a new general in charge of the operation, who made a name for himself turning around Russia's efforts in Syria.
> 
> On the measure, this certainly puts a little more pressure on NATO.



Yep. Austrian leader also said the same - he's pessimistic and doesn't think Putin is going to be convinced. Putin also said today that the invasion was necessary, justified, moral and that they will see it through. He also made a bunch of statements that a big powerful country like Russia can't be contained, limited or isolated from the world. (That's language also designed to appeal to China, I assume).

It also seems like sanctions have kinda peaked and there's not much more that can be done without causing recession in Europe. It's gonna get real tricky very soon...


----------



## Drew

Flappydoodle said:


> Yep. Austrian leader also said the same - he's pessimistic and doesn't think Putin is going to be convinced. Putin also said today that the invasion was necessary, justified, moral and that they will see it through. He also made a bunch of statements that a big powerful country like Russia can't be contained, limited or isolated from the world. (That's language also designed to appeal to China, I assume).
> 
> It also seems like sanctions have kinda peaked and there's not much more that can be done without causing recession in Europe. It's gonna get real tricky very soon...


Next step, IMO, will be more directly arming Ukraine - I think Russia-adjacent countries like Poland are already making some noise in this front. 

But, pushed far enough, one of three things has to happen: 

1) Ukraine has to defeat Russia in open war, drive them back from their borders, and humiliate them badly enough that they stay out for at least the medium term. This is possible, but not likely. 
2) The West never gets beyond a proxy fight with Russia in Ukraine, the war ends with either a total Russian victory and annexation of Ukraine, or a partial annexation of enough Ukrainian territory for Russia to call it a win. Most likely, this is just a temporary peace before Russia goes after another former Soviet territory, and depending on how strictly the West keeps harsh sanctions in place (which will have more of an effect over time), Taiwan will start eyeing China nervously. 
3) NATO steps in to defend Ukraine, and we're in open conflict with Russia. 

None of these are great save for #1, which is unlikely. I'd say 3 is probably preferable to 2, as a Russia that's struggling to make inroads in Ukraine will likely get steamrolled by a full NATO force, but there's the risk Russia escalates to nuclear conflict, which obviously isn't great. 2 is just kicking the can down the road. 

Either way, about all I'm comfortable calling here is we're entering some sort of a new phase.


----------



## bostjan

Drew said:


> Next step, IMO, will be more directly arming Ukraine - I think Russia-adjacent countries like Poland are already making some noise in this front.
> 
> But, pushed far enough, one of three things has to happen:
> 
> 1) Ukraine has to defeat Russia in open war, drive them back from their borders, and humiliate them badly enough that they stay out for at least the medium term. This is possible, but not likely.
> 2) The West never gets beyond a proxy fight with Russia in Ukraine, the war ends with either a total Russian victory and annexation of Ukraine, or a partial annexation of enough Ukrainian territory for Russia to call it a win. Most likely, this is just a temporary peace before Russia goes after another former Soviet territory, and depending on how strictly the West keeps harsh sanctions in place (which will have more of an effect over time), Taiwan will start eyeing China nervously.
> 3) NATO steps in to defend Ukraine, and we're in open conflict with Russia.
> 
> None of these are great save for #1, which is unlikely. I'd say 3 is probably preferable to 2, as a Russia that's struggling to make inroads in Ukraine will likely get steamrolled by a full NATO force, but there's the risk Russia escalates to nuclear conflict, which obviously isn't great. 2 is just kicking the can down the road.
> 
> Either way, about all I'm comfortable calling here is we're entering some sort of a new phase.


I think there are a few caveats and some possibilities in between those.

For example, it appears that Russia might only want the far Eastern part of Ukraine along with the coastline. Of course, a landlocked Ukraine would have some economic difficulties, especially reconstructing after a full scale invasion by a larger country, and especially especially if it is widely believed that the invaders are likely to come back soon.

But, I think the worst of all possibilities is one you didn't list, and that is that this never gets resolved. And I think that might be almost equal chance as some of the options you listed. What I mean is that Russia and Ukraine wage a war of attrition as a contest to see whether Russia runs out of money and supplies and soldiers that aren't deserting before Ukraine runs out of willpower from watching their home country, their women and children, and their schools and hospitals, get bombarded indiscriminately. Both seem to appear as an endless well, but we are only a month into the invasion. Economically, Russia is getting pummeled, but you have to remember that, no matter how bad the economy is for Russians, Ukrainians are dealing with an economy that is in an even worse state of freefall in addition to the fact that there are Russian invaders there. Even if a sniper hits Russia's new attack dog general a week from now, Putin will just replace him with another and another and another et cetera. Putin probably cares a lot more about these sanctions than he's letting on, but Russia is still supplying a huge portion of Europe's energy. It'll take years for Europe to get completely free from that dependency. Also, Russians have pride in their independence from foreign pressures, and probably have rightfully earned that pride. As much as Ukrainians have earned exactly the same, the Russians are not the ones with a foreign army infestation right now.

Maybe an analogy is like a termite infestation. You call the exterminator and they cannot come, so you go down into the foundation of your house and you keep squishing termites, but you can't get the queen termite or whatever it's called, so they just keep coming. You keep telling yourself that these termites don't stand a chance, but every time you squish one, two more crawl out of the nest. You could stand there for weeks squishing them one at a time and they'll just keep coming and coming. They won't be eradicated until you either get help from a professional or start spraying poison or you manage to dig up the queen. Now imagine that the termites have tanks and automatic weapons and the queen is in a concrete bunker a thousand miles away.

Even if the war appears to be going splendidly for Ukraine, it looks to me like neither side is winning nor losing hard enough for this to be over soon. I hope I'm wrong, and I'm no military analyst, but from what little I can assess and what little common sense I have, I can't piece together a realistic scenario where your possibility #2 comes without some sort of surprise move, like Putin ends up croaking or busting out the nukes or other countries collectively decide that they've seen enough and actively engage. Russia's not going to run out of soldiers, and they were already running out of decent equipment before they started, yet it didn't stop them from trying. If they manage to get dug in somewhere, like in the East, most likely, they are going to be in it for the long haul.

Not to mention, this war has already been happening for roughly 8 years. Even if Russia packs up whatever isn't already broken down, and heads back home, the war only de-escalates - it doesn't mean it's over. Maybe they even employ that as a tactic to try to get Ukrainians focused on rebuilding, just to storm back in again. They had zero legitimate reason to do it the first time, so why should we expect them to need any reason to leave or come back again, unless something changes in some demonstrable way?


----------



## syzygy

I've been lurking in this thread for a bit now but I just wanted to say that I find it hard to have faith in humanity at this point. I was talking with an acquaintance of mine at college who's from Beijing, and it was really, really disheartening to talk with her. I get pretty emotional about the situation in Hong Kong, having served some time there as a missionary, and she totally dismissed China as having done anything wrong there or at all. It was pretty surreal to hear someone ask me to give evidence on the situation in Xinjiang as if I was the liar, or hear her defend China's current actions in Shanghai. She even said that Russia was totally justified in what they were doing. And this is just an average person from China, just someone trying to make their way through life just like I am. I've talked to several people, even friends from mainland, and many have shared the same views with me. It never ceases to make me sick to my stomach.

I guess what I'm trying to say, or trying to ask, is how can I have hope that things will ever improve? I feel pretty powerless. Heck, I'm a college student just trying to get by; how can I feel anything other than just useless? I don't even have anything in my bank account, let alone any sort of worldwide political weight whatsoever. If this kinda brainwashing is what we're up against, how can we ever expect anything to change?

Sorry for the rant, I'm just at a bit of a low right now. I know offering "thoughts and prayers" like some Facebook mom are about as effective as trying to put out a grease fire with a water pistol, but I keep praying for Ukraine. I feel for y'all that are over there and really hope you stay safe. Hopefully some real help will be sent to them soon by someone.


----------



## bostjan

syzygy said:


> I've been lurking in this thread for a bit now but I just wanted to say that I find it hard to have faith in humanity at this point. I was talking with an acquaintance of mine at college who's from Beijing, and it was really, really disheartening to talk with her. I get pretty emotional about the situation in Hong Kong, having served some time there as a missionary, and she totally dismissed China as having done anything wrong there or at all. It was pretty surreal to hear someone ask me to give evidence on the situation in Xinjiang as if I was the liar, or hear her defend China's current actions in Shanghai. She even said that Russia was totally justified in what they were doing. And this is just an average person from China, just someone trying to make their way through life just like I am. I've talked to several people, even friends from mainland, and many have shared the same views with me. It never ceases to make me sick to my stomach.
> 
> I guess what I'm trying to say, or trying to ask, is how can I have hope that things will ever improve? I feel pretty powerless. Heck, I'm a college student just trying to get by; how can I feel anything other than just useless? I don't even have anything in my bank account, let alone any sort of worldwide political weight whatsoever. If this kinda brainwashing is what we're up against, how can we ever expect anything to change?
> 
> Sorry for the rant, I'm just at a bit of a low right now. I know offering "thoughts and prayers" like some Facebook mom are about as effective as trying to put out a grease fire with a water pistol, but I keep praying for Ukraine. I feel for y'all that are over there and really hope you stay safe. Hopefully some real help will be sent to them soon by someone.


I hate to sound apathetic, because I am most certainly not that way, but maybe you should try nihilism.

Why? Because when you try to believe in some cosmic order for everything, yet you watch as murderers get away with their crimes, tyrants live lavish lives off of the suffering of others, and sometimes baby ducks drown in the water, it pisses you off. And honestly, there _is _nothing you can do about most of these things. Maybe you think that you could sign up for the Ukrainian Army as a volunteer and go blow up Russian tanks, but frankly, it won't make a difference unless you start a movement to get other people to go with you or something.

As a nihilist, you don't really believe in some grand order, so you aren't really tasked with figuring out the cognitive dissonance between all of the evil that exists in the world and how people's indifference to it allows it to perpetuate. It's pretty easy to sit back in your chair and say, "Pfft, Russia is clearly in the wrong here," and then move on with dealing with everything that actually might be in your control throughout the day, because you don't dare try to think of any fathomable reason why it's happening. It's happening. We can agree that it sucks. Some people out there disagree with us and think it's awesome that Russia is bombing little kids waiting for the train or that China is ripping little babies away from their moms because the babies test positive for covid. Let's just opine that those people are wrong, try to think of a way to stop Russia and/or China from being categorical dicks to everyone else, and try not to get too depressed about it when we inevitably get stumped. Because, anyway, if you get depressed about how much of a dick Putin is being or how disconnected from what we see as morals Xi is, then the bad guys just rack up one more small little victory.

And if nihilism doesn't work out for you, meh. As a nihilist, I don't even really believe in the foolproofness of anything, especially nihilism.


----------



## syzygy

bostjan said:


> I hate to sound apathetic, because I am most certainly not that way, but maybe you should try nihilism.
> 
> Why? Because when you try to believe in some cosmic order for everything, yet you watch as murderers get away with their crimes, tyrants live lavish lives off of the suffering of others, and sometimes baby ducks drown in the water, it pisses you off. And honestly, there _is _nothing you can do about most of these things. Maybe you think that you could sign up for the Ukrainian Army as a volunteer and go blow up Russian tanks, but frankly, it won't make a difference unless you start a movement to get other people to go with you or something.
> 
> As a nihilist, you don't really believe in some grand order, so you aren't really tasked with figuring out the cognitive dissonance between all of the evil that exists in the world and how people's indifference to it allows it to perpetuate. It's pretty easy to sit back in your chair and say, "Pfft, Russia is clearly in the wrong here," and then move on with dealing with everything that actually might be in your control throughout the day, because you don't dare try to think of any fathomable reason why it's happening. It's happening. We can agree that it sucks. Some people out there disagree with us and think it's awesome that Russia is bombing little kids waiting for the train or that China is ripping little babies away from their moms because the babies test positive for covid. Let's just opine that those people are wrong, try to think of a way to stop Russia and/or China from being categorical dicks to everyone else, and try not to get too depressed about it when we inevitably get stumped. Because, anyway, if you get depressed about how much of a dick Putin is being or how disconnected from what we see as morals Xi is, then the bad guys just rack up one more small little victory.
> 
> And if nihilism doesn't work out for you, meh. As a nihilist, I don't even really believe in the foolproofness of anything, especially nihilism.


Appreciate the thought, but I don't actually think I'm quite there yet, ya know? Just needed to vent. 

Still, you're definitely right that it's better to focus on trying to solve the problem, instead of just being depressed about it all. I figure that all I can do right now is to just to be kind to the people around me, because at least that's something I have control over.


----------



## bostjan

syzygy said:


> Appreciate the thought, but I don't actually think I'm quite there yet, ya know? Just needed to vent.
> 
> Still, you're definitely right that it's better to focus on trying to solve the problem, instead of just being depressed about it all. I figure that all I can do right now is to just to be kind to the people around me, because at least that's something I have control over.


Maybe you'll get lucky and it'll never happen to you, but I used to be like you, until I got older. I used to always be super quick to drop whatever I was doing and help another person out. Even after I bought a guy a hot coffee and he threw it in my face, even after I stopped to help a guy switch off his car alarm without knowing he was stealing someone else's car, and even after I held the door open for a man rushing into the bank unaware that he was just about to rob it. All three of those things really affected me, but I just kept trying to be nice to people. I still try to be generally nice to people, but after years of seeing how people will see you going a little out of your way to help and will see you as an opportunity to be shitty to other people, I just have to get to know a person before I'll bother anymore. And now I don't have these moral dilemmas nearly as much anymore. I feel like I'm still the same, but I just restructured my priorities so that I am more available to help the people I believe actually could use the help.


----------



## Adieu

syzygy said:


> Sorry for the rant, I'm just at a bit of a low right now. I know offering "thoughts and prayers" like some Facebook mom are about as effective as trying to put out a grease fire with a water pistol, but I keep praying for Ukraine. I feel for y'all that are over there and really hope you stay safe. Hopefully some real help will be sent to them soon by someone.



You can send money.

Ukrainian military takes credit cards and even Google Pay. Commission is like 1.3 or 1.4%

https://bank.gov.ua/ua/news/all/nat...srahunok-dlya-zboru-koshtiv-na-potrebi-armiyi


----------



## bostjan

Unconfirmed reports of chemical weapons deployed in Mariupol.

Meanwhile, Vladimir Kara-Murza, a Russian national who writes for Washington Post was arrested today for resiting police.


----------



## syzygy

Adieu said:


> You can send money.
> 
> Ukrainian military takes credit cards and even Google Pay. Commission is like 1.3 or 1.4%
> 
> https://bank.gov.ua/ua/news/all/nat...srahunok-dlya-zboru-koshtiv-na-potrebi-armiyi


Done.


----------



## Drew

bostjan said:


> I think there are a few caveats and some possibilities in between those.
> 
> For example, it appears that Russia might only want the far Eastern part of Ukraine along with the coastline. Of course, a landlocked Ukraine would have some economic difficulties, especially reconstructing after a full scale invasion by a larger country, and especially especially if it is widely believed that the invaders are likely to come back soon.
> 
> But, I think the worst of all possibilities is one you didn't list, and that is that this never gets resolved. And I think that might be almost equal chance as some of the options you listed. What I mean is that Russia and Ukraine wage a war of attrition as a contest to see whether Russia runs out of money and supplies and soldiers that aren't deserting before Ukraine runs out of willpower from watching their home country, their women and children, and their schools and hospitals, get bombarded indiscriminately. Both seem to appear as an endless well, but we are only a month into the invasion. Economically, Russia is getting pummeled, but you have to remember that, no matter how bad the economy is for Russians, Ukrainians are dealing with an economy that is in an even worse state of freefall in addition to the fact that there are Russian invaders there. Even if a sniper hits Russia's new attack dog general a week from now, Putin will just replace him with another and another and another et cetera. Putin probably cares a lot more about these sanctions than he's letting on, but Russia is still supplying a huge portion of Europe's energy. It'll take years for Europe to get completely free from that dependency. Also, Russians have pride in their independence from foreign pressures, and probably have rightfully earned that pride. As much as Ukrainians have earned exactly the same, the Russians are not the ones with a foreign army infestation right now.
> 
> Maybe an analogy is like a termite infestation. You call the exterminator and they cannot come, so you go down into the foundation of your house and you keep squishing termites, but you can't get the queen termite or whatever it's called, so they just keep coming. You keep telling yourself that these termites don't stand a chance, but every time you squish one, two more crawl out of the nest. You could stand there for weeks squishing them one at a time and they'll just keep coming and coming. They won't be eradicated until you either get help from a professional or start spraying poison or you manage to dig up the queen. Now imagine that the termites have tanks and automatic weapons and the queen is in a concrete bunker a thousand miles away.
> 
> Even if the war appears to be going splendidly for Ukraine, it looks to me like neither side is winning nor losing hard enough for this to be over soon. I hope I'm wrong, and I'm no military analyst, but from what little I can assess and what little common sense I have, I can't piece together a realistic scenario where your possibility #2 comes without some sort of surprise move, like Putin ends up croaking or busting out the nukes or other countries collectively decide that they've seen enough and actively engage. Russia's not going to run out of soldiers, and they were already running out of decent equipment before they started, yet it didn't stop them from trying. If they manage to get dug in somewhere, like in the East, most likely, they are going to be in it for the long haul.
> 
> Not to mention, this war has already been happening for roughly 8 years. Even if Russia packs up whatever isn't already broken down, and heads back home, the war only de-escalates - it doesn't mean it's over. Maybe they even employ that as a tactic to try to get Ukrainians focused on rebuilding, just to storm back in again. They had zero legitimate reason to do it the first time, so why should we expect them to need any reason to leave or come back again, unless something changes in some demonstrable way?


Russia carving out parts of Ukraine and calling it a day was #2, but I guess yeah, I didn't include "endless stalemate" as an option here. Though, I suppose that's maybe ultimately what 2 would look like, fighting slows to a crawl and we just have troops facing off at each other at the new borders but no one really makes a move. 

Who knows. It's getting clearer that a negotiated peace is becoming less and less likely, no matter how you dice it (unless this "I choose war" posturing on Putin's part is supposed to get some sort of concession out of Ukraine at the negotiating table, and I think based on the recent trajectory of the war Russia would have to show something's changed before that becomes likely). 

It's a mess, and it's about to get messier.


----------



## AMOS

Talks are at a dead end because Putin created that dead end.


----------



## Flappydoodle

syzygy said:


> I've been lurking in this thread for a bit now but I just wanted to say that I find it hard to have faith in humanity at this point. I was talking with an acquaintance of mine at college who's from Beijing, and it was really, really disheartening to talk with her. I get pretty emotional about the situation in Hong Kong, having served some time there as a missionary, and she totally dismissed China as having done anything wrong there or at all. It was pretty surreal to hear someone ask me to give evidence on the situation in Xinjiang as if I was the liar, or hear her defend China's current actions in Shanghai. She even said that Russia was totally justified in what they were doing. And this is just an average person from China, just someone trying to make their way through life just like I am. I've talked to several people, even friends from mainland, and many have shared the same views with me. It never ceases to make me sick to my stomach.
> 
> I guess what I'm trying to say, or trying to ask, is how can I have hope that things will ever improve? I feel pretty powerless. Heck, I'm a college student just trying to get by; how can I feel anything other than just useless? I don't even have anything in my bank account, let alone any sort of worldwide political weight whatsoever. If this kinda brainwashing is what we're up against, how can we ever expect anything to change?
> 
> Sorry for the rant, I'm just at a bit of a low right now. I know offering "thoughts and prayers" like some Facebook mom are about as effective as trying to put out a grease fire with a water pistol, but I keep praying for Ukraine. I feel for y'all that are over there and really hope you stay safe. Hopefully some real help will be sent to them soon by someone.


An average Chinese person being trash and having horrible views shouldn’t surprise you. It’s the norm. I know that’s probably not politically correct to say, but we all know it’s true lol. They grew up with the brainwashing and nationalism drilled into their heads. Even the ones who leave and study in the west can’t let it go.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Drew said:


> Next step, IMO, will be more directly arming Ukraine - I think Russia-adjacent countries like Poland are already making some noise in this front.
> 
> But, pushed far enough, one of three things has to happen:
> 
> 1) Ukraine has to defeat Russia in open war, drive them back from their borders, and humiliate them badly enough that they stay out for at least the medium term. This is possible, but not likely.
> 2) The West never gets beyond a proxy fight with Russia in Ukraine, the war ends with either a total Russian victory and annexation of Ukraine, or a partial annexation of enough Ukrainian territory for Russia to call it a win. Most likely, this is just a temporary peace before Russia goes after another former Soviet territory, and depending on how strictly the West keeps harsh sanctions in place (which will have more of an effect over time), Taiwan will start eyeing China nervously.
> 3) NATO steps in to defend Ukraine, and we're in open conflict with Russia.
> 
> None of these are great save for #1, which is unlikely. I'd say 3 is probably preferable to 2, as a Russia that's struggling to make inroads in Ukraine will likely get steamrolled by a full NATO force, but there's the risk Russia escalates to nuclear conflict, which obviously isn't great. 2 is just kicking the can down the road.
> 
> Either way, about all I'm comfortable calling here is we're entering some sort of a new phase.


Yeah I’m guessing number 2. Putin annexes enough to claim victory. Ukraine goes back to stalemate - likely will not join EU or NATO. Probably some help rebuilding and they fortify their new border. Once fighting has stopped, western weapons pour in. Russia is more isolated and probably doesn’t ‘win’ in the long run but they’ll still be fine. It is a bit worrying that if Putin comes out relatively unscathed, or sanctions can’t go any higher, he has nothing left to lose from invading others. Interesting indeed. 

Let’s just hope he has a stroke, heart attack, GBM or pancreatic cancer. 


Adieu said:


> You can send money.
> 
> Ukrainian military takes credit cards and even Google Pay. Commission is like 1.3 or 1.4%
> 
> https://bank.gov.ua/ua/news/all/nat...srahunok-dlya-zboru-koshtiv-na-potrebi-armiyi



How verified is this? I’ve given a few thousand to various Red Cross, some British charities for refugees etc. 

But what I really want to do is pay for a missile or something that really delivers a FU, haha


----------



## Adieu

This one is the genuine Ukrainian Armed Forces account in the genuine National Bank.

Most of the support Ukrainian soldiers etc. ads you see are for an NGO called Come Back Alive that specializes in non-lethal support, this ain't it.

This is straight-up Ukrainian military.


PS do NOT give to Red Cross, those people collude with Russia to populate concentration camps.


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> This one is the genuine Ukrainian Armed Forces account in the genuine National Bank.
> 
> Most of the support Ukrainian soldiers etc. ads you see are for an NGO called Come Back Alive that specializes in non-lethal support, this ain't it.
> 
> This is straight-up Ukrainian military.
> 
> 
> PS do NOT give to Red Cross, those people collude with Russia to populate concentration camps.


Actually there's plenty of people gathering funds supplying allowed stuff to different batallions directly without all the goverment bureaucracy - thermal scopes, magnifiers, helmets, headsets, medical stuff like turniquets, seals, bandages etc. So if someone is willing I'll gladly share the contacts


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> Actually there's plenty of people gathering funds supplying allowed stuff to different batallions directly without all the goverment bureaucracy - thermal scopes, magnifiers, helmets, headsets, medical stuff like turniquets, seals, bandages etc. So if someone is willing I'll gladly share the contacts



True.

But for foreigners, donating to anything but the biggest is at a high risk of falling for crooks by mistake

Besides, he wanted someone with the right to buy actual weapons


----------



## Adieu

And then there's people earnestly donating to Red Cross, which helps Putin put people in fucking concentration camps


----------



## neurosis

Adieu said:


> And then there's people earnestly donating to Red Cross, which helps Putin put people in fucking concentration camps


Can you post a link or point at any source that gives more background on this issue? I am interested.


----------



## neurosis

bostjan said:


> Maybe you'll get lucky and it'll never happen to you, but I used to be like you, until I got older. I used to always be super quick to drop whatever I was doing and help another person out. Even after I bought a guy a hot coffee and he threw it in my face, even after I stopped to help a guy switch off his car alarm without knowing he was stealing someone else's car, and even after I held the door open for a man rushing into the bank unaware that he was just about to rob it. All three of those things really affected me, but I just kept trying to be nice to people. I still try to be generally nice to people, but after years of seeing how people will see you going a little out of your way to help and will see you as an opportunity to be shitty to other people, I just have to get to know a person before I'll bother anymore. And now I don't have these moral dilemmas nearly as much anymore. I feel like I'm still the same, but I just restructured my priorities so that I am more available to help the people I believe actually could use the help.


Off topic but don't stop being nice to people because of other people turning out to not being nice. You don't have to get out of your way to be nice. Just a basic courtesy makes a huge difference. You don't necessarily do it for them or expecting anything in return and you can retire the nicety when someone is openly a dick back to you. That's the power of nice. It's free but nobody is entitled to it. And it's your right to discontinue nice for dicks.


----------



## devastone

I'm interested in the Red Cross info also, this is the first I've heard of it. 

And to the OT, just because some people are dicks doesn't mean I will lower myself to their standards. I appreciate that you were in the wrong place at the wrong time on multiple occasions (given the odds of those 3 things happening to the same person, I would probably recommend you not stand outside in a lightning storm), and can understand being cynical. We also have to have healthy boundaries, always dropping our own stuff to help others (unless it is a real time sensitive emergency) can be tiring and unhealthy.


----------



## bostjan

neurosis said:


> Off topic but don't stop being nice to people because of other people turning out to not being nice. You don't have to get out of your way to be nice. Just a basic courtesy makes a huge difference. You don't necessarily do it for them or expecting anything in return and you can retire the nicety when someone is openly a dick back to you. That's the power of nice. It's free but nobody is entitled to it. And it's your right to discontinue nice for dicks.


I don't do anything nice for anyone hoping they'll be nice back. The point I was trying to convey was that you can be nice to a stranger and help them do something that might seem innocuous, only to later find out that you assisted that person do harm to someone else who didn't deserve it.

Maybe next time I stop to help a stranger change a tyre, I'll be thinking that I'm doing a little good in the world, but then the person ends up just barely catching a flight in time to blow it up.

You know what I mean? Just seems to be the way things often go for me. If someone wants to be a dick to me, that's between me and them, and I can generally deal with it. But use my assistance to harm a third party and you've damaged any chance of me having an altruistic philosophy.


----------



## tedtan

neurosis said:


> Can you post a link or point at any source that gives more background on this issue? I am interested.


I’ll third this request for info , as the is the first I’m hearing of this, too.


----------



## MaxOfMetal

He's probably referring to this: https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladi...imize-moscows-alleged-abduction-of-civilians/


----------



## Adieu

There were a bunch of news in UA sources about "humanitarian corridors" with the cooperation of the Red Cross being opened only towards Russia, with people getting swept up into camps


----------



## devastone

*EDIT* no reason to post


----------



## AMOS

I'm not sure why they put this on the news, have closed door meetings, vote them in and move in the hardware.


Here’s Why Finland And Sweden Might Join NATO — And Why It Matters


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> There were a bunch of news in UA sources about "humanitarian corridors" with the cooperation of the Red Cross being opened only towards Russia, with people getting swept up into camps


You mean the International Red Cross, out of Switzerland? I think it looks like they are almost literally between a rock and a hard place trying to supply aid to civilians in Ukraine whilst the Russian government is accusing every man, woman, child, baby, dog, cat, and pet goldfish of being an enemy combatant. The ICRC is trying to be apolitical, so they have to wait for the international criminal court to make some sort of definitive finding about the war before they can even so much as call it a war. Keep in mind that the ICRC has offices in Russia, and, according to its philosophy, it would help Russian civilians just as much if they came under attack (probably from Russia). I'm not entirely sure, though, since some of their activities are a little bit confusing, to say the least. I'm hoping that the accusations are false and, if so, that they can clear their good name; however, if there is something sinister going on, as much of a shame as it would be for the organization, I believe it would have to be punished to the full extent of international law.

That said, there are also tons of other "Red Cross" organizations, like the Ukrainian Red Cross, the Russian Red Cross and Red Crescent, the American Red Cross, etc. I don't know how these organizations are connected to one another, but I do know that they are distinct organizations. Perhaps the story you are talking about refers to one of those? But I do recall that the ICRC has taken quite a bit of criticism over opening an office in Rostov-on-Don to handle the Ukrainian "conflict."


----------



## Xaios

AMOS said:


> I'm not sure why they put this on the news, have closed door meetings, vote them in and move in the hardware.
> 
> 
> Here’s Why Finland And Sweden Might Join NATO — And Why It Matters


Time for someone to make a thread titled "Will Russia invade Finland again?"


----------



## bostjan

Xaios said:


> Time for someone to make a thread titled "Will Russia invade Finland again?"


Please don't.

To many threads with yes/no questions as the thread title, in OT, have ended up being answered yes.

For example:

Will Russia Invade Ukraine Again? (this thread)
Will Trump Win the Republican Nomination?
Are Conspiracy Theories More Popular Now Than Ever?
Will the Lie Ruin Brian William's Career?
etc.

At least don't word it as a yes or no question if you do.

I'm joking, of course. 



Or am I?


----------



## AMOS

Xaios said:


> Time for someone to make a thread titled "Will Russia invade Finland again?"


Simo Hayha lives!


----------



## Drew

devastone said:


> *EDIT* no reason to post


Please. Like that ever stops any of us.


----------



## devastone

It was about the Red Cross thing, everything seemed kind of vague and I have trouble (or don't want to) believing the Red Cross would be willingly involved in that type of ill-doing. But, I had 2nd thoughts about the post, no reason to ruffle any feathers. I hope this thread (for the most part) stays informative and on point, this is a serious, and honestly sickening, world issue.


----------



## profwoot

Regarding the impotence one feels in the face of such horrors, and without attempting to discount the will to find ways to help, I think it's worth feeling a spark of positivity within yourself knowing that you're still human. A lot of people don't make it through with their humanity intact, so each prick of frustration can serve as a reminder to continue nourishing your humanity, however interpreted.

Then again, existential nihilist gang so the above is ultimately bullshit. Also I stole it from Albert Camus, who wrote in similar times.


----------



## bostjan

Looks like the Russian warship everyone was telling to go home might not be going anywhere ever again, because it exploded twice and then caught on fire. Ukrainian officials said they fired two missiles at it. The Russian defence minister said that's not true, that it just exploded and caught fire for no reason. If he's lying in order to save face, I don't think he thought this one through.


----------



## nightflameauto

bostjan said:


> Looks like the Russian warship everyone was telling to go home might not be going anywhere ever again, because it exploded twice and then caught on fire. Ukrainian officials said they fired two missiles at it. The Russian defence minister said that's not true, that it just exploded and caught fire for no reason. If he's lying in order to save face, I don't think he thought this one through.


"We didn't have to be attacked! We're fully capable of running shit so poorly that we blow it up all on our own! Thank you very much!"


----------



## bostjan

nightflameauto said:


> "We didn't have to be attacked! We're fully capable of running shit so poorly that we blow it up all on our own! Thank you very much!"


The cruiser sank. Russia is literally reporting that it did not sink, but that they've evacuated all 500+ crew members from the ship. Well, then how TF do they know it hasn't sunk? Maybe it sunk while they were away! Next they'll be telling us that it didn't sink, it was converted into a dive-only submarine.

My colleagues about an hour away from Kiev told me this morning that they are going back to work, but that things in their workspace are pretty heavily damaged. I sure hope this is a safe move. I know everybody wants to get back to earning money and get life back on track, but if the environment isn't safe, it's not worth it for a few bucks.

Also, in other news, Russia is now threatening to poise nuclear missiles to strike Finland and Sweden if they join NATO. That's a very frightening and also very weird threat. It's like if a guy holding a gun shouted at you "Don't make any sudden movements or I'll aim my gun at you!"


----------



## devastone

Yes, that is a weird, scary, and unstable threat.

I hope you friends are safe!


----------



## neurosis

bostjan said:


> I don't do anything nice for anyone hoping they'll be nice back. The point I was trying to convey was that you can be nice to a stranger and help them do something that might seem innocuous, only to later find out that you assisted that person do harm to someone else who didn't deserve it.
> 
> Maybe next time I stop to help a stranger change a tyre, I'll be thinking that I'm doing a little good in the world, but then the person ends up just barely catching a flight in time to blow it up.
> 
> You know what I mean? Just seems to be the way things often go for me. If someone wants to be a dick to me, that's between me and them, and I can generally deal with it. But use my assistance to harm a third party and you've damaged any chance of me having an altruistic philosophy.


I see what you mean more clearly now. I guess it's out of your control though. You either help or you don't. That's as far as your involvement goes. Maybe hold back if the situation is unclear. The situation with the bank is so unusual. Seems like that was entirely bad luck man. Anyway. I'll PM you if you want to chat about this more. Don't wan to derail the thread. Have a good one!


----------



## nightflameauto

bostjan said:


> Also, in other news, Russia is now threatening to poise nuclear missiles to strike Finland and Sweden if they join NATO. That's a very frightening and also very weird threat. It's like if a guy holding a gun shouted at you "Don't make any sudden movements or I'll aim my gun at you!"


WTF? How many nuclear threats does it take before the collective world goes, "Put up, shut up, or we go first?" For fuck sake, even the dude waving a machete around in a bar and screaming about killing everybody that walks in eventually gets smacked by somebody. I'm just flabbergasted the world is still pretty much going, "Yeah, that weird uncle of ours is always talking shit." And then shrugging it off as nothing.


----------



## Drew

Meanwhile, the EU is drafting an embargo that would ban the import of Russian oil. Any of the 27 members could kill it, but Germany so far has not tried to do so. Worth keeping an eye on.


----------



## bostjan

nightflameauto said:


> WTF? How many nuclear threats does it take before the collective world goes, "Put up, shut up, or we go first?" For fuck sake, even the dude waving a machete around in a bar and screaming about killing everybody that walks in eventually gets smacked by somebody. I'm just flabbergasted the world is still pretty much going, "Yeah, that weird uncle of ours is always talking shit." And then shrugging it off as nothing.


Well, the trouble in the entire philosophy of mass-destruction weaponry. Weapons are tools. So, before you can use a nuclear weapon, you need a use case for a nuclear weapon. What on earth would that ever be?

That's why I believe that the days of ordered society are numbered. If we don't get taken out by disease or famine or whathaveyou, we'll get nuked. And when we get nuked, it won't be by reasonable people- it'll be by terrorists.

Think about it. What use does a verdant society have for nuclear weapons? It's to deter violent societies from using nuclear weapons. But what use does a terrorist have for a nuclear weapon? Just to set it off in a highly populated area. So, all it'll take is for some organization like ISIS to get their hands on a nuke. Then, believing that if they nuke a major population center, they will receive eternal rich rewards in the afterlife, what will they do?

Putin has more nuclear weapons at his disposal than any other human being on the planet. Other than that, his military is poorly funded (because of the dissolution of the USSR and the continued sanctions), his military is poorly staffed (because compulsory military service in Russia had to be lowered to 12 months, due to excessive hazing between veterans and new recruits), his military is spread too thin (because Russia wants to be like the USA and install bases all over the world, but no one likes the idea of having a Russian military base in their yard), his economy is crumbling (because of gross mismanagement and corruption of the government, as well as from the sanctions and poorly planned war), he's getting old, his people are much less fond of him, and his alliances are showing increasing weakness (due to the war). His only big manly move left is to start shaking his big phallic missiles around at anyone who rolls their eyes at him.

But it's no joke. If Putin decides that planet earth doesn't look enough like the surface of the moon, he can give the command, and, if his generals do as they are instructed, the few dozen survivors will have to figure out how to survive off of radioactive food long enough to reproduce, if it's even worth reproducing.

I guess the question is whether someone will shake their head. The older Putin gets, the more likely he may become to act irrationally. Who knows. I don't know what the solution is. We can't snap our fingers and make the nukes all vanish. It's likely that we can't even shoot down a frighteningly large proportion of them even if they weren't hypersonic. But then again, maybe the duct tape that has been holding them together lost it's adhesive integrity decades ago.


----------



## nightflameauto

bostjan said:


> Well, the trouble in the entire philosophy of mass-destruction weaponry. Weapons are tools. So, before you can use a nuclear weapon, you need a use case for a nuclear weapon. What on earth would that ever be?
> 
> That's why I believe that the days of ordered society are numbered. If we don't get taken out by disease or famine or whathaveyou, we'll get nuked. And when we get nuked, it won't be by reasonable people- it'll be by terrorists.
> 
> Think about it. What use does a verdant society have for nuclear weapons? It's to deter violent societies from using nuclear weapons. But what use does a terrorist have for a nuclear weapon? Just to set it off in a highly populated area. So, all it'll take is for some organization like ISIS to get their hands on a nuke. Then, believing that if they nuke a major population center, they will receive eternal rich rewards in the afterlife, what will they do?
> 
> Putin has more nuclear weapons at his disposal than any other human being on the planet. Other than that, his military is poorly funded (because of the dissolution of the USSR and the continued sanctions), his military is poorly staffed (because compulsory military service in Russia had to be lowered to 12 months, due to excessive hazing between veterans and new recruits), his military is spread too thin (because Russia wants to be like the USA and install bases all over the world, but no one likes the idea of having a Russian military base in their yard), his economy is crumbling (because of gross mismanagement and corruption of the government, as well as from the sanctions and poorly planned war), he's getting old, his people are much less fond of him, and his alliances are showing increasing weakness (due to the war). His only big manly move left is to start shaking his big phallic missiles around at anyone who rolls their eyes at him.
> 
> But it's no joke. If Putin decides that planet earth doesn't look enough like the surface of the moon, he can give the command, and, if his generals do as they are instructed, the few dozen survivors will have to figure out how to survive off of radioactive food long enough to reproduce, if it's even worth reproducing.
> 
> I guess the question is whether someone will shake their head. The older Putin gets, the more likely he may become to act irrationally. Who knows. I don't know what the solution is. We can't snap our fingers and make the nukes all vanish. It's likely that we can't even shoot down a frighteningly large proportion of them even if they weren't hypersonic. But then again, maybe the duct tape that has been holding them together lost it's adhesive integrity decades ago.


Based on the way their military has been behaving, perhaps the best thing in the world would be for Putin to give the go command on a nuke launch. They'd go straight up, straight down, and no more Russia. I mean, it'd suck for the rest of us left to deal with the fallout for the next few hundred / thousand years or so, but at least he'd be done threatening stupidity.

I dunno, man. Trying to find some levity in this nonsense.


----------



## bostjan

nightflameauto said:


> Based on the way their military has been behaving, perhaps the best thing in the world would be for Putin to give the go command on a nuke launch. They'd go straight up, straight down, and no more Russia. I mean, it'd suck for the rest of us left to deal with the fallout for the next few hundred / thousand years or so, but at least he'd be done threatening stupidity.
> 
> I dunno, man. Trying to find some levity in this nonsense.


Damn, that's pretty harsh. This is definitely a pretty harsh situation, though...


----------



## Xaios

Drew said:


> Meanwhile, the EU is drafting an embargo that would ban the import of Russian oil. Any of the 27 members could kill it, but Germany so far has not tried to do so. Worth keeping an eye on.


Seems like Hungary would be first in line at this point to do so. After all, Orban recently stated that Hungary is going to play ball with Russia and pay for oil in rubles.


----------



## Metropolis

AMOS said:


> I'm not sure why they put this on the news, have closed door meetings, vote them in and move in the hardware.
> 
> 
> Here’s Why Finland And Sweden Might Join NATO — And Why It Matters



Kreml has already started to throw threats to us and they performed most likely a cyber attack to few government websites, and an airspace violation on our southern coast. That bullshit will go on soon as we are in NATO after the summer I believe.

Final decision is quite tedious political process and it will be made behind closed doors. The thing is that Russia doesn't respect anything but power. Finland is fairly militaristic country because of that. We will make our own decisions and nothing comes between that.


----------



## AMOS

It's awesome that they sank this thing, the Moskva weighs 11,500 tons, the Destroyers I served on in comparison were 3,400-4,500 tons. The Russian ship looks kinda cool but it's a shitty design, it's too easy to hit one of those monster anti ship missile launchers. it sounds like that's what may have happened.


----------



## Adieu

Also, in case anybody missed it... Moskva is the name of the city y'all call Moscow.

The flagship. Named after the capital.

This genius calls for a victorious short totally-not-a-war with a scheduled victory lap in 48-72 hours... And 50 days later national TV is admitting "MOSCOW IS BURNING" but won't explain why

And then it frikkin sinks

LOOOOOL

PS maybe buy out those radiation countermeasures after all. This is so damn humiliating the evil gnome might just want to murder-suicide the rest of the world.


----------



## Randy




----------



## AMOS

That model kit is funny, but having served in the Navy I can only imagine the horror of being stuck inside a sinking ship. I was in a ship that almost capsized during trials and that was bad enough! Any sailors that perished certainly didn't start this war, but during war everything and everyone are fair game. Except civilians, targeting civilians in this day and age is unacceptable.


----------



## tedtan

AMOS said:


> but during war everything and everyone are fair game. Except civilians, targeting civilians in this day and age is unacceptable.


Yet Russia keeps targeting civilians. Bastards.


----------



## spudmunkey

AMOS said:


> That model kit is funny, but having served in the Navy I can only imagine the horror of being stuck inside a sinking ship. I was in a ship that almost capsized during trials and that was bad enough! Any sailors that perished certainly didn't start this war, but during war everything and everyone are fair game. Except civilians, targeting civilians in this day and age is unacceptable.



I believe I heard they they were evacuating it pretty much right away. Do we know if it was emptied?


----------



## AMOS

spudmunkey said:


> I believe I heard they they were evacuating it pretty much right away. Do we know if it was emptied?


No idea, I heard from an unconfirmed source that over 100 went down with it.


----------



## oversteve

Old soviet cartoon where kids on sub called Neptune find a Nazi destroyer marked by Z
p.s. already deleted on russian cartoon studio's youtube chanel...


----------



## oversteve

spudmunkey said:


> I believe I heard they they were evacuating it pretty much right away. Do we know if it was emptied?


There's no proper info on that, Russia delivered a video with the crew that should've been an evidence that everyone's fine however it was later found out it was merged from 3 older videos, also locals in Crimea say lots of cars near the harbor are still waiting for their owners and some people already started posting on social networks they can't find their relatives.


----------



## Randy

Real talk:
Is Kyiv just leaving the national guard in Mariupol to be martyred or what?


----------



## oversteve

Randy said:


> Real talk:
> Is Kyiv just leaving the national guard in Mariupol to be martyred or what?


Unfortunately it's not easy getting in there right now with currently available weapons and all the reinforcements will be easy targets for artilery/aviation on their way there since the area is plains with no cover, also the more heated phase in the East already started


----------



## Flappydoodle

Randy said:


> Real talk:
> Is Kyiv just leaving the national guard in Mariupol to be martyred or what?



I imagine that getting there or sending stuff there is probably not easy.

I guess that it will fall fairly soon, but Ukraine may have to then re-capture it. Seems the Western weapons are pouring in faster now, and more offensive weaponry. So hopefully Ukraine will be able to keep Russia from using naval power, and hopefully block them off in the East too. But I'm no military expert.


----------



## nightflameauto

How is Russia managing to maintain the illusion of a victory lap in Ukraine while the body count continues to pile up. I mean, won't people back home eventually start to wonder why they no longer hear anything from their family they sent to free the Ukrainians from their despotic Nazi regime? I would think at some point, even those that are as tapped into Vlad's narrative will start to ask why things aren't adding up. Wouldn't they?


----------



## devastone

You would think, but to my western mind it's hard to comprehend the scale of brainwashing that has taken place there. I'm sure relatives will be told they died heroes defending innocents from the Jewish Nazi regime (irony intentional) and no one will probably know the total scale if people are isolated enough, Russia is a big country.


----------



## oversteve

nightflameauto said:


> How is Russia managing to maintain the illusion of a victory lap in Ukraine while the body count continues to pile up. I mean, won't people back home eventually start to wonder why they no longer hear anything from their family they sent to free the Ukrainians from their despotic Nazi regime? I would think at some point, even those that are as tapped into Vlad's narrative will start to ask why things aren't adding up. Wouldn't they?


The answer is simple - majority don't care. Those few who care are afraid to raise the quiestion in order not to get prosecuted. Lots of those who participate in war on russian side come from depressive regions where some common stuff like sewers is akin to a miracle, they literaly have nothing to do there where they live except drink and brawl, and here in Ukraine they can steal some shit and when they die their relatives should receive a nice boost to their budget...


----------



## bostjan

nightflameauto said:


> How is Russia managing to maintain the illusion of a victory lap in Ukraine while the body count continues to pile up. I mean, won't people back home eventually start to wonder why they no longer hear anything from their family they sent to free the Ukrainians from their despotic Nazi regime? I would think at some point, even those that are as tapped into Vlad's narrative will start to ask why things aren't adding up. Wouldn't they?


I think the key to understanding the answer to your question is in understanding the situation. The "illusion" is pretty thin - most Russians are either wise to it or are older people who don't leave their homes much. The remainder of believers fall into a sort of weird category of people who are too inconvenienced by disbelieving things to give them much thought.

Russian polls show overwhelming support for the "special military operation" and for Putin. Yes. But, and maybe not many westerners really understand this, but the polling is done by an agency that is administered by the government. So, the same government that will arrest you and lock you away for 10-15 years for speaking negatively about it calls you and asks you what you think about the fearless leader or about the thing that the fearless leader has instructed you not to talk about, what are you going to do? Disagree with them?! No, you either agree, verbally shrug your shoulders, or just hang up the phone. Since the agency will likely not count you either way in the two latter cases, of course Putin has a super high approval rating. Couple that with the fact that these older people who are stuck at home all the time watching the state-sponsored propaganda are the most likely ones to answer the phone and talk with the polling agency.

Then take into account the voice recordings of the hundreds of Russian people calling the Ukraine to ask the Ukrainian military if they know anything about their family members who were sent to fight. Those people _should_ be calling the Russian authorities for news, but they _know_ that those authorities can't give them any information.

Don't forget about the tens of thousands of protesters arrested, including the journalist who went on live TV with a sign, knowing full well she would face severe repercussions.

This is Putin's war. The group of people who wanted this are extremely small. It's no excuse for the fighters in the military carrying out these war crimes.

The state-controlled Russian media has declared that this is already WWIII - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russian-state-tv-ukraine-world-war-3-b2058684.html

I mean, the Russian people are not all stupid. It's a big country, so there are a large number of stupid people, but it's also the culture that has produced some of the greatest minds in history, as well as the fifth highest number of Nobel prizes awarded. I'm really hoping that they can take care of this Putin problem internally, but, unfortunately, the problem has already spilled out into Ukraine, and it's looming very close to spilling into other countries. I think that if Russia attacks Finland, it'll be WW3 for virtually everyone.


----------



## Xaios

devastone said:


> You would think, but to my western mind it's hard to comprehend the scale of brainwashing that has taken place there.


What? Dude, within the past six months, there were hundreds of Americans camped out on the grassy knoll, chanting the Pledge of Allegiance as if it were a magical summoning incantation, waiting for freaking _JFK Jr._ to magically appear as if he hadn't been dead for over 20 years to declare his allegiance to Donald Trump, and that the two of them would then suddenly re-take the White House.

Compared to that, the notion that the majority of Russians buy into the lie that they're fighting for a righteous cause in Ukraine is so believable it's practically banal.


----------



## Drew

Randy said:


> Real talk:
> Is Kyiv just leaving the national guard in Mariupol to be martyred or what?


Aren't they surrounded, at this point, with no escape route? 

In practice that might be what's about to happen, but my understanding is barring some sort of desperate Ukrainian assault to claw back territory and open a channel to send in reinforcements, I don't know if they have alternatives.


----------



## Randy

Drew said:


> Aren't they surrounded, at this point, with no escape route?
> 
> In practice that might be what's about to happen, but my understanding is barring some sort of desperate Ukrainian assault to claw back territory and open a channel to send in reinforcements, I don't know if they have alternatives.


They don't but this is an event 45 days in the making. Has there ever been a significant delivery of supplies to the forces in Mariupol?


----------



## Drew

Randy said:


> They don't but this is an event 45 days in the making. Has there ever been a significant delivery of supplies to the forced in Mariupol?


That i can't tell you.


----------



## devastone

Xaios said:


> What? Dude, within the past six months, there were hundreds of Americans camped out on the grassy knoll, chanting the Pledge of Allegiance as if it were a magical summoning incantation, waiting for freaking _JFK Jr._ to magically appear as if he hadn't been dead for over 20 years to declare his allegiance to Donald Trump, and that the two of them would then suddenly re-take the White House.
> 
> Compared to that, the notion that the majority of Russians buy into the lie that they're fighting for a righteous cause in Ukraine is so believable it's practically banal.



Touche'


----------



## PK317

There is a post published by father of some russian sailor, who served on "Moskva" sheep. They couldn't get ahold of him for some time, and now his son listed as missing. But according to russian authorities, all the sailors were safely evacuated, that is hard to believe, honestly.
Anyway, the ironic thing is, that based on his VK (kind of russian facebook), this father seems to be very supportive of the invasion. Well, I may sound like an evil now, but that is the price of such support.


----------



## Legion

One thing that blows my fucking mind as an outsider who was always told about the Unstoppable Military Might of Mother Russia: the sheer incompetence demonstrated by the Russian military is so jarring it beggars belief. 
If what I was told while I was a child was even remotely true, this should have been over in a week. Before anyone had any chance to respond. But here we are.


----------



## AMOS

Back during the Chernobyl incident the Gorbachev regime had the Ukrainians outdoors playing like nothing happened. Another great example of how they lie about current events. if the Russian people were as armed as we are they could rise up and take down those clowns, starting with Putin. The beauty of having the RKBA.


----------



## Legion

AMOS said:


> Back during the Chernobyl incident the Gorbachev regime had the Ukrainians outdoors playing like nothing happened. Another great example of how they lie about current events. if the Russian people were as armed as we are they could rise up and take down those clowns, starting with Putin. The beauty of having the RKBA.


Nah, they'd get drone struck into oblivion. I see this a lot, "if they had guns they could rise up against tyranny". Arguments like this really seem to underestimate state power and its capacity to brutally put down and snuff out any resistance. As incompetent as the Russian military appears to be, I'd wager they'd be more than capable of crushing an armed domestic revolt, it would just lead to loss of a lot more life.


----------



## AMOS

Legion said:


> Nah, they'd get drone struck into oblivion. I see this a lot, "if they had guns they could rise up against tyranny". Arguments like this really seem to underestimate state power and its capacity to brutally put down and snuff out any resistance. As incompetent as the Russian military appears to be, I'd wager they'd be more than capable of crushing an armed domestic revolt, it would just lead to loss of a lot more life.


The police and militaries of most countries would back the people. I think even the Russian military would refuse to cause widespread death among their own population, it would lead to a coup against the govt. They going to nuke their own military and civilian population in order to prevail? Then what.


----------



## Randy




----------



## Legion

AMOS said:


> The police and militaries of most countries would back the people.



I VIGOROUSLY disagree with this. I see direct evidence to the contrary both here in the US as well as back in my home country (and many more examples from Africa and the middle east). The police and military absolutely act as extensions of the state. 

That being said, I'll acknowledge that we're all speculating here. I'm just glad that the bloodshed isn't worse, and heartbroken that it even happened to the extent that it did.


----------



## Flappydoodle

PK317 said:


> There is a post published by father of some russian sailor, who served on "Moskva" sheep. They couldn't get ahold of him for some time, and now his son listed as missing. But according to russian authorities, all the sailors were safely evacuated, that is hard to believe, honestly.
> Anyway, the ironic thing is, that based on his VK (kind of russian facebook), this father seems to be very supportive of the invasion. Well, I may sound like an evil now, but that is the price of such support.



BBC identified at least 30 families who have missing soldiers.



Legion said:


> One thing that blows my fucking mind as an outsider who was always told about the Unstoppable Military Might of Mother Russia: the sheer incompetence demonstrated by the Russian military is so jarring it beggars belief.
> If what I was told while I was a child was even remotely true, this should have been over in a week. Before anyone had any chance to respond. But here we are.



Well, yes and no. I agree with you that they've been very shit so far. However, they're still going to win and achieve their objectives eventually. Larger, totally willing to use brutality and terrorism and don't give a shit about casualties on their side or the civilians on the other side. The only way to force a loss is by starving them economically and technologically. With enough destruction of their equipment and inability to resupply (like their guided missiles need micro-chips from Korea and Taiwan, now banned), that *might* do it.



Legion said:


> I VIGOROUSLY disagree with this. I see direct evidence to the contrary both here in the US as well as back in my home country (and many more examples from Africa and the middle east). The police and military absolutely act as extensions of the state.
> 
> That being said, I'll acknowledge that we're all speculating here. I'm just glad that the bloodshed isn't worse, and heartbroken that it even happened to the extent that it did.



Think it depends what "side" the police end up on. If they are still given privileged status, they may go along. But if they end up with themselves and their families lumped in with the plebs, they'll quickly rebel.

In the UK, I can say with confidence that the police would not be used against the general public. We have a strong rule of law where the PM himself can be investigated and punished by the police.


----------



## Adieu

Legion said:


> One thing that blows my fucking mind as an outsider who was always told about the Unstoppable Military Might of Mother Russia: the sheer incompetence demonstrated by the Russian military is so jarring it beggars belief.
> If what I was told while I was a child was even remotely true, this should have been over in a week. Before anyone had any chance to respond. But here we are.



No, this was all well-known

Russian army is like a weak, sad, half-looted and half-dilapidated knockoff of the Soviet army, which itself had shockingly low levels of training, little to no tactics and strategy, very bad cooperation and coordination between units, a rigid command structure where no one questions idiotic decisions, and a tradition of fighting like a disorganized horde with a death wish

Analysts just don't like to "dwell" on the weakness of likely threats since their jobs depend on their perceived might


----------



## Adieu

Remember, Stalin lost to Finland. FINLAND, population the size of one big city.

And the current Russian army doesn't even have the ideology, fanaticism, or sheer terror of their own superiors that drove Stalin's troops.


----------



## StevenC

AMOS said:


> Back during the Chernobyl incident the Gorbachev regime had the Ukrainians outdoors playing like nothing happened. Another great example of how they lie about current events. if the Russian people were as armed as we are they could rise up and take down those clowns, starting with Putin. The beauty of having the RKBA.


No matter how many topics you say this on, it won't miraculously become true


----------



## AMOS

StevenC said:


> No matter how many topics you say this on, it won't miraculously become true


If you're happy with how they do things in Northern Ireland that's all that matters. But anything about how we do things here is none of your business, with all due respects.


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> Remember, Stalin lost to Finland. FINLAND, population the size of one big city.
> 
> And the current Russian army doesn't even have the ideology, fanaticism, or sheer terror of their own superiors that drove Stalin's troops.


Thinking about it, there are a lot of parallels between the Winter War in the late 1930's and the was in Ukraine now:

1. Stalin made a public addresse declaring that Finland was not a real country.
2. The USSR claimed that Finnish territory was necessary to form a buffer between USSR territory and the West.
3. Prior to the war, Stalin had several Finnish activists secretly assassinated.
4. The USSR started out trying to claim that they only wanted the Hanko Peninsula and the extreme eastern part of Finland.
5. Military operations started with the USSR claiming that they were not planning to invade, but sent a ton of troops to the border for "drills," then kicked off the firefight with a false flag.
6. The USSR proceeded bombing civilians, and when the international diplomats were upset, the USSR tried to claim that they were only trying to aid the civilian population that was being repressed and abused by the Finnish government.
7. The USSR sent a cruiser to the coast, which was attacked by Finnish missiles and heavily damaged, embarrassing the Soviet navy.
8. The League of Nations failed to get involved beyond stating outrage at the invasion.
9. The Allies planned to step in, but kept making excuses, and ultimately never became actively involved.

It looks like Putin is using the same playbook Stalin used. Where Stalin might have had a good excuse that many of these things worked in capturing the Baltic states, Putin is insane, because he has the hindsight that none of these plays worked against Finland, but he's trying the same course of action in Ukraine. If only Putin's underlings had learned a little more about history, they could have seen how dumb all of this was from the beginning and known that they would ultimately fail and be strung up by Putin.


----------



## StevenC

AMOS said:


> If you're happy with how they do things in Northern Ireland that's all that matters. But anything about how we do things here is none of your business, with all due respects.


You're literally talking about how things should be in Russia.

But while we're on the topic, yeah things are way better here in Northern Ireland than America.


----------



## jaxadam

StevenC said:


> yeah things are way better here in Northern Ireland than America.


----------



## mbardu

Flappydoodle said:


> We have a strong rule of law where the PM himself can be investigated and punished by the police.



In light of the events of the last few months and the BoJo Admin, and their absolute lack of respect for law enforcement and the public at large, I absolutely just love this joke of a sentence  .

Thank you for making us laugh with this levity in the midst of the awful Ukrainian tragedy.


----------



## AMOS

StevenC said:


> You're literally talking about how things should be in Russia.
> 
> But while we're on the topic, yeah things are way better here in Northern Ireland than America.


Are they really? I remember the Irish Catholic bigots and the way they treated my family in Plymouth Massachusetts. They hated everyone that weren't Irish Catholics and they made no secret about it. Tolerance at it's absolute finest. Not to mention they brought their problems with them from Ireland.


----------



## tedtan

AMOS said:


> Are they really? I remember the Irish Catholic bigots and the way they treated my family in Plymouth Massachusetts. They hated everyone that weren't Irish Catholics and they made no secret about it. Tolerance at it's absolute finest. Not to mention they brought their problems with them from Ireland.


In fairness, the “‘Irish’ Catholic bigots“ in Plymouth are Americans, not Irish.


----------



## StevenC

AMOS said:


> Are they really? I remember the Irish Catholic bigots and the way they treated my family in Plymouth Massachusetts. They hated everyone that weren't Irish Catholics and they made no secret about it. Tolerance at it's absolute finest. Not to mention they brought their problems with them from Ireland.


Wow, sounds like you have a lot of experience of Ireland.


----------



## AMOS

tedtan said:


> In fairness, the “‘Irish’ Catholic bigots“ in Plymouth are Americans, not Irish.


Following a bigoted Irish philosophy


----------



## bostjan

There's a certain irony in any statement that calls out an entire ethnic group for being bigotted as part of an argument of how great your country is in comparison to another, all within a thread about problems between two other nations completely unrelated to any of that discussion. 

So, it's been more than 5.5 hours since the Russian military's deadline of "surrender or else" in Mariupol. I haven't heard any updates. I guess the "or else" part was that they keep fighting. I'm not sure what the point of the ultimatum was, considering it's widely reported that the Russian military isn't even taking prisoners, but rather just murdering POWs and civilians alike.


----------



## narad

I grew up eating Lucky Charms so I feel like I'm at least equally as qualified as AMOS to make sweeping generalizations of the Irish / life in Ireland vs. US.

I'll say, man, when I was in Ireland people were way happier and welcoming than I've experienced in American since like... maybe forever.


----------



## tedtan

Ireland and Northern Ireland had their Troubles, but that was _mostly_ the 60s through the late 90s. They’ve both been on a much better trajectory for the past 20-25 years.


----------



## ArtDecade

No one hates "Irish Catholics" more than Irish Catholics.


----------



## Drew

bostjan said:


> 8. The League of Nations failed to get involved beyond stating outrage at the invasion.
> 9. The Allies planned to step in, but kept making excuses, and ultimately never became actively involved.
> 
> It looks like Putin is using the same playbook Stalin used. Where Stalin might have had a good excuse that many of these things worked in capturing the Baltic states, Putin is insane, because he has the hindsight that none of these plays worked against Finland, but he's trying the same course of action in Ukraine. If only Putin's underlings had learned a little more about history, they could have seen how dumb all of this was from the beginning and known that they would ultimately fail and be strung up by Putin.


Just to explicitly cross t's and dot i's here for anyone reading this, the Winter War is broadly considered the campaign that opened the Cold War.


----------



## Drew

Legion said:


> I VIGOROUSLY disagree with this. I see direct evidence to the contrary both here in the US as well as back in my home country (and many more examples from Africa and the middle east). The police and military absolutely act as extensions of the state.
> 
> That being said, I'll acknowledge that we're all speculating here. I'm just glad that the bloodshed isn't worse, and heartbroken that it even happened to the extent that it did.


This is a little complicated here, I think, in that like anything in America politics plays a part too. There's certainly a large faction of the police, based on Blue Lives Matter and Punisher skull bumper stickers and the like, who would very likely back "the people" against a Democrat, but "the state" against Trump. They're hardly homogenized, but not for nothing a lot of major police unions - groups that tend to be a little authoritarian anyway on the subject of law enforcement, and pro-police-state - were lining up for Trump in 2020.


----------



## profwoot

Drew said:


> This is a little complicated here, I think, in that like anything in America politics plays a part too. There's certainly a large faction of the police, based on Blue Lives Matter and Punisher skull bumper stickers and the like, who would very likely back "the people" against a Democrat, but "the state" against Trump. They're hardly homogenized, but not for nothing a lot of major police unions - groups that tend to be a little authoritarian anyway on the subject of law enforcement, and pro-police-state - were lining up for Trump in 2020.


This is my fear. Not sure it's quite that bad yet, but that's certainly the current leaning. A recent study showed that cops are way more conservative than the people they police, which was bound to happen. Also showed that cops who identify as conservative are more likely to beat and/or kill the people they police, as I recall.


----------



## Drew

profwoot said:


> This is my fear. Not sure it's quite that bad yet, but that's certainly the current leaning. A recent study showed that cops are way more conservative than the people they police, which was bound to happen. Also showed that cops who identify as conservative are more likely to beat and/or kill the people they police, as I recall.


I mean, you pretty much don't become a cop unless you're no less than neutral on the modern police state. There are probably exceptions out there, but just enough to prove the rule.


----------



## bostjan

Drew said:


> Just to explicitly cross t's and dot i's here for anyone reading this, the Winter War is broadly considered the campaign that opened the Cold War.


Literally and figuratively. Although IIRC, the USA was hands-off at that point, unlike after WWII, so a lot of US-based texts regarding the Cold War pin it to the end of WWII. But the Winter War was quite heavily linked to both WWII and the CW. That makes the rhetoric from Russia that this already is WWIII all the more concerning.



profwoot said:


> This is my fear. Not sure it's quite that bad yet, but that's certainly the current leaning. A recent study showed that cops are way more conservative than the people they police, which was bound to happen. Also showed that cops who identify as conservative are more likely to beat and/or kill the people they police, as I recall.


I have a weird perspective about this. I have some cops on my dad's side of the family who are the more old-fashioned conservatives. Probably pretty moderate by today's standards. Then I have in-laws who are cops and much more toward the Qanon fringe. Then I live in VT, the state that's poor, relative to the rest of New England, 98% white, 57% liberal (compared to 18% conservative), and the cops here, as a matter of publicity, are somewhat liberal. Probably less liberal than the general population, but definitely liberal enough to release statements condemning the treatment of George Floyd. And the police in my town even organized a protest, but, weirdly and also weirdly unsurprisingly, the protesters did a march around town, went back to the police station, and the police told everyone, "okay, that's the protest, now go home," but the protesters didn't go home. Things started getting out of hand when protesters started blocking traffic, which led to one of the officers shoving some of the protesters and making a number of arrests. The officers involved publicly apologized a few days later.

But yeah, this is a sore subject for me. I grew up in Detroit. I personally knew three people who were shot and killed by police officers there. The only time in my own life when I've had a gun pointed at me, it was a police officer holding the gun. If I hadn't been a kid at the time, or if I had been playing with a squirt gun or holding any sort of object, I likely wouldn't be here today. The cops in cities like Detroit in the 1980's were not only okay with shooting unarmed people, but they were also evidently okay with hiding it. I don't know how it pertains to European countries, but it's clear to me that it doesn't take much for people with a little bit of authority to abuse it. And as far as the police protecting people, look up _Lozito v New York City_. A man was stabbed in the subway whilst two of New York's finest, armed, watched the attack, then turned and moved to hide in the subway motorman's booth, locking the door. The stabbing victim asked the police for help to no avail, then defended himself against the attacker. Although he was unarmed, he managed to subdue the knife-wielding man, after sustaining multiple stab wounds to the head, neck, and torso. The victim tried to sue the NYPD for negligence, stating that the man who attacked him was wanted for an active killing spree, but the judge dismissed the case, stating that the police have no legal duty to protect anyone. So much for "to protect and to serve," I guess.


----------



## StevenC

narad said:


> I grew up eating Lucky Charms so I feel like I'm at least equally as qualified as AMOS to make sweeping generalizations of the Irish / life in Ireland vs. US.
> 
> I'll say, man, when I was in Ireland people were way happier and welcoming than I've experienced in American since like... maybe forever.


And the burritos are better too!


ArtDecade said:


> No one hates "Irish Catholics" more than Irish Catholics.


Can confirm.


----------



## AMOS

bostjan said:


> There's a certain irony in any statement that calls out an entire ethnic group for being bigotted as part of an argument of how great your country is in comparison to another, all within a thread about problems between two other nations completely unrelated to any of that discussion.
> 
> So, it's been more than 5.5 hours since the Russian military's deadline of "surrender or else" in Mariupol. I haven't heard any updates. I guess the "or else" part was that they keep fighting. I'm not sure what the point of the ultimatum was, considering it's widely reported that the Russian military isn't even taking prisoners, but rather just murdering POWs and civilians alike.


It fucking pisses me off when someone puts down the place I live, when their own country can't live in peace, then their immigrants bring their problems here. This happened in the 1970's but It has a way of traveling through life with you, just ask the blacks about that one. My apologies to anyone I've offended but I'm definitely out of here. Guitar forums shouldn't have politics, period!


----------



## ArtDecade

AMOS said:


> It fucking pisses me off when someone puts down the place I live, when their own country can't live in peace, then their immigrants bring their problems here. This happened in the 1970's but It has a way of traveling through life with you, just ask the blacks about that one. My apologies to anyone I've offended but I'm definitely out of here. Guitar forums shouldn't have politics, period!



Quick! Someone find me a _black_. I have a question about bigotry that needs an immediate answer.


----------



## Adieu

What genius troll derailed this into a discussion of ethnic, social, and religious strife in English-speaking countries?

Ukraine. War. Focus.


----------



## Xaios

Adieu said:


> Ukraine. War. Focus.


----------



## nightflameauto

Adieu said:


> What genius troll derailed this into a discussion of ethnic, social, and religious strife in English-speaking countries?
> 
> Ukraine. War. Focus.


Dude,
It's tough to remain perpetually offended on a subject where 99.99% of the forum agrees. Thus, ethnic, race, social, blah blah blah is thrown out by the people that have a vested interest in making sure the subject isn't actually discussed in a rational manner.

Sincerely,
Meh. Just another day.


----------



## bostjan

bostjan said:


> So, it's been more than 5.5 hours since the Russian military's deadline of "surrender or else" in Mariupol. I haven't heard any updates. I guess the "or else" part was that they keep fighting. I'm not sure what the point of the ultimatum was, considering it's widely reported that the Russian military isn't even taking prisoners, but rather just murdering POWs and civilians alike.


Reports from Ukraine are stating that precisely zero Ukrainians surrendered. Russia has yet to announce what "or else" means.

Meanwhile, Kiev officials have arranged an evacuation to get as many civilians out of Mariupol as possible. It's not clear yet whether the evacuation is already underway or not.


----------



## Drew

Worth keeping an eye on - a while ago we were talking about the recovery of the ruble as a proxy for how well Russia is weathering the sanctions. I'd say there are plenty of reasons not to do that, mostly having to do with how Russia is doing everything they can to prop up the ruble and maintain their own foreign currency reserves, including trying to force counterparties to pay for oil in rubles, bought from Russia. Here's another example.

The Credit Derivatives Determination Committee just deemed Russia in potential default over the April 4th interest payments on dollar-denominated bonds, as Russia paid in rubles and the bond covenants were clear that payments must occur in USD. They have a 30 day grace period, ending May 4th, to pay in dollars; if they fail, they will have defaulted on their debt.

So, yeah, Russia is now about two weeks from sovereign default as a result of these sanctions, unless they're willing to start depleting their limited foreign currency reserves. And, if they do, with limited ways to obtain dollars that won't undercut the value of the ruble (selling rubles and buying dollars, accepting payments in dollars and in turn slashing global demand for rubles), they will either face a currency crisis all over again, a default, or, probably, both.

EDIT - also, with the degree to which their participation in SWIFT, the interbank communications and settlement network, has been constrained, they might not even be able to pay in dollars if theyu want to.


----------



## bostjan

Drew said:


> Worth keeping an eye on - a while ago we were talking about the recovery of the ruble as a proxy for how well Russia is weathering the sanctions. I'd say there are plenty of reasons not to do that, mostly having to do with how Russia is doing everything they can to prop up the ruble and maintain their own foreign currency reserves, including trying to force counterparties to pay for oil in rubles, bought from Russia. Here's another example.
> 
> The Credit Derivatives Determination Committee just deemed Russia in potential default over the April 4th interest payments on dollar-denominated bonds, as Russia paid in rubles and the bond covenants were clear that payments must occur in USD. They have a 30 day grace period, ending May 4th, to pay in dollars; if they fail, they will have defaulted on their debt.
> 
> So, yeah, Russia is now about two weeks from sovereign default as a result of these sanctions, unless they're willing to start depleting their limited foreign currency reserves. And, if they do, with limited ways to obtain dollars that won't undercut the value of the ruble (selling rubles and buying dollars, accepting payments in dollars and in turn slashing global demand for rubles), they will either face a currency crisis all over again, a default, or, probably, both.
> 
> EDIT - also, with the degree to which their participation in SWIFT, the interbank communications and settlement network, has been constrained, they might not even be able to pay in dollars if theyu want to.


What happens if Russia defaults by not paying in the proper currency? Do you think investors would try to bargain with the government or would they just up and leave? Or maybe it depends?


----------



## Drew

bostjan said:


> What happens if Russia defaults by not paying in the proper currency? Do you think investors would try to bargain with the government or would they just up and leave? Or maybe it depends?


Honestly, some of this is probably semantics, when you get right down to it. But -

1) By being considered in default on a debt obligation, it becomes considerably harder/more expensive for Russia to sell sovereign debt in the global capital markets subsequently. If they want to borrow ever again, it will be a lot more expensive, and will probably _have_ to be in a currency other than rubles (the fact they were issuing USD-based debt wasn't a great sign to begin with, as that indicates there's enough of a spread to matter between what they can borrow debt paying in dollars, vs debt paying in rubles)

2) By defaulting, both these bonds, and any other Russian sovereign debt, becomes close to worthless. I say close because it becomes a matter of valuing by the recovery value either in debt restructuring or a lawsuit. 

Normally these are pretty big deals, but, well, Russia is already cut out of the capital markets framework and would have a very hard time selling sovereign bonds _anyway_, and the secondary market for Russian assets is pretty much nonexistent at the moment based on sanctions. Honestly it's probably more surprising to me that they tried to make ruble payments in the first place, maybe they still thought, back on 4/4, that this was all going to blow over somehow?

I suppose it's possible you could, say, see China buy up a lot of Russian debt, agree to accept payment in rubles, and then turn around and use the proceeds to buy oil, but that would be risking a fair amount of international ire, and Russia would probably rather have China pay them directly in yuan just to boost their foreign currency reserves.

Kind of an interesting question though - most of the usual incentives to meet debt payments are right out the window here. For perspective here, while Russia has defaulted on domestic debt in the past, they hadn't defaulted on international debt since 1918 when in the Russian Revolution incoming Soviets decided they were under no obligation to honor Tsarist debt. They eventually had to honor these debts as part of a debt restructuring after the collapse of the Soviet Union, but one could argue this was a pretty major turning point in turning the West against communism coming into the modern era.


----------



## Xaios

No wonder Putin seems nostalgic for the old Soviet days. Seems like he's realized that capitalist Russia is going to collapse in only half the time that the USSR took, and when you manage to make the utter incompetence of Soviet bureaucracy look good by comparison, you know you done fucked up.


----------



## BMFan30

ToolmasterOfBrainerd said:


> You all are prolific! It took a month and a half, but I finally caught up to the front of this thread. I think I started around page 15. Lots of interesting information here.
> 
> Whew.
> 
> There hasn't been a post from @BMFan30 in awhile... you okay?


Yeah I just took time off the pc to focus on myself, lifting and stop drinking for a while since learning of the news about the war. Thanks for asking.


AMOS said:


> When did 9/11 turn out to be an inside job? Are those silly youtube videos considered proof? I've seen all the conspiracy theories, it was Bush, it was Israel, it was the CIA. You have some proof to back this up?


So just a question, you believe some hungover habibs down from the gas station really hopped on a plane and were able to fly and manuever it into a building. What's with all the controlled demolition stuff? Also why were so many floors at the top closed off and security was lifted with workers in there right before the explosion? You really don't think it was because of the price of oil, really?

Lol, you believe mainstream news if you want but inside jobs aren't a myth anymore. People have long woke up to domestic terrorists instead of believing the government wasn't able to catch and stop it from happening when they surveilled the inside of your asshole for days and can see the fibrous corn coming out your asshole before you do.

But keep dreaming dude. Seek the answers outside of mainstream propaganda yourself, I'm not going to do your homework or point out obvious CGI, neither.



fantom said:


> Defend all you want. I support it. I find it equally sad that Russian soldiers are starving on expired rations and getting frostbite due to lack of shelter as I do when I see a building getting leveled with civilians inside. Those soldiers are just pawns who are uninformed or afraid of standing up to their government.


I never said I don't have sympathy for Russian people that are brainwashed into believing what their news tells them either. Or the soldiers that are left for dead with botulism waiting for them in their MRE. It's how propaganda and lies work, in order for propaganda to operate, someone must believe in it first.



fantom said:


> As for 9/11, it was just as much an "inside job" as those tanks and mortars shelling your nuclear facilities. Aside from the horrible inaccuracy there...
> 
> Americans didn't support invading Afghanistan. Many Americans, including republicans, didn't want a war. Many Americans supported the government doing something to make sure the Taliban was accountable.
> 
> So I understand why you want Russian leadership accountable. I still don't think it makes sense to wish death on a bunch of ignorant 20 year olds that got tricked into this war.


I was over generalizing to make a point, not lump all individuals and their vastly different opinions on topics and how much they know about it into one category. I do want Russian leadership accountable, but I don't want regular Russians accountable. 

Same as I don't blame American citizens for any war they started or any country they invaded because that was their leaders, not people like me and you. In order for a false flag to work, someone needs to get blamed and then people need to follow that lie for that propaganda to fly as well. 

As I mentioned in the reply above you regarding 9/11 which is the event that made me realize that mainstream news lies. The next event that fully woke me up was Sandy Hook when I looked deeper than what the MSM was telling me on the squared up idiot box.

Regarding my previous points about dragging NATO into a full blown war which I didn't think might happen. I've since then chjanged my mind and want NATO to physically stay out of it. They are doing enough with training, donating and sending weapons/ medical aid.


----------



## BMFan30

bostjan said:


> You mean in congress? Definitely a lot of American people were against the Afghanistan War, but I don't doubt that the majority were for it. People really wanted revenge. Turned out Afghanistan had little to do with 911, bin Laden was in Pakistan, the regime change enacted by Americans only lasted until the exact second American troops withdrew (all just as I had predicted), so I guess democracy is dumb when you don't have a hard framework around it. But, then again, there are hard rules around declaring war, and the US government skirted them all.
> 
> As for 911, I don't think it "turned out" anything. As time moves forward, there is more and more evidence of what we all knew all along, which was that the Bush administration was willfully ignorant and stubborn about everything. I'm not sure what that proves, though, beyond the fact that the Bush administration was unfit to have ever been in power, which was another thing I had been saying all along. Not that I'm some sort of Nostradamus or anything, it was all really painfully obvious and simple observations that anyone would have been able to make if the American people hadn't also chosen to be willfully ignorant at that time.


Yeah when I was referring to Americans, I meant the leadership. Not it's citizens. Americans are good people, some like Russians are caught under the crush of mainstream news and are have their opinions swayed but that goes does down in every country known to humanity. Look at how many Russians support the "special military operation" for example. Without propaganda there would be no war because we would have truth but that's never the case unfortunately.


Dumple Stilzkin said:


> I never supported that war and there are others who didn’t as well. Way to assume.


I wasn't trying to make it look like I was lodging every individual into one category. I was just making a point that for every person that didn't believe the bullshit and didn't support the war there was just as many to match them who believed the propaganda like the Z supporting Russians at large events cheering the death of Ukrainians.

Definitely not assuming every American citizen believed they should go to war with another country as I knew better since I knew Americans that didn't.


profwoot said:


>


LOL Sorry I wasn't trying to make it look like every American backed, was trying to make a strong point but I over did it cause I know not everyone supported that shit in reality. Just saying the propaganda machine doesn't sleep, people believe it so it works.

Anyways that's all the replies I have for the missed notifications in this thread since I've been gone so I'm sorry if after page 4 of notifications I missed your response as it didn't show up in my inbox. Feels good to be back though and feel free to write me again if I glossed over anyone's point.


----------



## profwoot

BMFan30 said:


> So just a question, you believe some hungover habibs down from the gas station really hopped on a plane and were able to fly and manuever it into a building. What's with all the controlled demolition stuff? Also why were so many floors at the top closed off and security was lifted with workers in there right before the explosion? You really don't think it was because of the price of oil, really?
> 
> Lol, you believe mainstream news if you want but inside jobs aren't a myth anymore. People have long woke up to domestic terrorists instead of believing the government wasn't able to catch and stop it from happening when they surveilled the inside of your asshole for days and can see the fibrous corn coming out your asshole before you do.
> 
> But keep dreaming dude. Seek the answers outside of mainstream propaganda yourself, I'm not going to do your homework or point out obvious CGI, neither.


I really mean no offense, but you're not thinking rationally about this. Look, I know how hard it can be to get out from under that type of thing; certainty is a drug, and certainty about seeeeecret knowledge that _they_ don't want you to know is straight heroin. This is a defect of the human brain that everyone must wrestle with from time to time. But have you actually read about 9/11 from the point of view of actual experts? Be honest with yourself and consider whether you have really sought out real explanations with the same fervor as the internet conspiracy ones. If not, I get it -- studying the real nuts and bolts of a thing doesn't come with the dopamine flood, and can actually cause great discomfort if you humble yourself and _learn_ enough to disabuse yourself of what are, ultimately, childish notions born of ignorance and fundamental misunderstanding of a wide range of fields of inquiry. But if you ever want to be taken seriously on a topic in the broader marketplace of ideas, you really need to do it.


----------



## Drew

profwoot said:


> I really mean no offense, but you're not thinking rationally about this. Look, I know how hard it can be to get out from under that type of thing; certainty is a drug, and certainty about seeeeecret knowledge that _they_ don't want you to know is straight heroin. This is a defect of the human brain that everyone must wrestle with from time to time. But have you actually read about 9/11 from the point of view of actual experts? Be honest with yourself and consider whether you have really sought out real explanations with the same fervor as the internet conspiracy ones. If not, I get it -- studying the real nuts and bolts of a thing doesn't come with the dopamine flood, and can actually cause great discomfort if you humble yourself and _learn_ enough to disabuse yourself of what are, ultimately, childish notions born of ignorance and fundamental misunderstanding of a wide range of fields of inquiry. But if you ever want to be taken seriously on a topic in the broader marketplace of ideas, you really need to do it.


Everyone loves to put on their tinfoil had and go all JeT fUeL dOeSn'T bUrN hOt EnOuGh To MeLt StEeL bEaMs and all that, and that's technically true... but they also lose like 90% of their structural integrity at the temperature jet fuel DOES burn, and if they're supposed to be supporting the building, then yeah, if you heat them up enough so that they soften up enough to begin to bend, then tha's a BiG fUcKiNg PrObLeM for the building not falling down.


----------



## Drew

BMFan30 said:


> Yeah I just took time off the pc to focus on myself, lifting and stop drinking for a while since learning of the news about the war. Thanks for asking.


Glad you're ok, dude.


----------



## oversteve

Someone got persecuted in Russia for wearing these sneakers...


----------



## StevenC

oversteve said:


> Someone got persecuted in Russia for wearing these sneakers...


Putin is supporting Denver in the NBA, I assume.


----------



## oversteve




----------



## DiezelMonster

I've been watching a lot of Vlad Vexler's YouTube videos lately, this one is particularly good


----------



## BMFan30

profwoot said:


> I really mean no offense, but you're not thinking rationally about this. Look, I know how hard it can be to get out from under that type of thing; certainty is a drug, and certainty about seeeeecret knowledge that _they_ don't want you to know is straight heroin. This is a defect of the human brain that everyone must wrestle with from time to time. But have you actually read about 9/11 from the point of view of actual experts? Be honest with yourself and consider whether you have really sought out real explanations with the same fervor as the internet conspiracy ones. If not, I get it -- studying the real nuts and bolts of a thing doesn't come with the dopamine flood, and can actually cause great discomfort if you humble yourself and _learn_ enough to disabuse yourself of what are, ultimately, childish notions born of ignorance and fundamental misunderstanding of a wide range of fields of inquiry. But if you ever want to be taken seriously on a topic in the broader marketplace of ideas, you really need to do it.


Lol whut? None taken, I got no dopamine fix from doing any research about such a historic and negative topic. I was just shocked that such a thing went down and how many people said they heard multiple explosions. Plus the thing went down in a controlled demolition just like every other video I saw of a controlled demolition.

Also Building 7, explain how that went down in a controlled demotion. Also the Pentagon that had reports of government employees with CP on their computers just before that got hit too. Just too many things don't add up.

I just use my brain to figure things out instead of following MSM and what lies they have to spew. You can use as many smart words as possible to derail the information that you can find yourself but you will gloss over experts talking about controlled demolitions and such. I don't even want to change your mind, believe what you want to, as I will do myself. Anyways I don't even want to derail the thread into another subject I'm just saying.


----------



## profwoot

BMFan30 said:


> Lol whut? None taken, I got no dopamine fix from doing any research about such a historic and negative topic. I was just shocked that such a thing went down and how many people said they heard multiple explosions. Plus the thing went down in a controlled demolition just like every other video I saw of a controlled demolition.
> 
> Also Building 7, explain how that went down in a controlled demotion. Also the Pentagon that had reports of government employees with CP on their computers just before that got hit too. Just too many things don't add up.
> 
> I just use my brain to figure things out instead of following MSM and what lies they have to spew. You can use as many smart words as possible to derail the information that you can find yourself but you will gloss over experts talking about controlled demolitions and such. I don't even want to change your mind, believe what you want to, as I will do myself. Anyways I don't even want to derail the thread into another subject I'm just saying.


I've quite thoroughly studied each of the conspiracy bullets you've parroted, and from pro-conspiracy sources, so I'm familiar with all the detailed reasons why you're so certain you're right. You should therefore consider why you immediately assume I'm a sheep that only gulps down what the "MSM" feeds me, and why you sound exactly like a Qanon/flat earther while doing so. Ironically, the difference is that I actually did think about it for myself rather than simply believing what the internet kooks fed me. 

For example, you seem to believe that the experts agree with you that controlled demolition is what brought down the towers. The only way you could believe that is if your only window into the expert community is via grifters presenting a couple fellow grifters who happen to work in relevant fields as if they represent the consensus of those fields. That's why you simply must actually research it for yourself, from _credible_ sources (and no, that doesn't mean "MSM"; watching tv doesn't count as research, and which "MSM" outlet ever talks about it anymore anyway?).

Anyway, I know you won't anytime soon, because that's not how it works. You might reconsider someday.


----------



## BMFan30

profwoot said:


> I've quite thoroughly studied each of the conspiracy bullets you've parroted, and from pro-conspiracy sources, so I'm familiar with all the detailed reasons why you're so certain you're right. You should therefore consider why you immediately assume I'm a sheep that only gulps down what the "MSM" feeds me, and why you sound exactly like a Qanon/flat earther while doing so. Ironically, the difference is that I actually did think about it for myself rather than simply believing what the internet kooks fed me.
> 
> For example, you seem to believe that the experts agree with you that controlled demolition is what brought down the towers. The only way you could believe that is if your only window into the expert community is via grifters presenting a couple fellow grifters who happen to work in relevant fields as if they represent the consensus of those fields. That's why you simply must actually research it for yourself, from _credible_ sources (and no, that doesn't mean "MSM"; watching tv doesn't count as research, and which "MSM" outlet ever talks about it anymore anyway?).
> 
> Anyway, I know you won't anytime soon, because that's not how it works. You might reconsider someday.


Sounds like troll leftie stuffs, so lets not defaill threads and stick to ukraine stuffs mang amitrit or amirite? I don't even want to convince you like I said before. We can agree to disagree and I will be alright mang. Believe whatever you want to man, it's legal in your country member?


----------



## narad

The idea of how people will believe far-fetched things if it suits their motives is kind of at the core of the Ukraine ops though. Ukraine as a nazi country, 9/11 as an inside job, skunk ape... all the same idea, just different miscalibrations of "what is possible" vs. "what is likely".


----------



## Flappydoodle

mbardu said:


> In light of the events of the last few months and the BoJo Admin, and their absolute lack of respect for law enforcement and the public at large, I absolutely just love this joke of a sentence  .
> 
> Thank you for making us laugh with this levity in the midst of the awful Ukrainian tragedy.


Yes, it's dumb of the PM to go to a party during lockdown, and I'm not defending it, but I also don't consider it to be that important. Me, and I think everybody I know, broke the stupid Covid rules at some points. 

My point isn't that BoJo is an amazing guy or that he isn't a hypocrite. My point is that there *is/was* an impartial investigation going on, and even the PM himself was handed down a punishment exactly the same as you or I would have received. He is, of course, using legal means to defend/insulate himself, but you can't see him ordering the investigation to end, using intel services to do dirty work, or bribing/blackmailing his way out of it which would be totally normal in many other countries.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Anyway, on the Ukraine situation, it looks like the plan now is just to have a proper proxy war. We've gone beyond just defensive weaponry now, all within two weeks. 

The US is now supplying heavy weapons including artillery and drones. Some mysterious "coastal protection vehicles" too (maybe anti-submarine?). Maybe even some anti-air defence systems, which would also be extremely useful.

I'm not sure how to interpret this. I guess there are two possibilities:

1. The west feels that Ukraine is going to lose, and they're desperately trying to support them and prevent overwhelming Russian victory

2. The west smells weakness from Putin and an opportunity to really fuck him up. It's a show of faith in Ukraine that we believe these weapons will be used successfully and not simply lost or captured by the Russians.

Every tank the Ukranians blow up, or plane and helicopter they take down, is probably weakening Russia for many many years to come. Russia is going to find it difficult to replace this gear, especially with so many sanctions, including S Korea and Taiwan blocking microchip exports. So I think NATO countries are actually seeing this as an opportunity to deplete Russian resources.

It's also a great opportunity for intelligence gathering. Captured Russian drones, radios and other equipment are being sent to the UK for analysis - so I will expect Ukraine to soon have jamming technology and other counter-measures. MI6 and the CIA must be having a good time.


----------



## Flappydoodle

narad said:


> The idea of how people will believe far-fetched things if it suits their motives is kind of at the core of the Ukraine ops though. Ukraine as a nazi country, 9/11 as an inside job, skunk ape... all the same idea, just different miscalibrations of "what is possible" vs. "what is likely".


Propaganda/brainwashing is crazy strong. Nobody is immune from it.

Friend of mine worked in Russia for about 2 years. He even laughed about it, how shit it is, how dumb people are etc. But even now, after he left, he holds a sympathetic position towards Russia in this Ukraine conflict.

And that's a guy who grew up in a democracy, enjoyed all the modern luxuries of life, has access to censorship-free information. Some person growing up as a regular pleb inside Russia has zero chance.


----------



## Drew

profwoot said:


> For example, you seem to believe that the experts agree with you that controlled demolition is what brought down the towers. The only way you could believe that is if your only window into the expert community is via grifters presenting a couple fellow grifters who happen to work in relevant fields as if they represent the consensus of those fields. That's why you simply must actually research it for yourself, from _credible_ sources (and no, that doesn't mean "MSM"; watching tv doesn't count as research, and which "MSM" outlet ever talks about it anymore anyway?).


I think one thing @BMFan30 and a whole BUNCH of other conspiracy theory fans tend to underestimate is for ever one "expert" touting a controlled demolition, the sheer number of other experts who think that one whackjob is fucking crazy and doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about.


----------



## Xaios

Drew said:


> I think one thing @BMFan30 and a whole BUNCH of other conspiracy theory fans tend to underestimate is for ever one "expert" touting a controlled demolition, the sheer number of other experts who think that one whackjob is fucking crazy and doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about.


Part of the problem is that, whenever you see some kind of "debate" between experts of different positions, it intentionally obfuscates the ratio of experts who hold a certain position by having opposing debaters talking one-on-one. Showing a climate scientist debate about climate change with one expert who argues that anthropocentric climate change is real versus one who argues that it's fake gives the spectator the impression (often with fully disingenuous intent on the part of the organizer of said debate) that the general consensus among experts is also evenly split, when it's really about 99 to 1 in favor of those who argue that it's real.


----------



## Drew

Xaios said:


> Part of the problem is that, whenever you see some kind of "debate" between experts of different positions, it intentionally obfuscates the ratio of experts who hold a certain position by having opposing debaters talking one-on-one. Showing a climate scientist debate about climate change with one expert who argues that anthropocentric climate change is real versus one who argues that it's fake gives the spectator the impression (often with fully disingenuous intent on the part of the organizer of said debate) that the general consensus among experts is also evenly split, when it's really about 99 to 1 in favor of those who argue that it's real.


...and if you want to talk about "mainstream media bias," IMO this is where it's the most pronounced - their bias isn't left or right or center or anything like that (where there's a LOT of range but no clear dominant direction), so much as towards making stories _interesting_ and more engaging, and presenting a subject as one still being hotly debated with good points on both sides, rather than 99.5% of scientists believing climate change is real but disagreeing on how to model it, 0.25% unsure, and 0.25% not actually climate scientists, kind of like the dermatologists pushing anti-vax rhetoric, well... it's just not as good a story, "everyone believes man made climate change is occurring except these three industry shrills with degrees in psychology," as "climate debate rages in Washington."


----------



## wheresthefbomb

We've all heard of Occam's Razor, paraphrased here: _*"the proposition requiring the fewest assumptions in order to be true is the most likely be true."*_

But what about Occam's Blazer, or Occam's Smoking jacket? Indeed, when you want to get all the way down the nitty-gritty rabbit-hole, nothing will suffice but the finest attire, and a maxim to match:_* "the proposition presented with a preponderance of purportedly privileged particulars is the most likely to be true."*_


----------



## bostjan

Two major oil depots, a large chemical plant, and a defense institute have all recently broken out in flames in Russia. Russia is blaming Ukraine for the oil depots, but word on the street is that no one really knows. Since the infrastructure in Russia is old and dangerous, it's basically a coin flip odds as to whether these were accidental or deliberate. Even if deliberate, it'd be surprising if Ukraine could manage sabotage that deep into Russian territory. There are probably a lot of different groups who might have the motive to stage such attacks. Or it could be a combination of any of those things. We may never know. At least it doesn't seem to be a false flag by Russia, in these cases.


----------



## oversteve

bostjan said:


> Two major oil depots, a large chemical plant, and a defense institute have all recently broken out in flames in Russia. Russia is blaming Ukraine for the oil depots, but word on the street is that no one really knows. Since the infrastructure in Russia is old and dangerous, it's basically a coin flip odds as to whether these were accidental or deliberate. Even if deliberate, it'd be surprising if Ukraine could manage sabotage that deep into Russian territory. There are probably a lot of different groups who might have the motive to stage such attacks. Or it could be a combination of any of those things. We may never know. At least it doesn't seem to be a false flag by Russia, in these cases.


In most case these things are pretty easy to explain - covering stolen/missing supplies. You can't account for missing fuel or ammo if everything is on fire


----------



## bostjan

oversteve said:


> In most case these things are pretty easy to explain - covering stolen/missing supplies. You can't account for missing fuel or ammo if everything is on fire


I suppose that's the most likely explanation. The institute might have records of that fuel usage and the chemical plant maybe makes some fuel additives or might just be an unrelated coincidence.


----------



## devastone

wheresthefbomb said:


> We've all heard of Occam's Razor, paraphrased here: _*"the proposition requiring the fewest assumptions in order to be true is the most likely be true."*_
> 
> But what about Occam's Blazer, or Occam's Smoking jacket? Indeed, when you want to get all the way down the nitty-gritty rabbit-hole, nothing will suffice but the finest attire, and a maxim to match:_* "the proposition presented with a preponderance of purportedly privileged particulars is the most likely to be true."*_



William of Ockham didn't have the interwebs.


----------



## devastone

Double post.


----------



## BMFan30

Drew said:


> I think one thing @BMFan30 and a whole BUNCH of other conspiracy theory fans tend to underestimate is for ever one "expert" touting a controlled demolition, the sheer number of other experts who think that one whackjob is fucking crazy and doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about.


Fine, but what about Building 7 which didn't get hit with a plane but also got blown up that day? Does that not at all make you suspicious? Whether you're an expert or not, building 7 should make everybody raise their eyebrows...

I also find it laughable everyone that disagrees with me doesn't tackle the point head on. They just point and laugh, taking the easiest route. Anyone can do that shit my man. Want to discredit my points then direct message me and show me how building 7 went down on the same day so we don't keep derailing the thread... lmao


----------



## narad

BMFan30 said:


> Fine, but what about Building 7 which didn't get hit with a plane but also got blown up that day? Does that not at all make you suspicious? Whether you're an expert or not, building 7 should make everybody raise their eyebrows...
> 
> I also find it laughable everyone that disagrees with me doesn't tackle the point head on. They just point and laugh, taking the easiest route. Anyone can do that shit my man. Want to discredit my points then direct message me and show me how building 7 went down on the same day so we don't keep derailing the thread... lmao



It doesn't make me raise my eyebrows because, like most people, I'm not an expert in the structural integrity of buildings and the effects of nearby catastrophic disturbances. Therefore I have 0 ability to gauge what is or is not a plausible consequence of the twin towers being destroyed. Similarly, like most people, I'm not an expert in what a building collapse stemming from a collision with a plane should look like. This gives me 0 ability to gauge what that should look like. Where people go wrong is in vastly overestimating their ability to know these things, without having any preparation to do so whatsoever, and having an inherent distrust of experts, who are naturally the most qualified people to weigh in on it.


----------



## Adieu

I got suspended from Twitter for wishing out loud Putin would die already instead of bombing places I like... not even any profanity

What gives?


----------



## spudmunkey

I assume their algorithm isn't able to understand context. In a woodworking facebook group, the word "screw" is forbidden, and will get your post deleted, and if you do it repeatedly, suspended from the group, all automatically.


----------



## Adieu

spudmunkey said:


> I assume their algorithm isn't able to understand context. In a woodworking facebook group, the word "screw" is forbidden, and will get your post deleted, and if you do it repeatedly, suspended from the group, all automatically.



So I should have appealed that? Does it work?

Also, how many of these strikes can you collect?


----------



## Flappydoodle

Xaios said:


> Part of the problem is that, whenever you see some kind of "debate" between experts of different positions, it intentionally obfuscates the ratio of experts who hold a certain position by having opposing debaters talking one-on-one. Showing a climate scientist debate about climate change with one expert who argues that anthropocentric climate change is real versus one who argues that it's fake gives the spectator the impression (often with fully disingenuous intent on the part of the organizer of said debate) that the general consensus among experts is also evenly split, when it's really about 99 to 1 in favor of those who argue that it's real.



Yes and no. Because I think there's also something to be said for the quality of an argument or position, not just the number of supporters.

Like, you might have 99 of people on one side, but if 1 person on the other *can* actually disprove a hypothesis, then the other 99 are wrong and should change position. Problem is, something like global climate change is just way too complex to ever give it fair justice on a TV debate. Hell, it's too complex to communicate a proper understanding to anybody who doesn't dedicate their lives to it.

You look at how one single factor has multiple consequences, and some of those consequences have positive or negative feedback loops. And those loops probably affected by the environment in which they're taking place. It's impossible to have any sort of debate because both people can be saying things which are true and supported by data, but they're only part of the picture. So I think it's a bit of a myth to believe that we general public are ever going to have a properly educated understanding of any of these things.

As I have said before in a thread here, I recall a point during the Obama presidency when his administration was boasting about low unemployment, but Fox News was talking about record numbers of people out of work, or record numbers looking for work. During Trump, it was reversed, with CNN instead of Fox. Both are true statements. Which matters more? Unemployment is a kinda "fake" number. But maybe people looking for work means a more healthy economic environment. Or maybe people out of work is also good - like more stay-at-home parents because they have good financial security. I have no idea, but both true statements can be manipulated to paint whichever picture you would like to paint.



Adieu said:


> So I should have appealed that? Does it work?
> 
> Also, how many of these strikes can you collect?



Maybe the rules will change with Twitter's new ownership


----------



## Drew

BMFan30 said:


> Fine, but what about Building 7 which didn't get hit with a plane but also got blown up that day? Does that not at all make you suspicious? Whether you're an expert or not, building 7 should make everybody raise their eyebrows...
> 
> I also find it laughable everyone that disagrees with me doesn't tackle the point head on. They just point and laugh, taking the easiest route. Anyone can do that shit my man. Want to discredit my points then direct message me and show me how building 7 went down on the same day so we don't keep derailing the thread... lmao


I addressed the "jet fuel doesn't cause steel beams to melt" part of the theory earlier.  

Building 7, I don't see any obvious holes in the official explanation - debris from WTC1, immediately adjacent to WTC7, spread to WTC7 during the collapse, and burned uncontrolled as the collapse of WTC1 and 2 took out the complex's water mains, leaving the sprinkler system on the lower 20 floors without water. As the building burned, metal support beams thermally expanded, stressing the support structure until a girder lost contact with a key support beam, causing a lower floor to collapse and initiating a progressive collapse as floor after floor above it fell. 






Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation


Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation (09/17/2010, ARCHIVE, incorporated into




www.nist.gov





Worth keeping in mind too is this building burned almost entirely uncontrolled for the better part of seven hours before it collapsed - it's a little hard to keep explosives from NOT going off in that kind of an environment.


----------



## Drew

Flappydoodle said:


> During Trump, it was reversed, with CNN instead of Fox. Both are true statements. Which matters more? Unemployment is a kinda "fake" number. But maybe people looking for work means a more healthy economic environment. Or maybe people out of work is also good - like more stay-at-home parents because they have good financial security. I have no idea, but both true statements can be manipulated to paint whichever picture you would like to paint.


Nitpicking, but when I think of the Trump administration's record of bragging about the labor markets, it's not low unemployment I think of, it's his bragging about the record size of the job reports and how millions of American jobs were created on his watch in 2021. And, that his administration very conveniently forgot to mention that essentially all of those jobs were ones that were lost in March and April of 2020.  

Prior to covid the Trump administration's record on jobs growth actually wasn't bad, but I don't know how much of that was directly attributable to Trump's actions - he liked to tout the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as a source of job creation, but most of the tax savings corporations received there both from the reduced jobs rate and the repatriation of overseas earnings at a reduced rate went straight to stock buybacks. I suspect the far bigger factor was psychological, and that Trump as a Republican and a businessman was seen as more "business friendly" than Obama, so they were more willing to invest in hiring. Which, at the end of the day, still creates jobs, it just doesn't mean that the tax cuts didn't do anything beyond pad shareholder pockets. Obama could have been just as effective by taking a slightly friendlier tone to big business, though the progressive wing of the party would have been howling over that, I'm sure. 

To your earlier points, outliers can be useful and sometimes provide valuable information. So called experts saying climate change is fake for political and not scientific reasons though and ignoring massive quantities of scientific evidence to get there (or, the anti-vax community, while we're at it), are not making the sort of compelling arguments that deserve to be taken seriously. The nice thing about science is, if you're an outlier, and you're right, and you have the data to show that, eventually you will not be an outlier. The climate change deniers in some ways are living proof of this.


----------



## bostjan

BMFan30 said:


> Fine, but what about Building 7 which didn't get hit with a plane but also got blown up that day? Does that not at all make you suspicious? Whether you're an expert or not, building 7 should make everybody raise their eyebrows...
> 
> I also find it laughable everyone that disagrees with me doesn't tackle the point head on. They just point and laugh, taking the easiest route. Anyone can do that shit my man. Want to discredit my points then direct message me and show me how building 7 went down on the same day so we don't keep derailing the thread... lmao


Let's flip it around.

If you are claiming that something funky happened with WTC7, tell us exactly what the funky thing was that happened. Otherwise, it's a matter of both having to guess what the question is and then answer it.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Let's flip it around.
> 
> If you are claiming that something funky happened with WTC7, tell us exactly what the funky thing was that happened. Otherwise, it's a matter of both having to guess what the question is and then answer it.



I think he said it exploded for no apparent reason?

It's not something I have much interest in and thus can't comment on, but stuff exploding for no reason does seem to rate pretty high on the "funky" scale, no?


----------



## Drew

Adieu said:


> I think he said it exploded for no apparent reason?
> 
> It's not something I have much interest in and thus can't comment on, but stuff exploding for no reason does seem to rate pretty high on the "funky" scale, no?


It collapsed after burning for seven hours. Some observers described it as collapsing like it was in free-fall (it didn't), and suggested it was a controlled demolition and there must have been explosives involved. For that to be true, you first have to fiugure out how they didn't ignite for the first seven hours of uncontrolled fire after the water main's destruction stopped the sprinkler system from doing iots thing.


----------



## jaxadam

Drew said:


> For that to be true, you first have to fiugure out how they didn't ignite for the first seven hours of uncontrolled fire



Why would they? Explosive product will generally burn off if caught on fire.


----------



## Drew

jaxadam said:


> Why would they? Explosive product will generally burn off if caught on fire.


I mean, I said "ignite," not "explode."  But, "burn off," if you prefer.


----------



## jaxadam

Drew said:


> I mean, I said "ignite," not "explode."  But, "burn off," if you prefer.



So are you saying "ignite" as in detonate? Because most product will just sit there and burn and not detonate if set on fire.


----------



## Xaios

Flappydoodle said:


> Yes and no. Because I think there's also something to be said for the quality of an argument or position, not just the number of supporters.


We're talking about science though, not a matter of rhetoric. The argument isn't "this is what I believe", it's "this is the conclusion that the data supports." While the incredible complexity and scope of something like climate science is obviously beyond what Joe Average can understand and so there is certainly value in giving people the Coles Notes version so they can make _somewhat_ informed decisions, when 99% of climate scientists come to the same conclusion based on their research, giving the one guy a soapbox on which proclaim that everyone else is wrong, regardless of whether he actually believes his assertions, is an exercise meant to muddy the waters and discredit the science for ulterior motives on the part of the people broadcasting the debate. Between legitimate scientists, such differences should be discussed, examined and settled in the laboratory, not the Forum.


----------



## ArtDecade

I was never a part of you.* BURN!*
I was never a part of you.* BURN!*


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> I think he said it exploded for no apparent reason?
> 
> It's not something I have much interest in and thus can't comment on, but stuff exploding for no reason does seem to rate pretty high on the "funky" scale, no?





BMFan30 said:


> Fine, but what about Building 7 which didn't get hit with a plane but also got blown up that day? Does that not at all make you suspicious? Whether you're an expert or not, building 7 should make everybody raise their eyebrows...
> 
> I also find it laughable everyone that disagrees with me doesn't tackle the point head on. They just point and laugh, taking the easiest route. Anyone can do that shit my man. Want to discredit my points then direct message me and show me how building 7 went down on the same day so we don't keep derailing the thread... lmao



Ok, easy enough. There is video of WTC7 collapsing. Have you seen it? If not, watch it, and then reassess the term "blown up." It seems clear to me that what happened is more accurately described as "collapse."

If the question is reframed as "why did WTC7 collapse, despite not getting hit by a plane?" then the answer might seem pretty straightforward. A) Buildings collapse all of the time without getting hit by planes. B) There were multiple fires in WTC7 burning most of the day before the building collapsed, and those fires were difficult to fight due to the loss of water pressure (from everything else that was going on). Buildings that are allowed to remain on fire for periods of several hours without functioning sprinklers or effective firefighting tend to collapse.


----------



## Drew

jaxadam said:


> So are you saying "ignite" as in detonate? Because most product will just sit there and burn and not detonate if set on fire.


I'm saying, regardless of if it explodes or just burns off, keeping enough explosives at the base of a building from lighting in SOME sense of the term while the whole first 20 floors are gutted by fire is a little challenging. 

Specifically, yeah, I was using "ignite" as in "catch fire," rather than "blow up," but I think that's semantics here.


----------



## jaxadam

Drew said:


> I'm saying, regardless of if it explodes or just burns off, keeping enough explosives at the base of a building from lighting in SOME sense of the term while the whole first 20 floors are gutted by fire is a little challenging.
> 
> Specifically, yeah, I was using "ignite" as in "catch fire," rather than "blow up," but I think that's semantics here.



So can you explain your original line below again? 



Drew said:


> For that to be true, you first have to fiugure out how they didn't ignite for the first seven hours of uncontrolled fire after the water main's destruction stopped the sprinkler system from doing iots thing.



Because it sounds like you are either originally implying detonate, or then of course they would have caught fire. Or do we have mysterious explosives that may or may not be burning, but definitely not detonating? And why would you care if they didn't "ignite" for the first seven hours? It would be a non-issue.

And, in order to raze a building of that size, you wouldn't have explosives at the base of the building.


----------



## bostjan

Many explosives, for example C4, RDX, and TNT, are quite surprisingly unlikely to explode from exposure to fire.

That said, if they are set up as explosives in the place where whoever wants them to explode set them up, there must be some sort of detonator to set off the explosion, and that detonator would be much more likely to explode from the fire, which means that the whole setup would likely explode from the fire. In other words, bulk explosives in storage probably would not explode in the WTC 7 fire; however, that means nothing in the context of the conjecture that the explosives were there all along and detonated that evening after several hours on fire. The reason I can confidently say that, is because either the detonator would have been in the building before, and been set off by the fire, or else someone would have had to have run through the fire carrying the detonator in order to set it up later. In the specific circumstance where some sort of direct electronic detonation would be used (not sure how), the electronics would be super likely to fail from the exposure to the fire long before they detonated.

TL; DR - The scenario where explosives were hidden in the building and set off at 5:30ish PM after 7ish hours of fire is not very plausible.


----------



## jaxadam

bostjan said:


> Many explosives, for example C4, RDX, and TNT, are quite surprisingly unlikely to explode from exposure to fire.
> 
> That said, if they are set up as explosives in the place where whoever wants them to explode set them up, there must be some sort of detonator to set off the explosion, and that detonator would be much more likely to explode from the fire, which means that the whole setup would likely explode from the fire. In other words, bulk explosives in storage probably would not explode in the WTC 7 fire; however, that means nothing in the context of the conjecture that the explosives were there all along and detonated that evening after several hours on fire. The reason I can confidently say that, is because either the detonator would have been in the building before, and been set off by the fire, or else someone would have had to have run through the fire carrying the detonator in order to set it up later. In the specific circumstance where some sort of direct electronic detonation would be used (not sure how), the electronics would be super likely to fail from the exposure to the fire long before they detonated.
> 
> TL; DR - The scenario where explosives were hidden in the building and set off at 5:30ish PM after 7ish hours of fire is not very plausible.



None of it is plausible at all. There is just too much prep work that would go into razing those structures (probably 6 to 8 weeks of mechanical demo, preburning structural members, etc.) Additionally, you wouldn't use bulk explosives. We've shot multistory buildings with as little as 4 to 5 lbs of shape charges total.

I mean, the real dead giveaway it was an inside job would be the guy walking around for a few weeks with an acetylene torch preburning the web of the I-beams!


----------



## Drew

jaxadam said:


> So can you explain your original line below again?
> 
> 
> 
> Because it sounds like you are either originally implying detonate, or then of course they would have caught fire. Or do we have mysterious explosives that may or may not be burning, but definitely not detonating? And why would you care if they didn't "ignite" for the first seven hours? It would be a non-issue.
> 
> And, in order to raze a building of that size, you wouldn't have explosives at the base of the building.


Well, it's pretty simple.

If the theory was this was a controlled detonation, and the building collapsed from the base, then there would have to be explosives somewhere in the first 20 floors, where a girder on floor 13 failed and led to the cascading collapse, and where the collapse originated.

Now, if that wasn't a failed girder that thanks to heat expansion eventually lost contact with a critical support beam, but was actually an explosion, on a floor that was heavily burned out by the time of the collapse and had been burning uncontrollably for the better part of seven hours... Then it's kind of a moot point whether I meant "explode" or "burn away" when I said ignite, as in a gutted floor one or the other probably would have already happened at some point earlier in the day, and its awfully hard to see how any sort of explosive charge could still have survived a seven hour uncontrolled office fire. It's less if it would blow up or burn off, and more whether it could have survived that long in the first place, to be then triggered in a controlled explosion.

Am I missing something in your question? You may know better than I as I recall you being involved in this stuff professionally, but I'm not aware of any class of explosives that won't burn when exposed to a (massive, uncontrolled) open flame, but will still detonate when triggered?


----------



## jaxadam

Drew said:


> You may know better than I as I recall you being involved in this stuff professionally



Professionally?! I'd call it more like a paid vacation!


----------



## bostjan

Drew said:


> Am I missing something in your question? You may know better than I as I recall you being involved in this stuff professionally, but I'm not aware of any class of explosives that won't burn when exposed to a (massive, uncontrolled) open flame, but will still detonate when triggered?



I think it's safe to say that the consensus is that a building full of high explosives, rigged to detonate in some way, burning with an uncontrolled flame inside of it for an extended number of hours, then detonated, doesn't make any sense as a scenario.

In theory, you could have a super-high pressure inert gas released into atmosphere very rapidly, which would be like an explosion, but we're already into splitting-hair territory. Anything like PETN or RDX or TNT would either burn or degrade into something that no longer goes boom from a fire like that. If we want to kick around the idea that someone had some sort of alien-like super-high-tech explosive that could withstand as many hours of an intense fire as most people work in a day, and then still explode, and also leave no traces of explosive, nor give off any audio-visual clues that an explosive was used, we might as well also consider the idea that someone planted the bomb in WTC7 when it was built, and then time-machined it into the future, but accidentally broke off a piece of their time machine, hurtling it back from 1984 to 1963, accidentally killing JFK.


----------



## Drew

jaxadam said:


> Professionally?! I'd call it more like a paid vacation!


 

Business or pleasure? Hopefully a bit of both! 

Anyway, this:



bostjan said:


> I think it's safe to say that the consensus is that a building full of high explosives, rigged to detonate in some way, burning with an uncontrolled flame inside of it for an extended number of hours, then detonated, doesn't make any sense as a scenario.


...was what I was getting at, coupled with the fact that the official explanation of heat expansion in steel over a prolonged fire is something that doesn't require much more than high school level physics to explain. There aren't many angels dancing on pins here.


----------



## bostjan

bostjan said:


> Two major oil depots, a large chemical plant, and a defense institute have all recently broken out in flames in Russia. Russia is blaming Ukraine for the oil depots, but word on the street is that no one really knows. Since the infrastructure in Russia is old and dangerous, it's basically a coin flip odds as to whether these were accidental or deliberate. Even if deliberate, it'd be surprising if Ukraine could manage sabotage that deep into Russian territory. There are probably a lot of different groups who might have the motive to stage such attacks. Or it could be a combination of any of those things. We may never know. At least it doesn't seem to be a false flag by Russia, in these cases.











EU brands Russian gas halt 'blackmail', working on response


The EU's chief executive on Wednesday branded as "blackmail" Russian giant Gazprom's move to halt supplies to some European customers, but said the bloc was working on a coordinated response to Moscow's escalation.




www.reuters.com





I know the EU is blaming Russia for the gas being shut off. I know Russia is blaming Ukraine for refinery fires. I know that I, personally, don't know.

However, what if these are all symptoms of stuff in Russia just being broken?

First, the fires. If this was some sort of active sabotage, and it was effective, why stop with four fires? What, did the saboteurs get bored and head home?

Second, does Gazprom really want to be paid in rubles? Maybe I don't understand the economics here (maybe @Drew can explain), but, whether the bill is paid by using Russia's central bank to convert euros into rubles by the issued exchange rate and then paying the bill in rubles or if the bill is paid by directly offering euros to pay based on the same exchange rate issued by Russia's central bank, what is the difference? I'm thinking that the form of the currency used is not really the point. Either Russia is choosing not to trade with Poland and Bulgaria, something is going wrong with Russia's supply chain, or a combination of both. Refusing to trade when the economic pinch is already at full clamping pressure might be Russia shooting itself in the foot. They seem to be doing quite a bit of that lately, though, so who knows. The more rational thing for Russia to do, would be to continue trading and issue a steeper exchange rate or begin levying additional exchange fees. Or... and I know this is a crazy idea, but how about not invading Ukraine? I mean, whatever Russia believes it is getting out of this war doesn't seem to be happening. If the Crimean exclave is a problem, then why not Kaliningrad? IDK, nothing really adds up for me...

But that's a broader problem with wars in general. The US-led invasion of Iraq was to take away the WMD from Saddam Hussein. Well, Saddam didn't have any WMD and they executed him for war crimes and yet the war rages on from 2003-present. Most of the civil wars in recent history go on and on, and wars of invasion never know what any of their objectives are. Modern warfare is just a big mess, not that war was ever not a mess, but now it's only mess.


----------



## High Plains Drifter

So here's a really dumb question but I'm always perplexed by the points of view here in this thread so... What would it take to kill Putin? I mean... Is he himself absolutely untouchable in the sense that a sniper, a bomb, etc could never even get close to him? I know that he keeps his physical distance from just about all of his advisors, staff, etc. But does anyone know.. Like does he ever just go to Walmart for fresh undies, or maybe head down to the local Russian BBQ joint for some brisket? Okay.. I know he doesn't go out in public obviously but could someone conceivably take him out and if so... What happens after that? Does the invasion rage on or does everybody breathe a sigh of relief and the war/ invasion stops? Or will someone fill his shoes and keep the invasion going? 

I mean... I'm not asking someone to answer all these questions as I understand that they're quite hypothetical but again... is it even possible for someone to take him out and if so what might happen after that? And I guess that I'm also wondering WHO might try to take him down... the US? A sniper? A combined effort of a couple other countries?


----------



## pondman

He's killing himself, every time he opens his dumb mouth with the same old threats. He's totally fucked up with this idiotic attack /war with the. Ukraine and he knows it. 

He's finished no matter what.


----------



## bostjan

High Plains Drifter said:


> So here's a really dumb question but I'm always perplexed by the points of view here in this thread so... What would it take to kill Putin? I mean... Is he himself absolutely untouchable in the sense that a sniper, a bomb, etc could never even get close to him? I know that he keeps his physical distance from just about all of his advisors, staff, etc. But does anyone know.. Like does he ever just go to Walmart for fresh undies, or maybe head down to the local Russian BBQ joint for some brisket? Okay.. I know he doesn't go out in public obviously but could someone conceivably take him out and if so... What happens after that? Does the invasion rage on or does everybody breathe a sigh of relief and the war/ invasion stops? Or will someone fill his shoes and keep the invasion going?
> 
> I mean... I'm not asking someone to answer all these questions as I understand that they're quite hypothetical but again... is it even possible for someone to take him out and if so what might happen after that? And I guess that I'm also wondering WHO might try to take him down... the US? A sniper? A combined effort of a couple other countries?


Not likely easy.

This guy has a personal chef vetted by the FSB/Kremlin.

This is a guy who, when he travelled, only stayed at the most luxurious hotels, and still had his own crew replace all of the soap and toilet paper in the room, just in case.

Maybe next time he plays a professional hockey team in 1-on-team, he'll be vulnerable, but a lot of hockey players love him, and the ones vetted to play against him are probably either all huge fans or are afraid of him.


----------



## devastone

Unfortunately the only people that can get close to him are the people he 'trusts" the most, so basically it has to get bad enough for one of his bff's to want him gone. At least, that's my take, I could be wrong, happens a lot I'm told.


----------



## Andromalia

You don't need to kill Putin to remove him. Both Saddam Hussein and Ceausescu got killed well after they were toppled. What you need in the case of Russia at the moment is an internal coup. It's unlikely an assasination commando could succeed and even if, they likely wouldn't be able to escape.
The least resistance scenario is probably to funnel a few million dollars in some general's pockets.


----------



## arasys

High Plains Drifter said:


> So here's a really dumb question but I'm always perplexed by the points of view here in this thread so... What would it take to kill Putin? I mean... Is he himself absolutely untouchable in the sense that a sniper, a bomb, etc could never even get close to him? I know that he keeps his physical distance from just about all of his advisors, staff, etc. But does anyone know.. Like does he ever just go to Walmart for fresh undies, or maybe head down to the local Russian BBQ joint for some brisket? Okay.. I know he doesn't go out in public obviously but could someone conceivably take him out and if so... What happens after that? Does the invasion rage on or does everybody breathe a sigh of relief and the war/ invasion stops? Or will someone fill his shoes and keep the invasion going?


I lived in Turkey for years, and saw it became like a mini Islamic version of Russia thanks to Erdogan with Putin's help. In such countries, reality is really muddy; because their state / private media is pretty much owned by the same people. I know recently Russia closed the last independent newspaper; whereas in Turkey you'll see newspapers that are criticizing Erdogan are pretty much funded by the state. They appear to be the opposition, but they are tamed and managed by their govt (their opposition parties are like that too now). For example; if there's a scandal, state media completely ignores it or treats it as "foreign countries / Western countries are attacking our country, trying to divide us" whereas a so called opposition newspaper won't mention the scandal but will only mention the government's response, leaving the actual context out of it.

When both "sides" of the media is owned by the state for years, they can pretty much create their own narrative. Those who are aware of it either get use to it, or leave, and some of them start to get influenced. It becomes almost impossible to have them see the data, or objective information. I know it sounds so dumb that Russia is "getting rid of nazis in Ukraine" but imagine the decades of misinformation and how far it can go and impact a society. Well, we've seen it here in US in recent years, that was just a little taste of how bad things can get.

In my opinion, even if Putin gets replaced, the amount of BS in Russia already created their own "reality", so I would assume someone else would replace him.


----------



## tedtan

I keep seeing reports that Putin is ill, including a recent video where he seems to have tremors in his hands and legs as if he has Parkinson’s. Maybe this Ukrainian invasion is his last hurrah before he keels over on his own.


----------



## Flappydoodle

bostjan said:


> EU brands Russian gas halt 'blackmail', working on response
> 
> 
> The EU's chief executive on Wednesday branded as "blackmail" Russian giant Gazprom's move to halt supplies to some European customers, but said the bloc was working on a coordinated response to Moscow's escalation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know the EU is blaming Russia for the gas being shut off. I know Russia is blaming Ukraine for refinery fires. I know that I, personally, don't know.
> 
> However, what if these are all symptoms of stuff in Russia just being broken?
> 
> First, the fires. If this was some sort of active sabotage, and it was effective, why stop with four fires? What, did the saboteurs get bored and head home?
> 
> Second, does Gazprom really want to be paid in rubles? Maybe I don't understand the economics here (maybe @Drew can explain), but, whether the bill is paid by using Russia's central bank to convert euros into rubles by the issued exchange rate and then paying the bill in rubles or if the bill is paid by directly offering euros to pay based on the same exchange rate issued by Russia's central bank, what is the difference? I'm thinking that the form of the currency used is not really the point. Either Russia is choosing not to trade with Poland and Bulgaria, something is going wrong with Russia's supply chain, or a combination of both. Refusing to trade when the economic pinch is already at full clamping pressure might be Russia shooting itself in the foot. They seem to be doing quite a bit of that lately, though, so who knows. The more rational thing for Russia to do, would be to continue trading and issue a steeper exchange rate or begin levying additional exchange fees. Or... and I know this is a crazy idea, but how about not invading Ukraine? I mean, whatever Russia believes it is getting out of this war doesn't seem to be happening. If the Crimean exclave is a problem, then why not Kaliningrad? IDK, nothing really adds up for me...
> 
> But that's a broader problem with wars in general. The US-led invasion of Iraq was to take away the WMD from Saddam Hussein. Well, Saddam didn't have any WMD and they executed him for war crimes and yet the war rages on from 2003-present. Most of the civil wars in recent history go on and on, and wars of invasion never know what any of their objectives are. Modern warfare is just a big mess, not that war was ever not a mess, but now it's only mess.



For the fire, I think we don't have any sort of baseline. Russia enormous, so there's definitely going to be fires and accidents every single day. Maybe they're just getting more attention now? I really have no idea.

For Poland and Bulgaria, it's not as complex as you're making it IMO. It's just a simple power play. He asked them to pay in Rubles by 1st April. They didn't. He's looking weak, so this is a way of punishing the countries that didn't obey. Putin doesn't give a fuck about anything except looking strong and punishing people. This probably hurts the Russian economy, but why would he care about that?

For Rubles, those foreign companies need to be able to buy Rubles so they can pay in Rubles. And the only people selling Rubles is... Russia. So this lets them accept Euros (thus building foreign reserves) and increases demand for Rubles, thus increasing its price. That's why Putin demands it.


----------



## Drew

Flappydoodle said:


> For Rubles, those foreign companies need to be able to buy Rubles so they can pay in Rubles. And the only people selling Rubles is... Russia. So this lets them accept Euros (thus building foreign reserves) and increases demand for Rubles, thus increasing its price. That's why Putin demands it.


This is why I wouldn't make much of the recovery of the ruble after the invasion - Russia has been doing everything they can, including forcing people to buy oil in rubles, to prop up the currency. 



bostjan said:


> Not likely easy.
> 
> This guy has a personal chef vetted by the FSB/Kremlin.
> 
> This is a guy who, when he travelled, only stayed at the most luxurious hotels, and still had his own crew replace all of the soap and toilet paper in the room, just in case.
> 
> Maybe next time he plays a professional hockey team in 1-on-team, he'll be vulnerable, but a lot of hockey players love him, and the ones vetted to play against him are probably either all huge fans or are afraid of him.


He is infamously paranoid, at that.


----------



## bostjan

Flappydoodle said:


> For the fire, I think we don't have any sort of baseline. Russia enormous, so there's definitely going to be fires and accidents every single day. Maybe they're just getting more attention now? I really have no idea.
> 
> For Poland and Bulgaria, it's not as complex as you're making it IMO. It's just a simple power play. He asked them to pay in Rubles by 1st April. They didn't. He's looking weak, so this is a way of punishing the countries that didn't obey. Putin doesn't give a fuck about anything except looking strong and punishing people. This probably hurts the Russian economy, but why would he care about that?
> 
> For Rubles, those foreign companies need to be able to buy Rubles so they can pay in Rubles. And the only people selling Rubles is... Russia. So this lets them accept Euros (thus building foreign reserves) and increases demand for Rubles, thus increasing its price. That's why Putin demands it.


A baseline in terms of how many Russian fires there were in years prior to 2022? We sort-of do. Goskomstat's website seems to be currently inaccessible, but has reported between 20-180 *thousand* fires _per year_ in Russia. Maybe they modernized fairly recently, but, for a long time, Russia had a notoriously appalling record for fire safety in both urban and rural areas. Up until 2012, building codes were basically just "hope it doesn't catch on fire." So, anything build before then is fair game to "spontaneously" combust. If you look at this data: https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of-death/fires/by-country/ , the only two countries with more deaths from fires per capita in Eurasia are Belarus and Laos.

Regarding the ruble, the thing I don't understand is the difference between these two options:

A. Pay in euros, have Russia do the exchange internally. Russia ends up with the euros, Gazprom ends up with the rubles, so, Poland/Bulgaria essentially just bought however many euros worth of rubles.
B. Poland/Bulgaria buy the correct number of rubles with euros, then pay the gas bill in rubles. Russia ends up with euros, Gazprom ends up with rubles... same thing.

Either way, Gazprom gets X rubles, Russia gets Y euros, and the bank shows that X rubles were purchased for Y euros.

I don't see any difference. Maybe it's super subtle. But, I think it's just Putin being a tough guy, like you said. Whatever justification Putin is floating out there for acting like a tough guy seems illogical.


----------



## Drew

bostjan said:


> A. Pay in euros, have Russia do the exchange internally. Russia ends up with the euros, Gazprom ends up with the rubles, so, Poland/Bulgaria essentially just bought however many euros worth of rubles.
> B. Poland/Bulgaria buy the correct number of rubles with euros, then pay the gas bill in rubles. Russia ends up with euros, Gazprom ends up with rubles... same thing.
> 
> Either way, Gazprom gets X rubles, Russia gets Y euros, and the bank shows that X rubles were purchased for Y euros.
> 
> I don't see any difference. Maybe it's super subtle. But, I think it's just Putin being a tough guy, like you said. Whatever justification Putin is floating out there for acting like a tough guy seems illogical.


It IS pretty subtle, to be fair, and thinking through FX makes my head hurt. 

Russia could accept payment in euros, and then from their own currency reserves exchange euros for rubles, and pay Gazprom in rubles. But, doing so doesn't create the same international demand for the ruble making Poland et al buy them in the open market would, and what Russia is trying to do here is basically peg their currency to demand for Russian oil overseas, and make sure there's a continual bid side for the ruble, to help keep it from depreciating. Basically the differences is in scenario A someone has to go out and purchase rubles, while in scenario B they just deposit one currency and withdraw another from their own account.

Though, the interesting thing here... Oil isn't traded in euros. It's traded in dollars. And Russia owes a LOT of USD-denominated debt, and probably desperately needs the USD reserves to continue to meet payments here. So, I guess my read here is they're accepting a sovereign default on USD denominated debt - this may be the "tough guy" posturing you're referring to - and subtly broadcasting that, in return for trying to protect their currency, and not completely fuck their ability to buy imported goods. Which is pretty limited right now.


----------



## Drew

Aside from the pure economic impact, there's also a strategic piece here that I overlooked because, well, FX makes my brain hurt.  

Poland and Bulgaria are not. major export markets for Russia - Russia actually kind of needs foreign currency for debt service, but they can afford to cut off these two nations without really making a huge dent in their total exports, somewhete in the 10% ballpark. Both have been fairly active supporters of Ukraine, as well. Meanwhile, complying with Russia's demands to buy rubles and use those to pay for oil and gas are extremely hard to do without violating the sanctions that are already in place, with Russia largely cut off from the international banking system. 

This creates kind of a loaded political situation, where two prominent Ukrainian supporter nations are being held to a different standard than other European nations that have been a little more cautious, and as of yet Russia has only threatened to cut off but not actually taken steps to do so, and is still accepting payment in EUR or USD. While this is definitely an attempt to help peg the ruble, it's pretty clearly also an attempt to create political fault lines in the EU and cause tension between Poland, and Germany and Italy, who are more reliant on Russian imports (and, vice versa, Russia is more reliant on exports) than Poland and Bulgaria, but are not being punished as harshly by Russia for their opposition. 

If I had to guess, I'd say it _probably_ won't do any significant harm to the alliance, but it does up the pressure a little.


----------



## oversteve




----------



## DiezelMonster

oversteve said:


>



What a hole in one!


----------



## Flappydoodle

oversteve said:


>




Wow, what a good opportunity and a good shot. Do you know what kind of munition they are dropping?

I'm amazed the guys seemed to survive, at least in the short term. Wonder what sort of injuries they have, or they're just very badly dazed/concussed.


----------



## Flappydoodle

bostjan said:


> A baseline in terms of how many Russian fires there were in years prior to 2022? We sort-of do. Goskomstat's website seems to be currently inaccessible, but has reported between 20-180 *thousand* fires _per year_ in Russia. Maybe they modernized fairly recently, but, for a long time, Russia had a notoriously appalling record for fire safety in both urban and rural areas. Up until 2012, building codes were basically just "hope it doesn't catch on fire." So, anything build before then is fair game to "spontaneously" combust. If you look at this data: https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of-death/fires/by-country/ , the only two countries with more deaths from fires per capita in Eurasia are Belarus and Laos.
> 
> Regarding the ruble, the thing I don't understand is the difference between these two options:
> 
> A. Pay in euros, have Russia do the exchange internally. Russia ends up with the euros, Gazprom ends up with the rubles, so, Poland/Bulgaria essentially just bought however many euros worth of rubles.
> B. Poland/Bulgaria buy the correct number of rubles with euros, then pay the gas bill in rubles. Russia ends up with euros, Gazprom ends up with rubles... same thing.
> 
> Either way, Gazprom gets X rubles, Russia gets Y euros, and the bank shows that X rubles were purchased for Y euros.
> 
> I don't see any difference. Maybe it's super subtle. But, I think it's just Putin being a tough guy, like you said. Whatever justification Putin is floating out there for acting like a tough guy seems illogical.


Yeah, so maybe the fire thing is just "normal day in Russia". Or maybe it's sabotage, or Ukrainian action. I have no way of telling. Either way, if fuel depots near the border are on fire, I'm happy about that.

Just to add onto what Drew mentioned, one of the big things nobody mentioned is the sanctions. Most Russian banks are also under sanctions, and only that Gazprombank is exempt - specifically so that western countries CAN keep paying for gas. What we DON'T want is external demand for Rubles, which would cause a genuine increase in Ruble value. If Russia wants to do that internally with Euros that we pay them, that's different because they're forced to choose whether to keep Euros (stable, safe, foreign currency reserve) or to prop up the Ruble. 

I do think it's subtle, but it's also a principle thing. Russia signed contracts to be paid in Euros, and the EU is still willing to do that. So Russia demanding something else and cutting people off further demonstrates that they are a bad business partner who can't be trusted, and anybody should be careful about entering business relationships with them.


----------



## oversteve

Flappydoodle said:


> Wow, what a good opportunity and a good shot. Do you know what kind of munition they are dropping?
> 
> I'm amazed the guys seemed to survive, at least in the short term. Wonder what sort of injuries they have, or they're just very badly dazed/concussed.


Idk for sure, probably a modified fragmentation projectile from some rpg


----------



## Kolaniak

Don't really get why leftist people support Ukraine.


----------



## Demiurge

I would kind of like to think that the presence of neo-Nazis in my country doesn't entitle us to be invaded and bombed into a crater, but I am a silly person in general.


----------



## oversteve

Kolaniak said:


> View attachment 106881
> 
> 
> Don't really get why leftist people support Ukraine.


Why shouldn't they? If you mean Azov exactly then you'd better try to learn it's story instead of consuming propaganda from early 2014. It has come a long way from small volunteering selfdefence force formed by some soccer fans up to an official military unit. While it deffinitely has some ultraright members currently it's just a small portion of the batallion not even close to what it is usually presented by Russian narratives.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Kolaniak said:


> Don't really get why leftist people support Ukraine.



I appreciate the point, but Ukraine is not entirely made of Nazis, nor is it run by Nazis. Does it have problems with the far-right? Yes. Nobody denies that.

But do the 5 million people deserve to be displaced out of their homes? No.

Do the hospitals, schools and residential buildings of ordinary innocent people deserve to be bombed? No.

Did that mother and her 3 month old baby girl deserve to die? No.

Did the civilians shot at by tanks as they tried to escape deserve to burn alive inside their vehicles? No.

Do all of the children, thrown out of their homes, exposed to violence, death, bombings etc deserve to be traumatised and likely have mental damage for their whole lives? No.

I would like to think that any reasonable human being would agree with those things, whether you're on the "left" or the "right". I'm probably more on the right and I'm appalled by the way that Russia is actively targeting innocent people. In the first days of the war I chalked it up to bad intel, faulty missiles or plain incompetence. But it's absolutely certain now that bombing out residential areas, destroying hospitals and cutting utilities is a 100% deliberate part of their tactics. I am sure any left-wing person here will agree with me.


----------



## profwoot

Imagine witnessing these atrocities and thinking "ya but they got nazis there".

Find me a place that doesn't have nazis.


----------



## Adieu

Kolaniak said:


> View attachment 106881
> 
> 
> Don't really get why leftist people support Ukraine.



This again? WOW, you maybe-found a single pic of a dozen extremists...from years ago... in a country of 40+ million

Also, the NATO flag and Russian camo on them may or may not be indicative of this pic's trustworthiness. Because, SOMEHOW, the Ruscists are ALWAYS using this *one* pic.


----------



## oversteve

Flappydoodle said:


> I appreciate the point, but Ukraine is not entirely made of Nazis, nor is it run by Nazis. Does it have problems with the far-right? Yes. Nobody denies that.
> 
> But do the 5 million people deserve to be displaced out of their homes? No.
> 
> Do the hospitals, schools and residential buildings of ordinary innocent people deserve to be bombed? No.
> 
> Did that mother and her 3 month old baby girl deserve to die? No.
> 
> Did the civilians shot at by tanks as they tried to escape deserve to burn alive inside their vehicles? No.
> 
> Do all of the children, thrown out of their homes, exposed to violence, death, bombings etc deserve to be traumatised and likely have mental damage for their whole lives? No.
> 
> I would like to think that any reasonable human being would agree with those things, whether you're on the "left" or the "right". I'm probably more on the right and I'm appalled by the way that Russia is actively targeting innocent people. In the first days of the war I chalked it up to bad intel, faulty missiles or plain incompetence. But it's absolutely certain now that bombing out residential areas, destroying hospitals and cutting utilities is a 100% deliberate part of their tactics. I am sure any left-wing person here will agree with me.


I do agree with all of that except us having problems with far-rights. Atm there is 1 right party member in our parliament out of 450 seats and 0 far-right so they influence nothing. Compare it to our neighbour Hungary having a right pro-Putin ruling party with 2/3 seats and plenty other countries in EU having way bigger number of nationalists in their respective parliaments then us.






List of active nationalist parties in Europe - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





P.S. Funny thing is that majority of right parties in EU are backed and financed by Russia in this or that way...


----------



## narad

oversteve said:


> P.S. Funny thing is that majority of right parties in EU are backed and financed by Russia in this or that way...


They also seem to be backing the US right party lol. Russia wanted Trump to win. Nazis wanted Trump to win. I'll leave it to the german meme posters to connect the dots.


----------



## downburst82

Kolaniak said:


> View attachment 106881
> 
> 
> Don't really get why leftist people support Ukraine.


I wonder if more than 19 nazis have ever hung out together in the USA.....or Germany...or lets be honest pretty much any other country.










Neo-Nazis Burn Swastika After Rally in Georgia


They gathered outside another town about 50 miles from their original rally




time.com


----------



## oversteve

narad said:


> They also seem to be backing the US right party lol. Russia wanted Trump to win. Nazis wanted Trump to win. I'll leave it to the german meme posters to connect the dots.


More like backing Trump alone. If for example it was McCain I'm more then sure they would've supported Biden/Clinton.


----------



## oversteve

downburst82 said:


> I wonder if more than 19 nazis have ever hung out together in the USA.....or Germany...or lets be honest pretty much any other country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neo-Nazis Burn Swastika After Rally in Georgia
> 
> 
> They gathered outside another town about 50 miles from their original rally
> 
> 
> 
> 
> time.com


How about RuZZia? ))

Training camps for neo-nazis from EU in Russia








Why are German neo-Nazis training in Russia? | DW | 06.06.2020


German right-wing extremists are receiving paramilitary training in St. Petersburg, Russia, according to a new report by news magazine Focus. Who is running the training, and what do we know about the participants?




www.dw.com





Neo-nazis taking part in official parade on labour day in 2014 in Saint-Petersburg


----------



## Metropolis

Kolaniak said:


> View attachment 106881
> 
> 
> Don't really get why leftist people support Ukraine.



It's their unexplainably massive urge to be on the "good side". I'm not a leftist by any means, but I still support Ukraine... just for reasons. At the same time I feel bad for some of the russian people, and who whas such heritage. I know a few at the moment.


----------



## wheresthefbomb

One salient point that trash meme accidentally brushes upon is Amerikan leftists' fetishization of foreign struggles (I'm specifically talking about people taking up arms and flying to Ukraine, this has happened in other places in recent years as well) while ignoring the very real violent struggles taking place in their own country. It's ultimately a form of white savior/poverty tourism, where people show up after the hard work of getting shit going has already been done to feel like they're actually a part of something. 

Personally I think it's got a lot to do with white guilt, fetishizing a foreign conflict is a lot easier than trying to figure out your place in gender or race liberation as a cis white male. It's a way to escape from that accountability while keeping one's "leftist" cred intact. I'm also not saying going to help is wrong or not valid, just that I think a fair number of leftists are doing it for highly suspect reasons.


----------



## Adieu

Hey, I'm a half-Russian with a hard anti-Russian stance... I'm not about to become militantly anti-pale-straight-male as well.

Just mildly anti-pale-straight-male. And only because they're kinda obnoxious.

Racism? Bad. Gender identity struggles? Just not interested.


----------



## oversteve

some more nazi stuff


----------



## Randy

Sounds like UN successfully brokered a deal and evacuated the civilians in the Azostal plant. Back into Ukraine, not into Russia.


----------



## Adieu

Randy said:


> Sounds like UN successfully brokered a deal and evacuated the civilians in the Azostal plant. Back into Ukraine, not into Russia.



Wasn't it like 100 people?

Out of god knows how many in Mariupol?


----------



## Hollowway

wheresthefbomb said:


> One salient point that trash meme accidentally brushes upon is Amerikan leftists' fetishization of foreign struggles (I'm specifically talking about people taking up arms and flying to Ukraine, this has happened in other places in recent years as well) while ignoring the very real violent struggles taking place in their own country. It's ultimately a form of white savior/poverty tourism, where people show up after the hard work of getting shit going has already been done to feel like they're actually a part of something.
> 
> Personally I think it's got a lot to do with white guilt, fetishizing a foreign conflict is a lot easier than trying to figure out your place in gender or race liberation as a cis white male. It's a way to escape from that accountability while keeping one's "leftist" cred intact. I'm also not saying going to help is wrong or not valid, just that I think a fair number of leftists are doing it for highly suspect reasons.


That might be true, but a lot of the people that are going are vets. Vets aren’t generally classic leftists. The US definitely does concern it’s self with foreign affairs, and looks upon itself as the world police. But I don’t know that I’d call fighting for Ukraine white savior/poverty tourism. That’s more likely seen with peace corps stuff, etc. From the interviews I’ve read, the people going are going for the same reasons they joined the military in the first place - to fight for freedom.


----------



## vilk

Does spelling America with a K mean something?


----------



## bostjan

Remember Gerasimov, the badass guy who was going to take charge of the Special Military Operation? He's on his way back home with a leg wound.


----------



## StevenC

vilk said:


> Does spelling America with a K mean something?


There are 3 possibilities as I see it. They're either referencing Amerika, the 1987 TV miniseries; Amerika, the song by Rammstein; or it's a misspelling of Amerikca, which is how King Crimson aficionados would spell America.


----------



## oversteve

meanwhile russians stole tractors, probably wanted to strengthen their troops 









Russians plunder $5M farm vehicles from Ukraine -- to find they've been remotely disabled


Russian troops in the occupied city of Melitopol have stolen all the equipment from a farm equipment dealership -- and shipped it to Chechnya, according to a Ukrainian businessman in the area.




edition.cnn.com


----------



## Drew

wheresthefbomb said:


> One salient point that trash meme accidentally brushes upon is Amerikan leftists' fetishization of foreign struggles (I'm specifically talking about people taking up arms and flying to Ukraine, this has happened in other places in recent years as well) while ignoring the very real violent struggles taking place in their own country. It's ultimately a form of white savior/poverty tourism, where people show up after the hard work of getting shit going has already been done to feel like they're actually a part of something.
> 
> Personally I think it's got a lot to do with white guilt, fetishizing a foreign conflict is a lot easier than trying to figure out your place in gender or race liberation as a cis white male. It's a way to escape from that accountability while keeping one's "leftist" cred intact. I'm also not saying going to help is wrong or not valid, just that I think a fair number of leftists are doing it for highly suspect reasons.


Serious qyestion, what makes you think these are predominately leftists? 

They're mostly vets, and mostly with their own arsenals, and most of these tend to track much more closely with conservative Americans, than liberals. The recent GOP flirtation with Putin and other authoritarian leaders is all Trump, and hasn't really gotten THAT deep in his electorate yet. I'm surprised to hear youre saying this is a liberal trend, because I honestly thought we were seeing more Americans going overseas with center-right and right leanings. 

And, I mean, Ukraine isn't an obvious touchpoint for white guilt, either...?


----------



## narad

Drew said:


> Serious qyestion, what makes you think these are predominately leftists?
> 
> They're mostly vets, and mostly with their own arsenals, and most of these tend to track much more closely with conservative Americans, than liberals. The recent GOP flirtation with Putin and other authoritarian leaders is all Trump, and hasn't really gotten THAT deep in his electorate yet. I'm surprised to hear youre saying this is a liberal trend, because I honestly thought we were seeing more Americans going overseas with center-right and right leanings.
> 
> And, I mean, Ukraine isn't an obvious touchpoint for white guilt, either...?



That -and- we're not really seeing it. You have 300 million people in the country. If a couple fly over, that does not equate to anything in terms of overall population. If a thousand go... ten thousand go... it still certainly doesn't hold a candle to the number of people who do work within their own community to solve violence on a local level. I might as well comment on Americans' fetishization for having sex while dressed as large stuffed animals. Statistically a much stronger case to be made there.


----------



## bostjan

@narad Are you knocking what you haven't tried?

Meanwhile, in the town where I live, people are stockpiling thoughts and prayers to send to Ukraine. I've seriously seen people place plywood painted with Ukrainian flag colours on their front lawn with "Thinking of you" type wishes and urges for passers-by to sign in sharpie. It's great to keep things from being forgotten, I suppose, but I'm not sure what Ukrainians are going to do with the "card" if it's even ever sent to them.


----------



## narad

bostjan said:


> @narad Are you knocking what you haven't tried?
> 
> Meanwhile, in the town where I live, people are stockpiling thoughts and prayers to send to Ukraine. I've seriously seen people place plywood painted with Ukrainian flag colours on their front lawn with "Thinking of you" type wishes and urges for passers-by to sign in sharpie. It's great to keep things from being forgotten, I suppose, but I'm not sure what Ukrainians are going to do with the "card" if it's even ever sent to them.



Well I had to gather those statistics somehow...


----------



## wheresthefbomb

For general clarification, when I say "leftists," I am not talking about your average center-left bernie bro. Likewise, in this specific context I am talking about cross section people with some level of radical leftist ideology that could potentially lead them to real action who also have some amount of training and/or resources to do so. That said, the broader escapist behavior governing these actions can _absolutely_ be extrapolated to leftists and liberals of all convictions, training, and means.

We have a tradition of obfuscating these terms in the US, and not by accident. Just look at what "libertarian" means in the west vs the entire rest of the world.



Drew said:


> Serious qyestion, what makes you think these are predominately leftists?
> 
> They're mostly vets, and mostly with their own arsenals, and most of these tend to track much more closely with conservative Americans, than liberals. The recent GOP flirtation with Putin and other authoritarian leaders is all Trump, and hasn't really gotten THAT deep in his electorate yet. I'm surprised to hear youre saying this is a liberal trend, because I honestly thought we were seeing more Americans going overseas with center-right and right leanings.
> 
> And, I mean, Ukraine isn't an obvious touchpoint for white guilt, either...?



Nothing, I wouldn't know if they're predominantly leftists or pianists or Miley Cyrus fans, I was specifically commenting on the portion that _are_ leftists. Also, the fact that Ukraine isn't an obvious touchpoint for white guilt is exactly what makes these kinds of conflicts such potent escapism. It's a way to avoid addressing the crippling cognitive dissonance of white guilt while also engaging in "the good fight." Also, I was careful and specific not to use the word liberal, because this specifically is definitely not a liberal trend. However, it's been a trend in leftist circles since long before Ukraine.



narad said:


> That -and- we're not really seeing it. You have 300 million people in the country. If a couple fly over, that does not equate to anything in terms of overall population. If a thousand go... ten thousand go... it still certainly doesn't hold a candle to the number of people who do work within their own community to solve violence on a local level. I might as well comment on Americans' fetishization for having sex while dressed as large stuffed animals. Statistically a much stronger case to be made there.



There is a long tradition of fetishizing this kind of conflict among leftists. To be clear here, I am not commenting on the scale to which it is occurring, nor the scale to which people are choosing _to _work within their own communities, nor the potential ramifications to actual efforts in Ukraine, nor even how many more furries there are than leftists taking up arms and flying to Ukraine, I am merely commenting on the highly questionable motivations of those in the undertaking based on a combination of personal experience organizing leftists and trends among the circles I follow during this conflict.

There's no "case" to be made about fur suits, everyone knows it's happening. Likewise, I'm not here to make the "case" that this is happening; it's happening, I'm just describing it. That said, I'm describing a sub section of an already small group, so it's not entirely surprising this is news to a lot of you. I brought it up because it was relevant to a meme in a broken-clocks-and-blind-squirrels sense. The meme was garbage, but it touched on a very real trend that ought, in my humble reckoning, to leave any critically-minded leftist with cause to question and interrogate their own motivations.


----------



## Drew

wheresthefbomb said:


> Nothing, I wouldn't know if they're predominantly leftists or pianists or Miley Cyrus fans, I was specifically commenting on the portion that _are_ leftists. Also, the fact that Ukraine isn't an obvious touchpoint for white guilt is exactly what makes these kinds of conflicts such potent escapism. It's a way to avoid addressing the crippling cognitive dissonance of white guilt while also engaging in "the good fight." Also, I was careful and specific not to use the word liberal, because this specifically is definitely not a liberal trend. However, it's been a trend in leftist circles since long before Ukraine.


Ok, Serious Question Pt. Deux, IS there a "leftist" portion that's going to fight... *checks notes* the remnants of a communist nation, in Ukraine? All the Socialists I know started out as Putin apologists/"Ukranians are neo-Nazis!" before getting REAL quiet once the shelling of civilians started.


----------



## wheresthefbomb

Drew said:


> Ok, Serious Question Pt. Deux, IS there a "leftist" portion that's going to fight... *checks notes* the remnants of a communist nation, in Ukraine? All the Socialists I know started out as Putin apologists/"Ukranians are neo-Nazis!" before getting REAL quiet once the shelling of civilians started.



People who identify as big-S Socialists could even still believably be on that side of the narrative, they probably just don't have anything publicly to say about it as you guess. There is, to be sure, a strong strain of authoritarianism on the left. But no, I am talking about your lower-left-of-the-political-compass types, your libertarian socialist and syndicalist types, and the short answer is yes, there is a portion that is fetishizing it in the way I described, and a portion of those who are actually doing something about it, though whether they're actually doing anything isn't really even the point from where I'm standing. I'm looking at people's motivations in the context of their own national/social identities.


----------



## bostjan

Did anyone else catch Lavrov's comments where he claimed Hitler was Jewish and therefore the Jewish people are to blame for antisemitism?


----------



## Drew

wheresthefbomb said:


> People who identify as big-S Socialists could even still believably be on that side of the narrative, they probably just don't have anything publicly to say about it as you guess. There is, to be sure, a strong strain of authoritarianism on the left. But no, I am talking about your lower-left-of-the-political-compass types, your libertarian socialist and syndicalist types, and the short answer is yes, there is a portion that is fetishizing it in the way I described, and a portion of those who are actually doing something about it, though whether they're actually doing anything isn't really even the point from where I'm standing. I'm looking at people's motivations in the context of their own national/social identities.


I mean, could you maybe find us a few?

You just went on a LONG tangent about while guilt and white savior/poverty tourism motivation to "find their identity as a CIS white male" an an explanation for Americans flying overseas to volunteer in Ukraine, but by your own admission you can't tell "American leftists" from Miley Cyrus fans, so do we even know that "American leftists" ARE going over to Ukraine to volunteer at all?

Seems like an important thing to confirm, that there ARE a material number of "leftist Americans" going to Ukraine, before we start making conclusions about people fetishizing conflict out of an abundance of white savior guilt or whatever you think is driving them.


----------



## tedtan

bostjan said:


> Did anyone else catch Lavrov's comments where he claimed Hitler was Jewish and therefore the Jewish people are to blame for antisemitism?


Yeah, Israel wasn’t too happy with that comment.


----------



## wheresthefbomb

Drew said:


> I mean, could you maybe find us a few?
> 
> You just went on a LONG tangent about while guilt and white savior/poverty tourism motivation to "find their identity as a CIS white male" an an explanation for Americans flying overseas to volunteer in Ukraine, but by your own admission you can't tell "American leftists" from Miley Cyrus fans, so do we even know that "American leftists" ARE going over to Ukraine to volunteer at all?
> 
> Seems like an important thing to confirm, that there ARE a material number of "leftist Americans" going to Ukraine, before we start making conclusions about people fetishizing conflict out of an abundance of white savior guilt or whatever you think is driving them.



I'll give one more shot at clarifying myself here. I am commenting on my observation that amerikan leftists engage in fetishizing foreign conflict as a result of (in part) white guilt, as you say. I don't see any need to confirm whether anyone is actually going or not in order to interrogate that mindset. I am questioning the motivations of the fetishization in the very first place.

I will grant that my initial post could've been more clear on that point, I assumed incorrectly that it would be evident I was focused on the attitude leading to the action and not the action itself. As for examples, I could tell you that I've had conversations with leftist friends who had considered going themselves to this and other foreign conflicts in our recent history, but hesitated for exactly the reasons I'm talking about, but that's just my experience and it doesn't amount to "evidence" either way. On that note, the Peace Corps example is interesting because it was a common comparison in those conversations, and the motivations share a similar root.

To be honest whether anyone believes that amerikan leftists fetishizing foreign conflict is a phenomenon is of absolutely no consequence to me, I'm not here to convince anyone of anything. I have observed it for the last ten years of my life among people I've known and associated with including myself. If nobody here can relate to that then I apologize for the time you wasted reading my posts.


----------



## narad

I just have some qualms with characterizing a large group of people as expressing a certain attitude or behavior, when that behavior is a statistical outlier (likely well over-estimated at 100 volunteers entering the fray, i.e., < 0.000003% of Americans), and we have no means of talking objectively about the prevalence of those attitudes.


----------



## Xaios

Drew said:


> All the Socialists I know started out as Putin apologists/"Ukranians are neo-Nazis!" before getting REAL quiet once the shelling of civilians started.


My first instinct is that these sound like tankies, definitely not democratic socialists.


----------



## Kolaniak

tedtan said:


> Yeah, Israel wasn’t too happy with that comment.



What is Israel ever happy about?


----------



## vilk

wheresthefbomb said:


> amerikan


What does this mean? Why are you using a "k"?


----------



## wheresthefbomb

vilk said:


> What does this mean? Why are you using a "k"?



Because fuck amerika that's why. Okay but seriously that spelling has a history with counter culture movements of decades past and is meant to show intentional derision and disrespect to the fascist nation of amerika. Also sometimes spelled amerikkka.



narad said:


> I just have some qualms with characterizing a large group of people as expressing a certain attitude or behavior, when that behavior is a statistical outlier (likely well over-estimated at 100 volunteers entering the fray, i.e., < 0.000003% of Americans), and we have no means of talking objectively about the prevalence of those attitudes.



I never mentioned a large group though. My very first post was about amerikan leftists, already putting us on the fringe, and then went on to clarify immediately that it was addressing a fringe of that fringe. Also, as I said above, I'm not talking objectively, I'm talking about my experiences.

Personally I think one could make the case that most left-of-center people in this country exhibit the same behavior on some level (and smarter people than me have done so) but I'm not here for that.

I've made all the effort I can to make myself clear on this. I won't be replying any further because it's just not productive.


----------



## narad

wheresthefbomb said:


> Because fuck amerika that's why. Okay but seriously that spelling has a history with counter culture movements of decades past and is meant to show intentional derision and disrespect to the fascist nation of amerika. Also sometimes spelled amerikkka.
> 
> 
> 
> I never mentioned a large group though. My very first post was about amerikan leftists, already putting us on the fringe, and then went on to clarify immediately that it was addressing a fringe of that fringe. Also, as I said above, I'm not talking objectively, I'm talking about my experiences.
> 
> Personally I think one could make the case that most left-of-center people in this country exhibit the same behavior on some level (and smarter people than me have done so) but I'm not here for that.
> 
> I've made all the effort I can to make myself clear on this. I won't be replying any further because it's just not productive.



American leftists are a large group, though. I don't get this "Amerikan" thing, which I originally assumed was some phone pad typo. If that itself is supposed to indicate some subset of American leftists, then I guess I'm not up on the lingo these days. I've never seen it on SSO.


----------



## bostjan

Listen. If you wanted to join the Leftist Front of America, you'd have to really hate the Right. The only people we hate more than the Right are the fucking American Leftist's Front. Splitters! And the American Popular Leftist's Front. Yeah! Oh, yeah! Splitters! And the Leftist Front of America. Splitters!

Wait, we're the Leftist Front of America...


----------



## Kolaniak

I like how people use the word "fascism" and "fascist" yet would be hard pressed to define either term.
"Everything I dislike is fascism and nazi!"


----------



## Demiurge

Kolaniak said:


> I like how people use the word "fascism" and "fascist" yet would be hard pressed to define either term.
> "Everything I dislike is fascism and nazi!"


Didn't you post a meme that implied that Ukraine's military were Nazis?


----------



## bostjan

Kolaniak said:


> I like how people use the word "fascism" and "fascist" yet would be hard pressed to define either term.
> "Everything I dislike is fascism and nazi!"


Correct.

Even experts in politics and language have a very difficult time defining modern usage of the term. I believe it's more or less a metaphor. No one is literally a member of the extremist 1920's-1940's political party from Italy. But, if a person's political identity is far-right, espouses coalescence around a cult of personality, is militaristically nationalist, and has open racial bias, they are essentially the same thing.

Mussolini's personal beliefs could be thought of as the idealism behind fascism. The basic base of it is that you needed a strong leader to take everyone back to "the good ol' days," and that violence was a perfectly acceptable means to get there, even if it meant violence targeting people whose only transgression was speech.

The idea of a political left or political right is more or less determined by whether the ideal is looking forward or back. People's political ideas are a lot more complex than that, of course, but that's just the way words are defined. So, fascists are, by definition of political right-wing, politically right-wing, in that, they wanted to return things back to the pre-WWI days. Of course, where trouble comes into the philosophy is rarely it's final goals, it's how it plans to commit to those goals and the path it sees as most appropriate to achieve them. Obviously, people like Pol Pot and Stalin were far-left, in that they wanted to form a society like nothing ever seen before. However, the fact that those leaders were willing to kill however many millions of people necessary to achieve that goal was where their politics went off the rails. That's the common thread between facism, nazism, stalinism, and whatever-the-hell-the-ism-was-in-Campodia.

Before anyone gets fired up about anti-fa, I think there has to be a note that advocating violence against anyone who disagrees is absolutely not the same thing as advocating violence against the people advocating violence for those who disagree. IMO, turn-about is fair play, so if someone wants to debate a political philosophy, the appropriate response to disagreeing is to debate their political philosophy. If someone wants to kill other people who disagree with them, then, obviously, debating them is going to have no positive effect for your cause. Those people can only be stopped by segregating them from the people they wish to harm, either by reprogramming, by imprisonment, or by violence. Which of those three you chose to do is a matter of politics and philosophy, but the fact that one is necessary is simple logic.


----------



## Drew

wheresthefbomb said:


> I'll give one more shot at clarifying myself here. I am commenting on my observation that amerikan leftists engage in fetishizing foreign conflict as a result of (in part) white guilt, as you say. I don't see any need to confirm whether anyone is actually going or not in order to interrogate that mindset. I am questioning the motivations of the fetishization in the very first place.


I mean, maybe I'm not being clear enough either - I'm wondering where this observation is coming from, because this is the first I've seen or heard anything remotely like this.


----------



## Drew

Kolaniak said:


> I like how people use the word "fascism" and "fascist" yet would be hard pressed to define either term.
> "Everything I dislike is fascism and nazi!"


There's also the wee little detail that the term fascism, based on the italian word for a tightly bound bundle of sticks, was a term to describe a strong, authoritarian, ultra-nationalist government that accepted no dissent, and here we have citizens flying overseas to fight for some _other _country, which is not especially ultra-nationalist.


----------



## RevDrucifer

narad said:


> Well I had to gather those statistics somehow...



My buddy has a podcast that I guest on every so often, under the name Dr. Porndrucifer (he’s the one who donned me Drucifer over 20 years ago, actually) whenever they have a question about something sex-related. My 2nd or 3rd appearance on there was after they requested I do some research on furries. Less than 20% of furries are into the sex thing in costume. Biggest reason being; they cost a lot of money and no one wants to walk around looking like they sat in glue. They DO have murrsuits, which have openings for their junk, but again, they’re expensive. Also, the ones who prioritize sexual activity before other aspects of furry life are often looked down upon within the community due to people previously exploiting the community for that reason or because the greater community feels there is much more to it than just sexual activity.

I have a whole different perspective on furries after that week. I spoke to 15-20 of them individually and read a few of their forums. They often get a bad rap.


----------



## narad

RevDrucifer said:


> My buddy has a podcast that I guest on every so often, under the name Dr. Porndrucifer (he’s the one who donned me Drucifer over 20 years ago, actually) whenever they have a question about something sex-related. My 2nd or 3rd appearance on there was after they requested I do some research on furries. Less than 20% of furries are into the sex thing in costume. Biggest reason being; they cost a lot of money and no one wants to walk around looking like they sat in glue. They DO have murrsuits, which have openings for their junk, but again, they’re expensive. Also, the ones who prioritize sexual activity before other aspects of furry life are often looked down upon within the community due to people previously exploiting the community for that reason or because the greater community feels there is much more to it than just sexual activity.
> 
> I have a whole different perspective on furries after that week. I spoke to 15-20 of them individually and read a few of their forums. They often get a bad rap.



Well my search history just got a lot more embarrassing.


----------



## Kolaniak

Demiurge said:


> Didn't you post a meme that implied that Ukraine's military were Nazis?



They are certainly not LGBT-friendly liberals.
A lot of them are followers of Stepan Bandera, a man who is a national hero in Ukraine. A man who collaborated with Nazi Germany.


----------



## Xaios

Kolaniak said:


> They are certainly not LGBT-friendly liberals.


That qualification applies to half of Americans as well, but while "aggressively regressive moron" is certainly one ingredient in the broth of Nazism, it's not the whole soup. Fred Phelps was one of the most openly aggressive anti-LGBT crusaders to ever live, but even he wouldn't qualify.


----------



## nightflameauto

RevDrucifer said:


> My buddy has a podcast that I guest on every so often, under the name Dr. Porndrucifer (he’s the one who donned me Drucifer over 20 years ago, actually) whenever they have a question about something sex-related. My 2nd or 3rd appearance on there was after they requested I do some research on furries. Less than 20% of furries are into the sex thing in costume. Biggest reason being; they cost a lot of money and no one wants to walk around looking like they sat in glue. They DO have murrsuits, which have openings for their junk, but again, they’re expensive. Also, the ones who prioritize sexual activity before other aspects of furry life are often looked down upon within the community due to people previously exploiting the community for that reason or because the greater community feels there is much more to it than just sexual activity.
> 
> I have a whole different perspective on furries after that week. I spoke to 15-20 of them individually and read a few of their forums. They often get a bad rap.


I don't doubt this for a second for the simple reason that on certain other message boards I've frequented over the years, the fact that I'm in my thirties (at the time) and forties (now) and still play with Transformers was always seen as some form of sexual deviancy. Mostly, pedophile. Yeah, that's right. Being interested in the engineering of figures that can change into cars and animals means I wanna bang children.

I just think the human mind mostly thinks, "I don't like that, therefore weird sex stuff." Don't know exactly why we do that, but it seems to be second nature to us.


----------



## Kolaniak

Xaios said:


> That qualification applies to half of Americans as well, but while "aggressively regressive moron" is certainly one ingredient in the broth of Nazism, it's not the whole soup. Fred Phelps was one of the most openly aggressive anti-LGBT people to ever live, but even he wouldn't qualify.



"aggressively regressive moron"

You do know a lot of the Nazi elite back in Nazi Germany were high IQ people?


----------



## Xaios

Kolaniak said:


> "aggressively regressive moron"
> 
> You do know a lot of the Nazi elite back in Nazi Germany were high IQ people?


Jesus... fucking... Christ.

You're actually defending the regime which orchestrated one of the most destructive ethnic cleansings in all of human history as _having really smart leadership?_

So... The Holocaust was actually an ultimately misunderstood Big Brain Move? *Do tell.*


----------



## Kolaniak

Xaios said:


> Jesus... fucking... Christ.
> 
> You're actually defending the people who orchestrated one of the most destructive ethnic cleansings in all of human history as "having really smart leadership"?
> 
> So... The Holocaust was actually an ultimately misunderstood Big Brain Move? Do tell.



I am not defending anyone. I just happen to find it particularly odd that people think that Nazis are always dumb people. It is like equating being a leftist to being intelligent.


----------



## MFB

Xaios said:


> Jesus... fucking... Christ.
> 
> You're actually defending the regime which orchestrated one of the most destructive ethnic cleansings in all of human history as _having really smart leadership?_
> 
> So... The Holocaust was actually an ultimately misunderstood Big Brain Move? *Do tell.*



Rick and Morty fans are Nazis confirmed.


----------



## Xaios

Kolaniak said:


> I am not defending anyone. I just happen to find it particularly odd that people think that Nazis are always dumb people. It is like equating being a leftist to being intelligent.


Alright, fine. Let it be known that people who commit heinous acts of inhuman evil don't always act from ignorance. Sometimes their incredible intelligence actually leads them down the path of genocide, because it turns out massacring minorities is sometimes actually a sign of deep and abiding intellect.


----------



## Xaios

MFB said:


> Rick and Morty fans are Nazis confirmed.


Whoa, whoa. I mean, Nazis are one thing, but _Rick and Morty fans?_


----------



## MFB

Xaios said:


> Whoa, whoa. I mean, Nazis are one thing, but _Rick and Morty fans?_



Everyone knows WWII was never about eliminating the Jews, he was trying to round them up and get them to tell him the secret to the Mulan Szechuan sauce; and I'm sure you're thinking "but that wouldn't even come out for another 50+ years, how could Hitler have possibly know about it?" to which I say ...something something occult powers.


----------



## Crungy

Where is there information about leftists going to fight in Ukraine? I'm seeing articles about US veterans (that are left/righr/center) going to fight and Ukraine saying not to come if you are not combat trained and things of that nature but nothing of people with white guilt that are flaming liberals doing it for vanity. 

Is it some infowars/Q anon crap going around?


----------



## bostjan

I think we need to be careful in equating someone who is smart with someone who is right. Several very very smart people throughout history have done bad things and also been very very wrong about some of the assertions that they have made.

I don't care if Hitler's IQ was 150. It was a waste.

Not to compare these people with Hitler, but:

Bobby Fisher had an IQ of over 180. He was well-known to be unstable. He went homeless for a time. He was a racist, and, by several accounts by people who met him personally, he was probably an asshole. He died quite young and fairly disgraced.

Isaac Newton was super smart, probably one of the smartest people who ever lived. Obviously, we don't know his IQ, but there's little doubt it would have been high enough to provide difficulty charting it if we could. But he also very likely plagiarized a lot of his most famous works. He also lost a fortune in poor investment decisions. He also spent probably years of his life trying to convert things that were not gold into gold, as if that was a thing that could happen. Granted, it was the 1700's, but still...


----------



## jaxadam

bostjan said:


> I think we need to be careful in equating someone who is smart with someone who is right. Several very very smart people throughout history have done bad things and also been very very wrong about some of the assertions that they have made.
> 
> I don't care if Hitler's IQ was 150. It was a waste.
> 
> Not to compare these people with Hitler, but:
> 
> Bobby Fisher had an IQ of over 180. He was well-known to be unstable. He went homeless for a time. He was a racist, and, by several accounts by people who met him personally, he was probably an asshole. He died quite young and fairly disgraced.
> 
> Isaac Newton was super smart, probably one of the smartest people who ever lived. Obviously, we don't know his IQ, but there's little doubt it would have been high enough to provide difficulty charting it if we could. But he also very likely plagiarized a lot of his most famous works. He also lost a fortune in poor investment decisions. He also spent probably years of his life trying to convert things that were not gold into gold, as if that was a thing that could happen. Granted, it was the 1700's, but still...



There’s also Kurt Godel who was so smart he died of starvation because he would only eat his wife’s cookin’.


----------



## oversteve

Kolaniak said:


> They are certainly not LGBT-friendly liberals.
> A lot of them are followers of Stepan Bandera, a man who is a national hero in Ukraine. A man who collaborated with Nazi Germany.


That though is significantly misinterpreted with the help of Russia. That colaboration took place before 1941 with Germany's abwehr to gain intelligence against USSR in his fight for Ukrainian independence (at that time Germany was still colaborating with Stalin, is he a colaborator?), was imprisoned by Germany after they invaded USSR from 1941 till end of 1944, later in early 1945 he was offered to work with Germany under the lead of Russia's colaborator Vlasov but refused it. And roughly that's all his activity during WW2. Also he wasn't persecuted during Nuremberg as well as other more or less famous ukrainian natinalists who are usually claimed to be 'Nazis' by Russian narratives.

You can take one more similar exmaple from history - Mannerheim and Finnish army fought on the side of Germany against USSR in 41-44. Is he widely considered to be a colaborator? Why is he treated as a hero by Finnish people?


----------



## Crungy

@jaxadam


----------



## bostjan

jaxadam said:


> There’s also Kurt Godel who was so smart he died of starvation because he would only eat his wife’s cookin’.


 Didn't his wife die after him, too? Like, she was too weak or sick or something, so she stopped cooking...

Yeah, there are thousands of stories like this. Maybe we see people who think about things in a unique way, and call it smart, when it's really the same predisposition for insanity.


----------



## narad

Kolaniak said:


> "aggressively regressive moron"
> 
> You do know a lot of the Nazi elite back in Nazi Germany were high IQ people?



Lol, you have their test scores?


----------



## Adieu

Kolaniak said:


> I am not defending anyone. I just happen to find it particularly odd that people think that Nazis are always dumb people. It is like equating being a leftist to being intelligent.



Mr. Lavrov, how do you find the time to be here, too?

Don't you have some explaining to do to some Italians and Israelis right now?

They did NOT seem amused


----------



## Flappydoodle

End of the day, Ukraine is far from perfect. Definitely not as "liberal" on average as much of Europe when it comes to views on LGBT, Jews, Nazis, whatever.

Does any of it matter? They seemingly elected a pro-EU president and amended their constitution to aspire to EU membership and closer links to the West. You look at Poland, Hungary etc and you're not going to find radically different views, and yet they are EU members.

And now Ukraine is being invaded by a huge country which is a bully, run by a dictator who is threatening nuclear war. Not just invaded, but there's good evidence of genocidal actions such as deliberately targeting civilians, destroying civilian infrastructure and kidnapping large numbers of people. That's on top of all the executions, torture, rape etc and attempts at erasure of Ukrainian culture. 

Why everybody is bickering about "who" supports Ukraine? Is it other Nazis? Is it leftists and white saviours? Is it amerikans, (whatever the fuck that means)? WHO CARES? It's quite plain to almost everybody that what Russia is doing is very wrong. It's virtually unanimous throughout the western world. US congress passed support with almost complete support from both sides.

Why are people bitching about whether Nazis were intelligent people or not? Why does it even matter? Like any group, they're going to be a mixture. In my opinion, Hitler was pretty smart - at least in terms of his strategic thinking. But so what? Intelligence alone isn't some sort of merit or any indication that a person is good. You can be intelligent and totally evil, intelligent and a saint, or intelligent and a completely useless failure in life. The word "intelligent" isn't a compliment any more than "tall" or "athletic" - they're just descriptions. It's weird to believe that someone saying Hitler (or Putin) was smart is somehow condoning his actions.

"Funniest" part of all of this is Russia claiming to be de-Nazifying a Jewish president, while carrying out remarkably Hitler-esque actions. Hell, Lavrov just said Hitler was a Jew and that Jews are the worst Nazis... It's literally "accuse your opponent of the thing you are guilty of" cranked up to the max. Lucky for us, it causes even more countries to back away from Russia. Israel has been playing neutral, but things like this are going to seriously piss them off.


----------



## bostjan

Why is Russian media talking so aggressively about Ireland? They have been circulating a computer-generated clip of nuking Ireland with a thermonuclear torpedo. WTF did Ireland do to Russia, other than tell their warships to piss off when they wanted to run some drills off their coast?


----------



## Crungy

What in the actual fuck.


----------



## Crungy

A bit of an overreaction to some fishermen telling them to piss off, in my opinion.


----------



## Drew

Kolaniak said:


> I am not defending anyone. I just happen to find it particularly odd that people think that Nazis are always dumb people. It is like equating being a leftist to being intelligent.


While being a Nazi in 1939 took anywhere froom certain pathological lack of human empathy to outright sadistic bloodlust, I suppose you are _technically_ right that it did not require stupidity, and rarely are the leaders of any upstart movement actually stupid. 

However, being a Nazi in 2022, after we fought a war over the Nazi ideology that they lost... That's a little harder of a proposition. To be a Nazi today is to not have learned a couple pretty big lessons from our past.


----------



## Kolaniak

Drew said:


> While being a Nazi in 1939 took anywhere froom certain pathological lack of human empathy to outright sadistic bloodlust, I suppose you are _technically_ right that it did not require stupidity, and rarely are the leaders of any upstart movement actually stupid.
> 
> However, being a Nazi in 2022, after we fought a war over the Nazi ideology that they lost... That's a little harder of a proposition. To be a Nazi today is to not have learned a couple pretty big lessons from our past.



Nazis in 2022 are usually dumb people who wouldn't be able to read Mein Kampf in the original German and who would rather cover themselves in cringey tattoos and be aggressive towards non-white people. That is what being a Nazi in 2022 is about. 
By the way, quite a few of those in Azov have those cringey tattoos, proudly show their admiration of Hitler and are hardcore nationalists. Funny how leftists in the West who'd hardly ever heard of Ukraine before 2022 are now supporting such a radical movement.


----------



## oversteve

Kolaniak said:


> Nazis in 2022 are usually dumb people who wouldn't be able to read Mein Kampf in the original German and who would rather cover themselves in cringey tattoos and be aggressive towards non-white people. That is what being a Nazi in 2022 is about.
> By the way, quite a few of those in Azov have those cringey tattoos, proudly show their admiration of Hitler and are hardcore nationalists. Funny how leftists in the West who'd hardly ever heard of Ukraine before 2022 are now supporting such a radical movement.


Funny how some people don't read, one more time - those things you are telling are more or less valid for early 2014 when Azov was a self defence force, even then idk how many neo-nazis where there but there are around 20 people circulating on those old photos with zigas, swastikas and other nazi-related stuff. Nowadays Azov is a full fledged military batallion partially consisting of those people from 2014 and lots of other people added, among them jewish, asians and caucasians. While they are natinalists they are deffinitely far from being neo-nazi unit.


----------



## Kolaniak

oversteve said:


> Funny how some people don't read, one more time - those things you are telling are more or less valid for early 2014 when Azov was a self defence force, even then idk how many neo-nazis where there but there are around 20 people circulating on those old photos with zigas, swastikas and other nazi-related stuff. Nowadays Azov is a full fledged military batallion partially consisting of those people from 2014 and lots of other people added, among them jewish, asians and caucasians. While they are natinalists they are deffinitely far from being neo-nazi unit.


Admittedly I didn't read any of your comments.

May the good ones win. They probably already are.


----------



## Xaios

Kolaniak said:


> Funny how leftists in the West who'd hardly ever heard of Ukraine before 2022 are now supporting such a radical movement.


Got a citation on that? Because I've yet to see anyone on the left who is an Azov apologist. It's also funny how a bunch of people on the right are validating Russia's claims of "de-nazification" of all of Ukraine based on the existence of one single regional militia, while also not batting an eye about how Russia sent in their own out-and-proud group of self-proclaimed nazis, the Wagner group, to perform said de-nazification.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Why is Russian media talking so aggressively about Ireland? They have been circulating a computer-generated clip of nuking Ireland with a thermonuclear torpedo. WTF did Ireland do to Russia, other than tell their warships to piss off when they wanted to run some drills off their coast?



Very likely that was supposed to be the UK and they messed up (or decided to emphasize AND EVEN NORTHERN IRELAND, TOO)

Because Russian-language TV had a bunch of propagandists screaming about how they could blow up the UK with one missile and.... who knows? Some muahahaha radioactive dust losers crap.


----------



## narad

Adieu said:


> Very likely that was supposed to be the UK and they messed up (or decided to emphasize AND EVEN NORTHERN IRELAND, TOO)
> 
> Because Russian-language TV had a bunch of propagandists screaming about how they could blow up the UK with one missile and.... who knows? Some muahahaha radioactive dust losers crap.



Breaking news from Russia: Nazis discovered in Northern Ireland.


----------



## Flappydoodle

Kolaniak said:


> Nazis in 2022 are usually dumb people who wouldn't be able to read Mein Kampf in the original German and who would rather cover themselves in cringey tattoos and be aggressive towards non-white people. That is what being a Nazi in 2022 is about.
> By the way, quite a few of those in Azov have those cringey tattoos, proudly show their admiration of Hitler and are hardcore nationalists. Funny how leftists in the West who'd hardly ever heard of Ukraine before 2022 are now supporting such a radical movement.


I don't think anybody, even leftists, is outright supporting Nazis or Nazi ideology.

They are supporting withdrawal of Russian troops and an end to the war. It's not the same thing.


----------



## Adieu

Kolaniak said:


> Admittedly I didn't read any of your comments.
> 
> May the good ones win. They probably already are.



Ah, "the good ones"

Hmm doesn't that sound familiar

Why does Putinist propaganda steal EVERYTHING from European and American racists' playbooks???


----------



## Adieu

Flappydoodle said:


> I don't think anybody, even leftists, is outright supporting Nazis or Nazi ideology.
> 
> They are supporting withdrawal of Russian troops and an end to the war. It's not the same thing.



They borrowed this crap from MAGA's anti-BLM playbook

"Never mind the details about how or why we shot/chocked the person to death, we have some PROFOUND allegations that s/he MAY have been a shifty character, so folks it's all good and A-OK!"


Except these clowns took it up a notch and extended it to whole cities and regions. "Never mind the carpet bombing, Solovyov and Zakharova said Nazis lived somewhere over there! Yeehaw!"


----------



## StevenC

narad said:


> Breaking news from Russia: Nazis discovered in Northern Ireland.


Not _breaking_ news


----------



## vilk

Of course the leaders of the Nazi moment were smart. They knew dumbfuck incestuous wife sister beating retards gobble that shit up, just as they still do to this day.

I don't actually believe that Hitler and other major leaders in the original Nazi movement genuinely believed the various principles that outline the Nazi philosophy. It was simply a tool to mobilize the stupidly proud, just as the fascist republican party currently uses the moronic white Christian masses to realize their facist coup.


----------



## narad

StevenC said:


> Not _breaking_ news



Well of course I know one, but this is NaziS plural.


----------



## DiezelMonster

Kolaniak said:


> Nazis in 2022 are usually dumb people who wouldn't be able to read Mein Kampf in the original German and who would rather cover themselves in cringey tattoos and be aggressive towards non-white people. That is what being a Nazi in 2022 is about.
> By the way, quite a few of those in Azov have those cringey tattoos, proudly show their admiration of Hitler and are hardcore nationalists. Funny how leftists in the West who'd hardly ever heard of Ukraine before 2022 are now supporting such a radical movement.


Your comments in this thread are almost of a veiled nazi sympathizer, who's hearts and minds are you trying to sway here?


----------



## Drew

Kolaniak said:


> Nazis in 2022 are usually dumb people who wouldn't be able to read Mein Kampf in the original German and who would rather cover themselves in cringey tattoos and be aggressive towards non-white people. That is what being a Nazi in 2022 is about.
> By the way, quite a few of those in Azov have those cringey tattoos, proudly show their admiration of Hitler and are hardcore nationalists. Funny how leftists in the West who'd hardly ever heard of Ukraine before 2022 are now supporting such a radical movement.


You guys, we found the Russian troll! 

In addition to @oversteve's excellent post, the Azov unit was integrated into the Ukrainian military about a decade ago in an attempt to sever its historical ties to Ukrainian white supremacy groups - yes, Ukraine has them too - and whatever the unit's sordid history, trying to tie the _entire_ Ukrainian army and government to white supremacy based on the history of a single division is a bit problematic even before you account for the fact Zelenskyy himself is Jewish.

Arguing Ukraine is a pro-Nazi nation because of Azov makes about as much sense as saying Joe Biden is a Nazi because of the Proud Boys.

Not aware of any "leftists" explicitly cheering on the Azov division either, while we're at it.


----------



## pondman

Adieu said:


> Very likely that was supposed to be the UK and they messed up (or decided to emphasize AND EVEN NORTHERN IRELAND, TOO)
> 
> Because Russian-language TV had a bunch of propagandists screaming about how they could blow up the UK with one missile and.... who knows? Some muahahaha radioactive dust losers crap.


TBH does Russia know or have clue WTF they are now trying to achieve. This is one hell of a pear shaped war.


----------



## p0ke

pondman said:


> TBH does Russia know or have clue WTF they are now trying to achieve. This is one hell of a pear shaped war.



That's kinda what I'm worried about tbh, living right next to them. They don't really have anything to gain from attacking Finland, but who knows wtf they'll do next...


----------



## lurè

pondman said:


> TBH does Russia know or have clue WTF they are now trying to achieve. This is one hell of a pear shaped war.


 Probably making URSS great again


----------



## Crungy

More claims of "leftist" groups are doing this or that.... It really reeks of infowars/Tucker Carlson or whoever is the latest garbage spewer striking fear into the right as usual.


----------



## wheresthefbomb

Interesting that it's so much easier to recognize nazis on the other side of the globe than in our own neighborhoods. Wonder what that's about.


----------



## bostjan

What would happen is someone with a big military decided to "de-nazify" Russia?


----------



## pondman

p0ke said:


> That's kinda what I'm worried about tbh, living right next to them. They don't really have anything to gain from attacking Finland, but who knows wtf they'll do next...


They have nothing left in the tank to start an attack anywhere else. No moral, no money and no idea makes dads army a complete joke.


----------



## Adieu

Hey @oversteve just curious, I ran across a Ukrainian guy on Twitter in war-related topics with the same avatar. Are you @Zam*** (not sure if we're supposed to share such details in full) or is it just a popular avatar?


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> Hey @oversteve just curious, I ran across a Ukrainian guy on Twitter in war-related topics with the same avatar. Are you @Zam*** (not sure if we're supposed to share such details in full) or is it just a popular avatar?


nah, i don't a have a twitter account at all so probably just a coincidence 
that guy on my avatar is Oleksand Turchynov, he was an actiing president in 2014 after Yanukovych fled and before Poroshenko was elected and then a head of national security and defence council up till 2019. He's a pastor and russians hate him so at some point he's got a nickname of "bloody pastor" and a shitload of memes associated with it


----------



## Xaios

Someone get that man a Holy Hand Grenade.


----------



## oversteve

meanwhile in Russia... it starts like an average tik tok video with unexpected ending 



p.s. there's no translation but they didn't say anything related to Ukraine


----------



## DiezelMonster

So Finland and Sweden just officially applied to NATO, will take a few months most likely to complete that process but I bet it gets fast-tracked.

It seems this invasion had the complete opposite effect of stopping NATO expansion.

Now Switzerland who have remained neutral for hundreds of years are aligning with NATO and requesting joint nato training operations and support.

Things are getting wild!


----------



## Adieu

In other news, Putler's daughter apparently birthed him a grandkid... by Zelensky. Seriously.

Not THE Zelensky though. Just A Zelensky, some married old dancer turned ballet boss who recently got kicked out of Bavaria.

Loool.

Sweet, sweet humiliation


----------



## mbardu

Adieu said:


> In other news, Putler's daughter apparently birthed him a grandkid... by Zelensky. Seriously.
> 
> Not THE Zelensky though. Just A Zelensky, some married old dancer turned ballet boss who recently got kicked out of Bavaria.
> 
> Loool.
> 
> Sweet, sweet humiliation



No

Way


----------



## Adieu

mbardu said:


> No
> 
> Way











Putin's daughter revealed to be dating a ballet star named Zelensky


Vladimir Putin's daughter Katerina Tikhonova, 35, reportedly has a daughter with 52-year-old Igor Zelensky, who is a leading Russian professional ballet dancer and top director.




www.google.com





WAY!


----------



## bostjan

Anyone heard news about a Russian Air Force Major General shot down in a fighter plane?






Ukraine. BBC: Russian general Kanamat Botashev died in Ukraine. This is the highest-ranking military pilot who died in the war


Kanamat Botashev, retired Russian general Kanamat Botashev, died over Ukraine, BBC News reported on Tuesday. It was reported that his plane was shot down by Ukrainian air defense forces on Sunday. Botashev is the highest-ranking military pilot who died in the war with Ukraine. The BBC states...




polishnews.co.uk





I guess Russia is sending their generals actively to the front lines because... reasons? It's looking more and more like Russia is just going to be the laughing stock of this "operation." Is there anything that might bring an end to this nonsense?


----------



## tedtan

I’ve read reports from Ukrainian intelligence and former MI6 personnel, including Christopher Steele of the Steele Dossier on Trump, that they expect Putin will be in an asylum before the end of 2022 if he is still alive. Ukrainian intelligence also claims that there is a coup to overthrow Putin currently taking place. I’ll believe when I see it, but hopefully something happens sooner than later.


----------



## mbardu

bostjan said:


> Anyone heard news about a Russian Air Force Major General shot down in a fighter plane?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukraine. BBC: Russian general Kanamat Botashev died in Ukraine. This is the highest-ranking military pilot who died in the war
> 
> 
> Kanamat Botashev, retired Russian general Kanamat Botashev, died over Ukraine, BBC News reported on Tuesday. It was reported that his plane was shot down by Ukrainian air defense forces on Sunday. Botashev is the highest-ranking military pilot who died in the war with Ukraine. The BBC states...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> polishnews.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess Russia is sending their generals actively to the front lines because... reasons? It's looking more and more like Russia is just going to be the laughing stock of this "operation." Is there anything that might bring an end to this nonsense?



Do they just call every officer in their ranks "General" somehow or what?
Usual caveat of "we are only hearing those reports of dead generals from our sources, which are also propagandized and biased", but they sure seem to be losing a ton of "generals".


----------



## Adieu

mbardu said:


> Do they just call every officer in their ranks "General" somehow or what?
> Usual caveat of "we are only hearing those reports of dead generals from our sources, which are also propagandized and biased", but they sure seem to be losing a ton of "generals".



Sort of.

Russian General is the functional equivalent of a Lt. Colonel.

Back in Yeltsin's day, before they classified such info, Russian military had 2996 generals. Doubt it's any less, probably more now.


----------



## Drew

Adieu said:


> Sort of.
> 
> Russian General is the functional equivalent of a Lt. Colonel.
> 
> Back in Yeltsin's day, before they classified such info, Russian military had 2996 generals. Doubt it's any less, probably more now.


Huh, I didn't kno that. Google directed me to someone citing this elsewhere: 









Streitkräfte Russlands – Wikipedia







de.wikipedia.org





about 1,100 generals as of 2008. So that makes it both less surprising and less remarkable that Ukraine has killed a bunch of them.


----------



## p0ke

tedtan said:


> I’ve read reports from Ukrainian intelligence and former MI6 personnel, including Christopher Steele of the Steele Dossier on Trump, that they expect Putin will be in an asylum before the end of 2022 if he is still alive. Ukrainian intelligence also claims that there is a coup to overthrow Putin currently taking place. I’ll believe when I see it, but hopefully something happens sooner than later.



Well, there's even been speculation that he could already be dead, and all his recent public appearances have been pre-recorded or acted out by a stunt double. Apparently they'd be covering it up just to keep the status quo for now, because when the news is out it'll basically mean civil war in Russia.


----------



## MFB

As long as it doesn't mean a big barrage of nukes for everyone because "if I can't have it, no one will" then I'll take it


----------



## sleewell

sounds like putin was treated for advanced cancer and he survived an assassination attempt.


----------



## p0ke

MFB said:


> As long as it doesn't mean a big barrage of nukes for everyone because "if I can't have it, no one will" then I'll take it



Pretty much my thoughts exactly.


----------



## bostjan

p0ke said:


> Well, there's even been speculation that he could already be dead, and all his recent public appearances have been pre-recorded or acted out by a stunt double. Apparently they'd be covering it up just to keep the status quo for now, because when the news is out it'll basically mean civil war in Russia.


Well, if the real Putin died and the stunt double took over for him, would that effectively make the fake Putin the real Putin?

I don't buy it though. He did that rally a month or two ago, in front of tons of people, and he looked like regular Putin. Every paranoid leader has at least one body double, but those doubles never look convincing close-up, and that's never the purpose of them anyway.

Anyway, Putin has always been kind of vain, to the point where I can't buy into the idea that he'd allow his stunt double to have that much glory. He probably wrote in his will that, after he dies, either A) he gets to continue to rule Russia as a corpse or B) that Russia just go ahead and nuke the entire world (because without Putin, what use is planet Earth anyway?).



Drew said:


> Huh, I didn't kno that. Google directed me to someone citing this elsewhere:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Streitkräfte Russlands – Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> de.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> about 1,100 generals as of 2008. So that makes it both less surprising and less remarkable that Ukraine has killed a bunch of them.



IDK 12 generals in less than 6 months, including two high-ranking ones. How much front-line action do Lieutenant Colonels typically see, in, say, the US Army, or British Army? I'm guessing very little. Even if you equated a Russian Major General to a US (just plain) Major, this would still be a little surprising. And, anyway, these Russian generals who were killed in action had publicly known assignments as commanders (sometimes deputy commander) of Armies equivalent to brigades in western armies, so they'd be more like brigadier generals. I think, no matter how you slice it up logically, this is an impressive feat for the Ukrainians and/or makes the Russians look like they have no idea what they are doing.

Coming back to my earlier post, the retired general flying a fighter jet through a war zone is just all kinds of weird. The fact that his rank was too high to be flying missions is really only a tiny piece of the puzzle of that news. I think it really strongly reinforces the idea that the Russian military is basically a bunch of disorganized cowboys out there. To be clear, if the guy had been a retired Coast Guard Captain, the story would be more or less the same amount of bizarre.

----

In other news, it looks like many African countries, which have been dependent on both Russia and Ukraine for wheat, are facing a food shortage which may get much worse before harvest season. I know I mentioned early on how I had a hunch that this war was more about resources than territory, and it looks like it's going to become more and more about just that as it stretches on past the first 100 days of escalations.


----------



## Adieu

It's not ABOUT resources. It is being FOUGHT VIA RESOURCES.

Putin has long weaponized energy supplies, now he appears to be intending to manufacture a food crisis to pressure Europe.


----------



## p0ke

@bostjan yeah, I don't buy it either, but those speculations are out there.


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> It's not ABOUT resources. It is being FOUGHT VIA RESOURCES.
> 
> Putin has long weaponized energy supplies, now he appears to be intending to manufacture a food crisis to pressure Europe.


Why not both? Russia has tons of natural resources, but also lacks certain resources. For example, even though Russia has the world's largest nuclear stockpile of weapons, Russia only controls a tiny percentage of the world's uranium resources. Africa is full of uranium. Maybe the whole leveraging the African Union over wheat is about cocoa beans and bananas, but it might well be that Russia consumes nearly twice as much uranium as it is able to produce on its own and is now cut off from its trading partners.


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> Why not both? Russia has tons of natural resources, but also lacks certain resources. For example, even though Russia has the world's largest nuclear stockpile of weapons, Russia only controls a tiny percentage of the world's uranium resources. Africa is full of uranium. Maybe the whole leveraging the African Union over wheat is about cocoa beans and bananas, but it might well be that Russia consumes nearly twice as much uranium as it is able to produce on its own and is now cut off from its trading partners.



Too complex

Putler is a thug at heart. As long as his pockets are full, he has "respect" and "glory", he's happy.

He doesn't care about his people and therefore doesn't care about resources for them. As long as there's enough for him and his gang, and there IS.

In fact, a lot of his policies have been suggested to be aimed at INTENTIONALLY impoverishing his subjects. He wants a country of serfs with a filthy-rich all-powerful "nobility".

Wealthy cities or prosperous rural communities filled with "fat" "bougie" residents are not only NOT a goal, they are an existential threat to be destroyed or subjugated and impoverished.

This is a man who said that the "middle class" is a salary of $220 per month. While dressed in ~$250k of designer clothes and bling.

Much of his efforts have been dedicated to building a caste society mostly populated by scared and timid bipedal cattle with zero hopes or aspirations.


----------



## Adieu

He's even made some cautious efforts at re-instituting SLAVERY. Literally.

There was talk of building closed industrial cities out in the sticks to be populated by convicted forced laborers.


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> He's even made some cautious efforts at re-instituting SLAVERY. Literally.
> 
> There was talk of building closed industrial cities out in the sticks to be populated by convicted forced laborers.


Welcome to the USA, where what you just mentioned is _written into our Constitution_. Probably no one is surprised that inmates in Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, or Florida are leased out to factories, who then become responsible for providing shelter and food for the inmates in return (which, of course, the inmates get no say in leaving to find another job at that point - not sure how that's _not_ slavery, but then again, it's in our Constitution), but even in California, inmates are trained as firefighters, to risk their lives fighting wildfires for $0.25/hour: https://www.vice.com/en/article/paz...ing-their-lives-to-fight-california-wildfires



Adieu said:


> Too complex
> 
> Putler is a thug at heart. As long as his pockets are full, he has "respect" and "glory", he's happy.
> 
> He doesn't care about his people and therefore doesn't care about resources for them. As long as there's enough for him and his gang, and there IS.
> 
> In fact, a lot of his policies have been suggested to be aimed at INTENTIONALLY impoverishing his subjects. He wants a country of serfs with a filthy-rich all-powerful "nobility".
> 
> Wealthy cities or prosperous rural communities filled with "fat" "bougie" residents are not only NOT a goal, they are an existential threat to be destroyed or subjugated and impoverished.
> 
> This is a man who said that the "middle class" is a salary of $220 per month. While dressed in ~$250k of designer clothes and bling.
> 
> Much of his efforts have been dedicated to building a caste society mostly populated by scared and timid bipedal cattle with zero hopes or aspirations.



I guess special trade agreements with Africa could help get there, too, but I'd argue that if so, that's the _more_ complex route of motivation. Either way, hopefully we will never know.


----------



## mbardu




----------



## oversteve

> Russian-backed separatist court hands death sentences to two Britons and a Moroccan who fought for Ukraine





https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/06/09/ukraine-foreign-fighters-death-sentence/


----------



## philkilla

Invaders lose about 400 soldiers, 10 tanks, 69 vehicles in Ukraine in past 24 hours


Combat losses of the Russian occupation army over the past day amounted to about 400 people of military personnel, and since the beginning of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, as of Friday morning, August 19, amounted to about 44,700 people, according to the Facebook page of the...




en.interfax.com.ua





The level of attrition is staggering; I can only imagine what their propaganda machines are pumping out now.


----------



## DiezelMonster

philkilla said:


> Invaders lose about 400 soldiers, 10 tanks, 69 vehicles in Ukraine in past 24 hours
> 
> 
> Combat losses of the Russian occupation army over the past day amounted to about 400 people of military personnel, and since the beginning of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, as of Friday morning, August 19, amounted to about 44,700 people, according to the Facebook page of the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.interfax.com.ua
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The level of attrition is staggering; I can only imagine what their propaganda machines are pumping out now.



I'm curious to know how much of our reported information regarding Russia's losses can be attributed to propaganda.

I know they are doing abysmal compared to how they told the world they were going to do. 

The US is doing a great job of fighting a proxy war, For Ukraine's sake I hope these numbers are correct.


----------



## sleewell

u.s. weapons makers are LOVING it. the ability to test weapons in real combat without losing american lives is great for them. 

i think its fairly obvious by now that putin really isnt going to anything to us so we should keep sending longer range weapons to ukraine. he is a bully with a pretty weak army, we should call his bluff. i think ukraine should bring the fight into russian territory. russia is really struggling with areas almost everyone thought would be easy for them to take. they wouldn't be able to handle fighting on multiple fronts. 


the car bomb over the weekend that killed putin's close allies daughter was pretty interesting. wonder who is really behind it.


----------



## Drew

DiezelMonster said:


> I'm curious to know how much of our reported information regarding Russia's losses can be attributed to propaganda.
> 
> I know they are doing abysmal compared to how they told the world they were going to do.
> 
> The US is doing a great job of fighting a proxy war, For Ukraine's sake I hope these numbers are correct.


So, the question of whether or not reported information is accurate or prophaganda is, well, on one hand kind of an interesting one, but on the other, one with a pretty clear practical answer. 

Russia was widely expected to steamroll Ukraine if they invaded before the war. Six months in, they've made some sizable inroads, maybe, but clearly didn't have the blitzkrieg victory the world expected. If theres a disagreement between what Russia says they're losing and what the West says Russia is losing, it's likely going to err on the side of the West's estimates than Russia's, conditioned on the fact that an alleged superpower hasn't actually won a war against a much smaller nation.


----------



## philkilla

DiezelMonster said:


> I'm curious to know how much of our reported information regarding Russia's losses can be attributed to propaganda.
> 
> I know they are doing abysmal compared to how they told the world they were going to do.
> 
> The US is doing a great job of fighting a proxy war, For Ukraine's sake I hope these numbers are correct.



It's hard to truly get a stake in what is accurate. 

I'd say it is safe to assume both sides are broadcasting fluffed data; one consensus I've read is Ukraine is on the losing side, but the mass amount of equipment we've provides them for the proxy war is still beneficial to help drive Russia's economy/populace/infrastructure into the dirt.

The whole situation is fucked beyond belief, and I think it will only get worse.


----------



## philkilla

Russia Is at War With NATO, State TV Declares, Has No Plans of Stopping


A Russian propagandist said his country has liberated "around 10 million Ukrainian citizens from Nazi authorities."




www.newsweek.com


----------



## DiezelMonster

philkilla said:


> Russia Is at War With NATO, State TV Declares, Has No Plans of Stopping
> 
> 
> A Russian propagandist said his country has liberated "around 10 million Ukrainian citizens from Nazi authorities."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



What do we think of the assassination of Alexander Dugan's daughter? he was Putin's top advisor.


----------



## wheresthefbomb

DiezelMonster said:


> What do we think of the assassination of Alexander Dugan's daughter? he was Putin's top advisor.



talk shit get hit


----------



## oversteve

wheresthefbomb said:


> talk shit get hit


Nothing more to add here, some media and Pope addressing her like an unforeseen victim but in reality she said and did enough to get it even without taking into account her father's background.

Still there are few strange thing regarding the whole incident, according to russo news the bomd was planted under the driver's seat and the driver and car was burnt to crisp and yet her body and face were intact at the funeral and Dugin was smiling from time to time ...


----------



## Xaios

Another Russian oil and gas executive dies from an acute case of rapid onset defenestration:









Top Russian oil official falls to death from hospital window - sources


Ravil Maganov, the chairman of Russia's second-largest oil producer Lukoil , died on Thursday after falling from a hospital window in Moscow, two sources familiar with the situation said, becoming the latest in a series of businessmen to meet with sudden unexplained deaths.




www.reuters.com


----------



## bostjan

Xaios said:


> Another Russian oil and gas executive dies from an acute case of rapid onset defenestration:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Top Russian oil official falls to death from hospital window - sources
> 
> 
> Ravil Maganov, the chairman of Russia's second-largest oil producer Lukoil , died on Thursday after falling from a hospital window in Moscow, two sources familiar with the situation said, becoming the latest in a series of businessmen to meet with sudden unexplained deaths.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com





Reuters said:


> Lukoil said in a statement that Maganov had "passed away following a serious illness".



Damn, I have that same illness of being severely allergic to six-storey falls.


----------



## Xaios

bostjan said:


> Damn, I have that same illness of being severely allergic to six-storey falls.


Yeah, I also find that my immune system reacts overly aggressively to going from terminal velocity to full stop in an instant.


----------



## wheresthefbomb




----------



## Drew

bostjan said:


> Damn, I have that same illness of being severely allergic to six-storey falls.


I've read drinking enough can provide some immunity to that illness, you know. And, considering this is Russia, I absolutely have to now suspect foul play.


----------



## Flappydoodle

philkilla said:


> It's hard to truly get a stake in what is accurate.
> 
> I'd say it is safe to assume both sides are broadcasting fluffed data; one consensus I've read is Ukraine is on the losing side, but the mass amount of equipment we've provides them for the proxy war is still beneficial to help drive Russia's economy/populace/infrastructure into the dirt.
> 
> The whole situation is fucked beyond belief, and I think it will only get worse.


I think this is pretty realistic. Of course it depends what the definition of "winning" is. I doubt Ukraine will go back to 2013 borders, so Putin will likely "win" some land, resources etc. If things go well for him, they may be able to land lock Ukraine.

He's also caused massive devastation and weakened Ukraine for a long time. Millions of people have left. Many homeless. Millions traumatised. Infrastructure damaged. Repair bill into comfortably 12 figures USD. He'll probably count that as a win.

However, it has definitely come at a greater cost than he anticipated. Lots of Russian soldiers dead. Lots of equipment destroyed. Whatever prestige they had has definitely been tarnished. He's earned a new NATO border country. He's united the EU and UK and US more than ever. Even left and right wing politicians are on the same side now. And we're unlikely to go back to trading normally with Russia for a long time. So that's a long-term reduction in ability to sell their stuff or to buy nice things from the West which will definitely hurt his country.

From our western point of view, this is a gift that keeps giving. Ukraine is so far very willing to fight. We just send them stuff. We get to drain Russia at very little cost - just by supplying stuff that we "buy" from ourselves anyway. BAE, Lockheed, Raytheon etc employ a ton of people in really good jobs. Asking them to ramp production to refill our stocks really isn't a bad thing. Looking at the "$400 BN" Biden signed - something like 1/2 of it immediately goes back in the US military. 

I'm sure we are learning a TON also. How our weapons perform. More about logistics of delivering them and supplying. We're seeing the important of small drones. We're learning about the problems in Russian doctrine, equipment etc, and will have ways to exploit it. 

It's also nice to be weaning ourselves off oil and gas in general too. So aside from tragic Ukrainian civilian deaths, this war is absolutely amazing for western countries. That's why they're not pushing to end it any time soon. Longer it goes on, the worst things are for Russia.


----------



## AMOS

I wasn't aware China and India were training together 


Russia is using a fraction of soldiers it claimed for military exercises with China and India, UK intel says


----------



## jaxadam

AMOS said:


> I wasn't aware China and India were training together
> 
> 
> Russia is using a fraction of soldiers it claimed for military exercises with China and India, UK intel says



Don't worry, Taiwan has nothing to worry about.









Biden administration approves more than $1.1B in arms sales to Taiwan | CNN Politics


The Biden administration has approved more than $1.1 billion in arms sales to Taiwan, a move likely to further inflame already-heightened tensions between Washington and Beijing.




www.cnn.com


----------



## AMOS

jaxadam said:


> Don't worry, Taiwan has nothing to worry about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden administration approves more than $1.1B in arms sales to Taiwan | CNN Politics
> 
> 
> The Biden administration has approved more than $1.1 billion in arms sales to Taiwan, a move likely to further inflame already-heightened tensions between Washington and Beijing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com


They don't like each other so there must be something behind it. We should have sold that Aegis technology to Taiwan decades ago


----------



## Randy

jaxadam said:


> Don't worry, Taiwan has nothing to worry about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden administration approves more than $1.1B in arms sales to Taiwan | CNN Politics
> 
> 
> The Biden administration has approved more than $1.1 billion in arms sales to Taiwan, a move likely to further inflame already-heightened tensions between Washington and Beijing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com



Something off about the flag in that thumbnail


----------



## DiezelMonster

Randy said:


> Something off about the flag in that thumbnail


its on the moon


----------



## DrewH

Flappydoodle said:


> We're learning about the problems in Russian doctrine, equipment etc, and will have ways to exploit it.
> 
> Longer it goes on, the worst things are for Russia.



That's an understatement. This might be the biggest military blunder since Napoleons march to Moscow. If a land war erupted between the US and Russia, and assuming no one was dumb enough over there to use nukes, Biden would be smoking a cigar in the Kremlin within 3 weeks. I think the more appropriate statement is the longer this goes on, the worse it gets for Putin. Even Hitler, who was thought to be untouchable, was very nearly offed in 44. Saved by the heavy leg of a table.


----------



## Flappydoodle

DrewH said:


> That's an understatement. This might be the biggest military blunder since Napoleons march to Moscow. If a land war erupted between the US and Russia, and assuming no one was dumb enough over there to use nukes, Biden would be smoking a cigar in the Kremlin within 3 weeks. I think the more appropriate statement is the longer this goes on, the worse it gets for Putin. Even Hitler, who was thought to be untouchable, was very nearly offed in 44. Saved by the heavy leg of a table.


I guess it comes down to how much Russia can learn from all of this. I still think right now they're the more powerful force in the Ukraine fight. The western mission is obvious to prolong things and drain Russia, but they may still come out on top. There are risks that Europe might get bored, lost commitment, lose public support (especially with rising prices etc), and Putin doesn't have to care about the losses. So we shall see how much Russia can adapt and try to overcome.


----------



## bostjan

That's the biggest point to consider - in a war of attrition, Russia simply has more people and more raw materials to throw at Ukraine.

I don't think that a USA-vs-Russia war would end with Biden walking into the Kremlin. Something that should have been painfully learned in Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, and now in Ukraine is that homefield advantage plays a huge part in guerilla warfare, If Russia tried to invade the USA, it's be suicide, but I think likewise if the USA tried to invade Russia. I don't think the USA would be stupid enough to just flat out invade Russia, though, without first drumming up a revolutionary war and then intervening or whatever. Even that would probably be just incredibly stupid, strategically.

But when you think about whether Russia will learn something from this war or not - I have my doubts. Putin has surrounded himself with sycophants who simply "yessir" and try to paint the rosiest outlook possible. Misinformation in situations like this could be Russia's biggest weakness. So it depends on how much of his own Kool Aid Putin is drinking.


----------



## nightflameauto

bostjan said:


> That's the biggest point to consider - in a war of attrition, Russia simply has more people and more raw materials to throw at Ukraine.
> 
> I don't think that a USA-vs-Russia war would end with Biden walking into the Kremlin. Something that should have been painfully learned in Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, and now in Ukraine is that homefield advantage plays a huge part in guerilla warfare, If Russia tried to invade the USA, it's be suicide, but I think likewise if the USA tried to invade Russia. I don't think the USA would be stupid enough to just flat out invade Russia, though, without first drumming up a revolutionary war and then intervening or whatever. Even that would probably be just incredibly stupid, strategically.
> 
> But when you think about whether Russia will learn something from this war or not - I have my doubts. Putin has surrounded himself with sycophants who simply "yessir" and try to paint the rosiest outlook possible. Misinformation in situations like this could be Russia's biggest weakness. So it depends on how much of his own Kool Aid Putin is drinking.


The other aspect to look at is the history of Russia. Even if Russia now learns a lesson, which is highly doubtful, and even if (mighty big if) Putin learns anything, there will be another Russian Autocrat at some point and they will start swinging their dick around on the world stage the second that they feel comfortable doing it, or are so out of touch they think it's a good idea.

Only beating them senseless would sink in, and even that would most likely be a slightly longer delay before we got another big swinging dick in power there.

We're, as in the collective "we're," like the whole world, in a pretty big lose-lose situation. I don't know of any possible positive outcome save Putin failing so spectacularly with the war of attrition that he collapses Russia back into the stone age and they need to rely on the west to rebuild so completely that even the mostly misinformed population start to see the west differently.

How realistic is that scenario? Uh, not very. How's that technical assessment?


----------



## bostjan

nightflameauto said:


> The other aspect to look at is the history of Russia. Even if Russia now learns a lesson, which is highly doubtful, and even if (mighty big if) Putin learns anything, there will be another Russian Autocrat at some point and they will start swinging their dick around on the world stage the second that they feel comfortable doing it, or are so out of touch they think it's a good idea.
> 
> Only beating them senseless would sink in, and even that would most likely be a slightly longer delay before we got another big swinging dick in power there.
> 
> We're, as in the collective "we're," like the whole world, in a pretty big lose-lose situation. I don't know of any possible positive outcome save Putin failing so spectacularly with the war of attrition that he collapses Russia back into the stone age and they need to rely on the west to rebuild so completely that even the mostly misinformed population start to see the west differently.
> 
> How realistic is that scenario? Uh, not very. How's that technical assessment?


Probably. Russia has long had a strange relationship with autocrats. Russia was a feudal economy with full-on slave ownership (called "serfdom" to make it sound less awful) until around the time of the American Civil War. Except when Tsar Alexander II freed the serfs, they were forced to pay for the cost of their freedom back to their former owners, with interest, over the course of 49 years. As you can imagine, things really didn't change for serfs at the time. Imagine being a slave, being freed, and then being told that, in order to pay for your own freedom, you have to provide hard labour to your former master for the rest of your life.

The life of the average Russian didn't really improve when slavery was abolished. Likewise, under the counter-reforms of Alexander's heir, the children and grandchildren of former slaves were once again treated as slaves, under the policy of land captains who could tell the peasants when and where and how to live and die. Nicholas wasn't any better and Russians suffered a great deal under him and his penchant for fighting losing wars whilst shooting protesters. The peasants finally revolted in 1905, and were granted civil liberties and a representative government, only to have the tsar change his mind just a few months latter, first by not granting the promised civil liberties in any codified form, and then dissolving the government when they didn't like that, so the real revolution happened, and the people hoped to finally have a better life under socialism, yet the peasants who had been owned by the nobility, set free, but then still owned by the nobility as debtors to their own freedom, only to have that freedom effectively taken away as soon as their debts were paid, were now owned by the state. The life of a soviet peasant was honestly a tiny bit better, though, even though their lives were still hell by modern standards, but whether it was Lenin or Stalin in power, the Russian lower economic class were definitely living life in nightmare difficulty setting.

During the fall of the USSR, the economy in Russia was absolutely devastated. Putin came from seemingly nowhere and repaired the economy, and seemed to set some limits whilst still being mostly reasonable. But, for whatever reason, after Yeltsin died, Putin decided to override term limits and become president again, then started just gobbling up all of the power and dumping all of the checks and balances.

Whatever, the case, though, the Russian economy grew the fastest under Putin, and that, for maybe the first time in history, was passed directly to the Russian people (at least in part). With Putin turning full megalomaniac now, there's bound to be quite a bit of support for him, as well as internal resistance from people who see what he's doing as not only wrong, but as a threat to undo all of the progress they had made.

But Russia being big and scary and having nearly limitless resources, it's very doubtful that any external pressure will really make any sort of difference. Putin is going to keep sending young Russian men to Ukraine to continue the mayhem there, under the pretense that Ukraine will eventually get exhausted from the fight and give into demands. Putin, if he lives long enough, will accept those concessions and then just make up more bullshit in order to invade again.


----------



## Drew

bostjan said:


> But Russia being big and scary and having nearly limitless resources, it's very doubtful that any external pressure will really make any sort of difference. Putin is going to keep sending young Russian men to Ukraine to continue the mayhem there, under the pretense that Ukraine will eventually get exhausted from the fight and give into demands. Putin, if he lives long enough, will accept those concessions and then just make up more bullshit in order to invade again.


This isn't my area of expertise... but I've read from more authoritative sources that, with Putin thus far refusing to implement a draft (his policy goal here is to keep it as "life as usual" as possible on the home front), this conflict is going to essentially become a recruiting/training race, and whoever can get the most new recruits battle-ready in the shortest period of time will likely win.

If that's true, Putin's "keep everything life as normal for Russia" approach probably isn't the greatest way to et young Russians all fired up to enlist.


----------



## oversteve

Drew said:


> This isn't my area of expertise... but I've read from more authoritative sources that, with Putin thus far refusing to implement a draft (his policy goal here is to keep it as "life as usual" as possible on the home front), this conflict is going to essentially become a recruiting/training race, and whoever can get the most new recruits battle-ready in the shortest period of time will likely win.
> 
> If that's true, Putin's "keep everything life as normal for Russia" approach probably isn't the greatest way to et young Russians all fired up to enlist.


That's exactly the case, Russia has huge problems with capable man power and how they use what they have, lots of russians themselves started whining that while having some military experience in some field they are simply used as an infantry, that will be sooner or later crushed by artilery fire. Earlier there were plenty of Russian men willing to go here in Ukraine to plunder, to earn some post militray privileges or battle compensations or just raise some dough. Now half a year into a conflict there's plenty of returnees that didn't get their pay, some have returned with lost limbs and didn't get proper compensations, lots have died. So now the number of "volunteers" is significantly smaller, even your average dumb Ivan understands that it's a masacre here and the probability of getting killed is somewhat high. And getting capable resources is even more problematic.

Luckily with the arrival of long range artilery here in Ukraine now they also have huge problems with logistics, while they do have plenty of resources in Russia supplying them to the front in a timely manner is a huge pain.



bostjan said:


> But Russia being big and scary and having nearly limitless resources, it's very doubtful that any external pressure will really make any sort of difference. Putin is going to keep sending young Russian men to Ukraine to continue the mayhem there, under the pretense that Ukraine will eventually get exhausted from the fight and give into demands. Putin, if he lives long enough, will accept those concessions and then just make up more bullshit in order to invade again.



In short If Ukraine stays neutral the war will probably go on for a long time alternating between active and passive phases that will feel like the end of war but in reality Russia won't stop until either Ukraine ceases to exist as a sovereign state or Russia crumbles into smaller states. But if somehow we manage to join NATO during passive phase then that is very likely to prevent future invasions.


----------



## Drew

oversteve said:


> That's exactly the case, Russia has huge problems with capable man power and how they use what they have, lots of russians themselves started whining that while having some military experience in some field they are simply used as an infantry, that will be sooner or later crushed by artilery fire. Earlier there were plenty of Russian men willing to go here in Ukraine to plunder, to earn some post militray privileges or battle compensations or just raise some dough. Now half a year into a conflict there's plenty of returnees that didn't get their pay, some have returned with lost limbs and didn't get proper compensations, lots have died. So now the number of "volunteers" is significantly smaller, even your average dumb Ivan understands that it's a masacre here and the probability of getting killed is somewhat high. And getting capable resources is even more problematic.
> 
> Luckily with the arrival of long range artilery here in Ukraine now they also have huge problems with logistics, while they do have plenty of resources in Russia supplying them to the front in a timely manner is a huge pain.
> 
> 
> 
> In short If Ukraine stays neutral the war will probably go on for a long time alternating between active and passive phases that will feel like the end of war but in reality Russia won't stop until either Ukraine ceases to exist as a sovereign state or Russia crumbles into smaller states. But if somehow we manage to join NATO during passive phase then that is very likely to prevent future invasions.


Yeah, it quickly becomes a question of motivation, right? Ukraine is desperate to defend their homeland. It's only barely an exaggeration to say that any man, woman, or child who can hold a gun will line up in the trenches to fight. Meanwhile, Russia has been telegraphing "everything's fine, everything's normal, go about your lives" back home, and, well, that doesn't really get people to line up at the recruiting station. 

Either Russia is going to have to publicly admit things aren't going well and try to fire up some national patriotism - "defend your country's armor in this proxy war with the West" - or they're going to struggle.


----------



## narad

Hmm, last month Daria Dugina dies, now the queen? Suspicious.


----------



## DrewH

Interesting developments this past week. 3000 square kilometers retaken by Ukraine. An entire collapse of a Russian northern front with their soldiers retreating in disarray. Russia running out of munitions and now turning to North Korea for them. Pro-Putin people in and around Russia now starting to get a bit salty. 6 months ago, experts didn't think Ukraine would hold out for 2 weeks. Now, Ukraine is going on armored offensives and handing the Russians their asses. Amazing.


----------



## Drew

DrewH said:


> Interesting developments this past week. 3000 square kilometers retaken by Ukraine. An entire collapse of a Russian northern front with their soldiers retreating in disarray. Russia running out of munitions and now turning to North Korea for them. Pro-Putin people in and around Russia now starting to get a bit salty. 6 months ago, experts didn't think Ukraine would hold out for 2 weeks. Now, Ukraine is going on armored offensives and handing the Russians their asses. Amazing.


Combination of recruitment advantages, and the embargos on Russia on one hand and flood of munitions into Ukraine on the other giving Ukraine a pretty big firepower advantage. It's easy to downplay the embargos because, well, Putin's grasp on power hasn't crumbled and the Russian economy has stabilized a bit, but when the actual fighting is being done with one side using all the weapons that it can produce or buy from North Korea, and the other side all the weapons it can produce or that are donated by the United States, the EU, England, and anyone else in NATO not included above, it starts to matter.


----------



## tedtan

I’m starting to see reports that Russian officials are calling for Putin to resign due to the lack of success with the war in Ukraine. I don’t know if this will amount to anything, but it could be the beginning of a change in Russian leadership.

https://thehill.com/policy/international/3638950-municipal-deputies-call-for-putins-resignation/

https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-war-live-updates-1742084#live-blog-19312


----------



## Adieu

bostjan said:


> That's the biggest point to consider - in a war of attrition, Russia simply has more people and more raw materials to throw at Ukraine.
> 
> I don't think that a USA-vs-Russia war would end with Biden walking into the Kremlin. Something that should have been painfully learned in Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, and now in Ukraine is that homefield advantage plays a huge part in guerilla warfare, If Russia tried to invade the USA, it's be suicide, but I think likewise if the USA tried to invade Russia. I don't think the USA would be stupid enough to just flat out invade Russia, though, without first drumming up a revolutionary war and then intervening or whatever. Even that would probably be just incredibly stupid, strategically.
> 
> But when you think about whether Russia will learn something from this war or not - I have my doubts. Putin has surrounded himself with sycophants who simply "yessir" and try to paint the rosiest outlook possible. Misinformation in situations like this could be Russia's biggest weakness. So it depends on how much of his own Kool Aid Putin is drinking.



Not really.

Motivated pool of willing people in Russia is far *smaller* and forcibly drafted slave-soldier zerg rushes have proven fairly useless.

In effect, Russia, in its usual cynical and war crimey manner, did a pilot run of how mobilization would affect the situation on the front using occupied Ukraine as its testing region... by press-ganging any and every halfway undisabled adult male left in so-called "LNR" and a sizable portion of them in so-called "DNR".


Those appear to have been pilot trials of forced mobilization, full brutality mode in Luhansk, medium brutality mode in Donetsk.

The results were rather unimpressive.


----------



## bostjan

Adieu said:


> Not really.
> 
> Motivated pool of willing people in Russia is far *smaller* and forcibly drafted slave-soldier zerg rushes have proven fairly useless.
> 
> In effect, Russia, in its usual cynical and war crimey manner, did a pilot run of how mobilization would affect the situation on the front using occupied Ukraine as its testing region... by press-ganging any and every halfway undisabled adult male left in so-called "LNR" and a sizable portion of them in so-called "DNR".
> 
> 
> Those appear to have been pilot trials of forced mobilization, full brutality mode in Luhansk, medium brutality mode in Donetsk.
> 
> The results were rather unimpressive.


Which part is "not really?"

I was in no way saying that Russia was guaranteed to win, only that they have a bigger resource pool and a bigger population, which, on paper, gives them an advantage. The fact that Ukraine has much more at stake and has the home team advantage is why I was drawing parallels with past conflicts where a big scary nation got involved in something going on with a smaller nation and assumed it'd be a cake walk to turn the tides and win, only to end up losing.

It'd be kind of silly for me to try to make a point that Russia would win in the war against Ukraine, and then point at two wars in Afghanistan where tiny Afghanistan gave big USSR and then big USA so much trouble as an example of that.

If you are saying, "not really" to what I was saying about Russia learning something from this because this is a dress rehearsal for some sort of bigger military plan, then I think you might be giving them too much credit for future ambitions. But, I guess if the lesson learned ended up being "don't try to invade the USA" then we'll likely never know either way.


----------



## oversteve

meanwhile russia is shooting at the dam causing flood in residential areas ...









Russia strikes Ukrainian dam in city of Kryvyi Rih, triggering floods


Evacuations are underway in two districts of Kryvyi Rih city after Russia struck a nearby dam with eight cruise missiles, causing the Inhulets River to burst its banks in just the latest revenge strike on civilians.




www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## DiezelMonster

It sounds like there is increasing dissent among Russian politicians, they are now currently calling for Poutine to resign. I doubt he cares other than probably having them killed. This is interesting though, if true.


----------



## sleewell

why shouldnt ukraine just keep going into russia at this point? the fact that russia invaded their country for no reason and slaughtered, tortured, and raped so many innocent people and then turn and fled when defeated i think if i was ukrainian i would be of the mindset that stopping at the old border was no longer sufficient.


----------



## nightflameauto

sleewell said:


> why shouldnt ukraine just keep going into russia at this point? the fact that russia invaded their country for no reason and slaughtered, tortured, and raped so many innocent people and then turn and fled when defeated i think if i was ukrainian i would be of the mindset that stopping at the old border was no longer sufficient.


I would think one argument would be the already stressful situation of needing resources to rebuild at home would be multiplied exponentially the longer the war drags on and the further from home the Ukranian troops go. Regardless of how much "support" in money and arms they receive from the outside world, it's still war and war, no matter how justified, sucks both resources and morale, even when it's highly justified.


----------



## bostjan

sleewell said:


> why shouldnt ukraine just keep going into russia at this point? the fact that russia invaded their country for no reason and slaughtered, tortured, and raped so many innocent people and then turn and fled when defeated i think if i was ukrainian i would be of the mindset that stopping at the old border was no longer sufficient.


I mean, yeah, in a dream world where right makes might, this would be the case. However, the last time someone invaded Russia, it ended up literally being suicide. With summer being over, and Russian winter looming close, it'd just be crazy.

Unless, if, by "Russia," you mean pre-2014 Ukrainian territory, then, well, if Ukraine continues on her military winning streak, I'm sure it'll be a thought. I could see that, in the case where Russia gets booted out of Crimea, Putin could face some actual pressure to come back down to Earth and negotiate in good faith to end the conflict. But but but... let's be realistic- Putin in the moment believes that he is invincible, and his sycophants are telling him that things are going much better with the "special military operation" than they actually are. Putin has also made up such crazy justifications about Zelensky being an anti-Semitic Jewish Nazi cannibal, that he can't back down without looking like a pushover, an ethical bandwaggoner, and a liar. This conflict will not likely end so long as Putin is in power. And the stupid useless UN can't impose anything against Russia despite the strong evidence of systematic war crimes, or else they are too afraid to make a stand against a nation that could potentially end the world.


----------



## mmr007

sleewell said:


> why shouldnt ukraine just keep going into russia at this point? the fact that russia invaded their country for no reason and slaughtered, tortured, and raped so many innocent people and then turn and fled when defeated i think if i was ukrainian i would be of the mindset that stopping at the old border was no longer sufficient.


Nuclear weapons. Soviet and Russian military doctrine calls for use of tactical nuclear weapons as a second resort not last resort. They don't see nuclear weapon use on the battlefield as crossing the Rubicon.


----------



## oversteve

We talked about problems iwth manpower in russia few days ago, here's an interesting video where Wagner mercenaries' chief Prigozhin recruits prisoners...


----------



## mbardu

oversteve said:


> We talked about problems iwth manpower in russia few days ago, here's an interesting video where Wagner mercenaries' chief Prigozhin recruits prisoners...




So what's the read on that?
Is it forced conscription for prisoners? 
Is it "voluntary" but they get some kind of clemency in the unlikely event that they make it as "assault infantry" (_*cough* cannon fodder *cough*_)


----------



## oversteve

mbardu said:


> So what's the read on that?
> Is it forced conscription for prisoners?
> Is it "voluntary" but they get some kind of clemency in the unlikely event that they make it as "assault infantry" (_*cough* cannon fodder *cough*_)


My guess it's not forced, they might be promised to get the clemency but I don't see them getting any knowing how it's done in russia, probably the best case scenario for them is to keep on being mercenaries. That is if they survive the war

Meanwhile russian state tv strats telling ru forces had to withdraw from Kharkiv region due to NATO involvment....


----------



## jaxadam

Don’t. Don’t. Don’t.


----------



## DrewH

The summit with Xi, Modi, and some others didn't go all that well for ole Vlady. Losing militarily. Now losing support. I give it 6 months until he's disposed of in some way by his own people.


----------



## Adieu

mmr007 said:


> Nuclear weapons. Soviet and Russian military doctrine calls for use of tactical nuclear weapons as a second resort not last resort. They don't see nuclear weapon use on the battlefield as crossing the Rubicon.



That is absolute nonsense. Even if Putler or his inner circle read or gave a damn about the doctrine (hint: they haven't and they don't).

Ukraine crossing at least one oblast' (think state) deep into genuine Russia proper will be absolutely essential to have something to negotiate with.

It's even more essential than retaking all of Ukraine's pre-2014 borders.

In fact, it's the ONLY way negotiation gets anywhere.


----------



## Adieu

For weak western cowards, there's of course also plagisrism of and reversing the old Putlerist DNR/LNR playbook (which he had created under a false flag and a false pretense with the then-goal of trading back to Ukraine as a negotiating chip for Crimea).

There's even a perfect target: Belgorod, Russia, which used to be Ukraine in 1918.

Well, *only* in 1918, but for a false flag negotiating token, why not?

There's even a few kidding-maybe-not-kidding "BNR" memes making the rounds.

Hell, there's even several versions of a flag for it.


----------



## mmr007

Adieu said:


> That is absolute nonsense. Even if Putler or his inner circle read or gave a damn about the doctrine (hint: they haven't and they don't).
> 
> Ukraine crossing at least one oblast' (think state) deep into genuine Russia proper will be absolutely essential to have something to negotiate with.
> 
> It's even more essential than retaking all of Ukraine's pre-2014 borders.
> 
> In fact, it's the ONLY way negotiation gets anywhere.


I'm not sure I understand the point you are trying to make. I am saying the reason no Ukrainian forces will go in Russia is because Russia doesn't view tactical nukes (ie battlefield nukes) as that big a deal. You seriously think Putin, former KGB, FSB and now last 20 years dictator and commander of Russian military doesn't understand russian doctrine on the permissibility of nukes when pressed? The guy who has his forces commit war crimes, poisons journalists and throws rivals out windows will ignore a lifetime of training that use of battlefield nukes is ok? No. he won't which is why the west will not support an invasion into russian territory.


----------



## mbardu

oversteve said:


> Meanwhile russian state tv strats telling ru forces had to withdraw from Kharkiv region due to NATO involvment....




Not really unexpected from Russian propaganda.
And sure, it's a pretty laughable stretch to paint NATO as "The backbone of Zelensky's army" like they do.
But that said, they _are _fighting NATO intelligence, NATO equipment and supplies.
Also, even though not linked to NATO chain of command, they are also fighting some actual Western units/foreigners on the ground.

All in all, it's far from the worst piece of disinformation they've been putting out. 5/10


----------



## Adieu

mmr007 said:


> I'm not sure I understand the point you are trying to make. I am saying the reason no Ukrainian forces will go in Russia is because Russia doesn't view tactical nukes (ie battlefield nukes) as that big a deal. You seriously think Putin, former KGB, FSB and now last 20 years dictator and commander of Russian military doesn't understand russian doctrine on the permissibility of nukes when pressed? The guy who has his forces commit war crimes, poisons journalists and throws rivals out windows will ignore a lifetime of training that use of battlefield nukes is ok? No. he won't which is why the west will not support an invasion into russian territory.



1) They most certainly WILL have to enter Russia. And they actually have already, albeit just a few meters in to film themselves doing it.

2) It will NOT evoke a nuclear response.

3) What training? Putler was a chekist turned kleptocrat, not a hardline military dolt. And he's NOT ideological in the least.


----------



## Adieu

The whole dual "don't humiliate Putler OR ELSE" and "don't scare Putler OR ELSE" misconceptions are fucking hilarious.

Humiliation and fear are the only two languages he DOES understand and respect.


----------



## thraxil

mmr007 said:


> I am saying the reason no Ukrainian forces will go in Russia is because Russia doesn't view tactical nukes (ie battlefield nukes) as that big a deal.


Veering slightly away from the topic, but I think (and for obvious reasons really, really hope I'm right) that the risk of tactical nuclear weapons is pretty insignificant now. Earlier, when Russia was going full on and meeting way more resistance than they expected, it was more likely. Putin expected and promised a fast victory and might've gone there to get it.

Now, though, we've had six months of the Russian army being stalled out, burning through troops and ammunition and just not looking like the world power that they were viewed as previously. Meanwhile oligarchs have fled Russia or lost major parts of their fortunes, sanctions and embargos are crushing them, and there are cracks showing in the internal propaganda machine. Putin hasn't been ousted yet and may not be any time soon. The Russian people might have a suspicion about how badly the war is going but still mostly buy into the propaganda. But the generals have access to all the information and know what's going on. If Putin ordered a nuclear strike, I think that would be the last straw and you'd see a military coup instead. It's one thing to risk pissing off NATO and the west when you think you can quickly win and consolidate your power. If there'd been a nuclear strike early in the war, the generals could at least see a chance that the rest of the world would be so shocked and unwilling to retaliate immediately that they could use that to their advantage to take hold of Ukraine and bet that everything would quiet back down. Now, even if the west didn't retaliate with nukes of their own, the generals see that there'd at least be massively increased support for Ukraine in terms of funding, weapons, and sanctions and it would make a difficult war even harder for them. They already know that they're not going to succeed and are trying to save face for themselves and Putin and hope that either they keep some of the Donbas and Crimea and/or EU has a rough enough winter without Russian oil that they pressure Ukraine to back down.


----------



## DrewH

Adieu said:


> 1) They most certainly WILL have to enter Russia. And they actually have already, albeit just a few meters in to film themselves doing it.



No they won't. At least not in any meaningful sense. Ukraine gains nothing and risks everything by crossing the border with their troops. Right now, Ukraine's huge advantage is morale. They have a reason to fight and risk their lives. Russia does not. You start evoking feelings of defending the Russian homeland at all costs, and that turns quickly. Ukraine has Russia right where they want them. Putin is losing his grip on power. Ukraine just needs to stay the course. We need to stay the course in keeping them supplied. That happens and the Putin situation resolves itself in time.


----------



## Adieu

DrewH said:


> No they won't. At least not in any meaningful sense. Ukraine gains nothing and risks everything by crossing the border with their troops. Right now, Ukraine's huge advantage is morale. They have a reason to fight and risk their lives. Russia does not. You start evoking feelings of defending the Russian homeland at all costs, and that turns quickly. Ukraine has Russia right where they want them. Putin is losing his grip on power. Ukraine just needs to stay the course. We need to stay the course in keeping them supplied. That happens and the Putin situation resolves itself in time.



No, you need to threaten putler and/or take something from him to trade back.

Either counter-invasion or full-blown, no-holds-barred safari in his back yard with literally anybody who works for his goverment or has ever met him designated a legitimate target. And this would need to produce dozens or hundreds of casualties per day to work.


----------



## Adieu

Most of the people likely to overthrow him are bigger hawks than he is. And have FAR more balls and less scruples.

With a war that DOESN'T spill over into Russia, he's more likely to get overthrown by the MORE WAR MOAR BLOOD party.

They need to feel they are "getting" something to negotiate.

The only way to do that right is to TAKE that something from them and dangle the return thereof as the negotiating chip.

And it only works with a territory they want but nobody else does.

Like Belgorod.


----------



## mmr007

No.....just no. This is not logical and is a fantastical view of this conflict. Putin is letting criminals out of prison to fight because he CANNOT do a general mobilization for a "military action" that state tv had been saying is going well. Once those "nazis" Putin is claiming exist in Ukraine invade any part of Russia, he now has an excuse to authorize a general mobilization, the people on the fence about war will now want Ukrainian blood and you risk a wider war and tactical nukes which Putin will have every reason to use.

How did things turn out for the last two dickheads that invaded Russia right before winter? I know 6 months and counting is a long time but war is not a tik tok video. They take time and this current strategy is working. Russia has no access to military use electronics or other components. The sanctions are working and Putin is failing. Only a fool would alter a strategy that is clearly working.

As far as dangling something they want and avoiding a more ruthless successor? The west already has want they want. Sanctions that will not let up, oil and natural gas deals that are on permanent hold and Russia will be a pariah state until they commit to rebuilding Ukrainian infrastructure. There is no piece of land in all of motherfucking Russia more valuable than turning the cash spigot back on to the oligarchs. Trust me we are already speaking a language they understand. The rest of that is just nonsense.


----------



## mmr007

Enjoyable.....


----------



## Adieu

mmr007 said:


> No.....just no. This is not logical and is a fantastical view of this conflict. Putin is letting criminals out of prison to fight because he CANNOT do a general mobilization for a "military action" that state tv had been saying is going well. Once those "nazis" Putin is claiming exist in Ukraine invade any part of Russia, he now has an excuse to authorize a general mobilization, the people on the fence about war will now want Ukrainian blood and you risk a wider war and tactical nukes which Putin will have every reason to use.
> 
> How did things turn out for the last two dickheads that invaded Russia right before winter? I know 6 months and counting is a long time but war is not a tik tok video. They take time and this current strategy is working. Russia has no access to military use electronics or other components. The sanctions are working and Putin is failing. Only a fool would alter a strategy that is clearly working.
> 
> As far as dangling something they want and avoiding a more ruthless successor? The west already has want they want. Sanctions that will not let up, oil and natural gas deals that are on permanent hold and Russia will be a pariah state until they commit to rebuilding Ukrainian infrastructure. There is no piece of land in all of motherfucking Russia more valuable than turning the cash spigot back on to the oligarchs. Trust me we are already speaking a language they understand. The rest of that is just nonsense.



That's ridiculous.

Neither he nor ANY of the people most likely to overthrow him have ANY interest in cash whatsoever.

Also, he cannot be de-sanctioned without nuclear disarmament anyway.

And Gazprom? That's not a money-making enterprise, that's a foreign policy leverage enterprise.

It hasn't been about the money for almost 20 years now.


----------



## oversteve

Putin has announced partial mobilization in russia, Shoigu said they will mobilize 300k men. Some organizations already announced meetings against it but my guess they won't do much. Also there are plenty of local news here about russia locking from inside in order to prevent men from fleeing.

p.s. also Shoigu said there are only 6k dead good russians atm


----------



## thraxil

From everything I hear, Russia is having problems with supplies. What good are 300,000 new, basically untrained soldiers going to do if they can't even get them uniforms, ammunition, or food?


----------



## nightflameauto

thraxil said:


> From everything I hear, Russia is having problems with supplies. What good are 300,000 new, basically untrained soldiers going to do if they can't even get them uniforms, ammunition, or food?


The words "meat grinder at the front" come to mind.


----------



## DrewH

oversteve said:


> Putin has announced partial mobilization in russia, Shoigu said they will mobilize 300k men. Some organizations already announced meetings against it but my guess they won't do much. Also there are plenty of local news here about russia locking from inside in order to prevent men from fleeing.
> 
> p.s. also Shoigu said there are only 6k dead good russians atm



And subsequently all flights out of Russia are booked.


----------



## oversteve

nightflameauto said:


> The words "meat grinder at the front" come to mind.


it's nothing new for russia, just take a look at numbers of casualties of WW2

btw completely forgot, they have increased criminal liability for surrendering, deserting etc


----------



## DiezelMonster

this all gets more hilarious by the minute.

One report I read is that Russia will declare Martial Law in the country....


----------



## wheresthefbomb

My heart goes out to Russians who don't want this. I'm terrified of the US going to war and instituting a draft. I mean, I wouldn't go even if they picked me, but it's still a chilling thought, and I have a feeling it's a lot less easy for them to opt out.


----------



## oversteve

Seems like that's not all fun stuff for today

The prices on the plane tickets skyrocketed, for example yesterday a plane ticket from Moscow to Yerevan (Armenia) was around $150, in the morning it was already $1400+...

Our troops captued plenty of hotshots in recent counteroffensive so some of the Azov fighters and marines that were captured in Mariupol were exchanged today and lots of russian opinion leaders and propagandists are butthurt that it happened on the same day russia announced mobilization


----------



## oversteve

wheresthefbomb said:


> My heart goes out to Russians who don't want this. I'm terrified of the US going to war and instituting a draft. I mean, I wouldn't go even if they picked me, but it's still a chilling thought, and I have a feeling it's a lot less easy for them to opt out.


Nah, fuck them all, there's plenty of couch warriors there that were speculating in social networks how russia will conquer UA in 3 days, that they should nuke us, bomb civilians, annihilate all the population etc. And now they are shitting bricks they or their relatives might get directly involved in a war, let them have taste of it.


----------



## wheresthefbomb

oversteve said:


> Nah, fuck them all, there's plenty of couch warriors there that were speculating in social networks how russia will conquer UA in 3 days, that they should nuke us, bomb civilians, annihilate all the population etc. And now they are shitting bricks they or their relatives might get involved in a war, let them have taste of it.



Fuck all of those people, sure. I get where you're coming from, I don't begrudge countries the US has destabilized their broad hatred of amerikans. We were provided a full-on essay explaining why 9/11 happened and we still spent two decades like "wHy dO tHeY hAtE uS sO mUcH?"

It can't possible be _all _Russians who think that way, though. I'm not advocating a change in policy, or really anything as a result, just recognizing that there are regular people over there who don't want war and I'd hate to be one of them. I can't imagine the members of Pussy Riot want war, just off the top of my head.

That said, I don't begrudge you your position, either. I'm far removed from the situation and I'm not about to tell you how to think about what's happening in your own home.


----------



## oversteve

wheresthefbomb said:


> Fuck all of those people, sure. I get where you're coming from, I don't begrudge countries the US has destabilized their broad hatred of amerikans. We were provided a full-on essay explaining why 9/11 happened and we still spent two decades like "wHy dO tHeY hAtE uS sO mUcH?"
> 
> It can't possible be _all _Russians who think that way, though. I'm not advocating a change in policy, or really anything as a result, just recognizing that there are regular people over there who don't want war and I'd hate to be one of them. I can't imagine the members of Pussy Riot want war, just off the top of my head.
> 
> That said, I don't begrudge you your position, either. I'm far removed from the situation and I'm not about to tell you how to think about what's happening in your own home.


Not all but unfortunately majority of people. Even those who seem to oppose Putin still spout stuff like Crimea is part of russia and UA should be under them as a sub-nation etc. As our local saying goes russian liberal ends where the ukrainian question arises. 

Also I'm not sure that Russia vs US is an adequate comparison here, while I'm not well versed in all the aspects of US military operations and the explanations behind them they are far from being borderline genocidal and marauding like what Russia did in Afghanistan, Chechnya and now doing here in Ukraine. I guess it's more comparable to the Third Reich and Russia should suffer similar persecution as Germany did after WW2.


----------



## oversteve

meanwhile Hungarian press 



p.s. whole thread is hilarious...


----------



## mbardu

oversteve said:


> rubbing out the territory know for the past few decades as Ukraine from the map


----------



## Adieu

DiezelMonster said:


> this all gets more hilarious by the minute.
> 
> One report I read is that Russia will declare Martial Law in the country....



That sounds "too legal".

For all intents and purposes, they've been doing just that for months. No rights to assembly, no freedom of press, prison for internet comments, chance of prison for speaking "fakes about the army" (= anything that contradicts stare propaganda, be it events statistics etc.), etc etc

Now they're clamping down on freedom of movement and have instituted forced requisition and civilian labor (felony to refuse an "offer" of a "state contract" for your business, mandatory overtime under coercion as needed for "key industries", some such shit).


----------



## DiezelMonster

Adieu said:


> That sounds "too legal".
> 
> For all intents and purposes, they've been doing just that for months. No rights to assembly, no freedom of press, prison for internet comments, chance of prison for speaking "fakes about the army" (= anything that contradicts stare propaganda, be it events statistics etc.), etc etc
> 
> Now they're clamping down on freedom of movement and have instituted forced requisition and civilian labor (felony to refuse an "offer" of a "state contract" for your business, mandatory overtime under coercion as needed for "key industries", some such shit).


Sounds like they need some Bald Eagles and Freedom.


----------



## mmr007

Adieu said:


> That's ridiculous.
> 
> Neither he nor ANY of the people most likely to overthrow him have ANY interest in cash whatsoever.
> 
> Also, he cannot be de-sanctioned without nuclear disarmament anyway.
> 
> And Gazprom? That's not a money-making enterprise, that's a foreign policy leverage enterprise.
> 
> It hasn't been about the money for almost 20 years now.


There is NO freaking way you can escalate and invade ANY, I repeat ANY part of Russia. Putin will use tactical nukes. He will detonate one somewhere in Ukraine near but not too close to Ukrainian troop positions. Then what? Ukraine is frozen in place. They are stalled and the west can't respond in kind. What are we going to use tactical nukes inside Russia? No. Are we going to use tactical nukes inside Ukraine against Russian troop positions? No. So Putin will achieve exactly what he needs. I know there is this overwhelming sense to excise Putin with haste but the current strategy is the best and ONLY option right now.

Putin is desperate. Let's not make it worse than it needs to be for self satisfaction. 

That's the whole reason for the referendums to make the annexed regions part of Russia. Any attack East or South to reclaim will be seen as an attack on Russia proper and the nonstrategic nuke attack can commence.


----------



## Adieu

Not at all.

Putler is a rat, not an idealist.

If there's a tank army approaching artillery range of his current position, THEN he'll start squealing about nukes for real.

Shitty little border provinces? Nope. He's not willing to die for them.

Nukes are a "nice" threat... but shitty as weapons go. Whoever uses them signs their own death sentence.


----------



## philkilla

Adieu said:


> Not at all.
> 
> Putler is a rat, not an idealist.
> 
> If there's a tank army approaching artillery range of his current position, THEN he'll start squealing about nukes for real.
> 
> Shitty little border provinces? Nope. He's not willing to die for them.
> 
> Nukes are a "nice" threat... but shitty as weapons go. Whoever uses them signs their own death sentence.



Even thinking of the impact of a nuclear weapon is a nightmare. A year ago it was unthinkable that Putin would actually send a force across the Ukraine border again..but here we are.

I hope it doesn't come to that.


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> Not at all.
> 
> Putler is a rat, not an idealist.
> 
> If there's a tank army approaching artillery range of his current position, THEN he'll start squealing about nukes for real.
> 
> Shitty little border provinces? Nope. He's not willing to die for them.
> 
> Nukes are a "nice" threat... but shitty as weapons go. Whoever uses them signs their own death sentence.


He is, but imo he's a cornered rat to some extent, there's basically not much he can do without going nuts since our locals do not want any peace talks without pushing them out of UA territory completely.

Yesterday there was Piontkovsky's interview (you probably know who's that) and I don't know how credible he is as a source but according to him in short there are two "parties" among top ru ranks, one mild and the other one aggressive. Putler was sticking to the mild at first but after the Kharkiv fiasco and after being humiliated by Eastern countries at recent Shanghai Cooperation Organization meeting the milds started thinking of "retiring" him, he got scared of it and turned to aggressives for support and that's why we see all that shit with mobilization, fast paced referendums, threats of nukes etc. At the same time he angered the aggressives as well with the exchange of Azov fighters and marines protecting Mariupol.


----------



## DrewH

oversteve said:


> He is, but imo he's a cornered rat to some extent, there's basically not much he can do without going nuts since our locals do not want any peace talks without pushing them out of UA territory completely.
> 
> Yesterday there was Piontkovsky's interview (you probably know who's that) and I don't know how credible he is as a source but according to him in short there are two "parties" among top ru ranks, one mild and the other one aggressive. Putler was sticking to the mild at first but after the Kharkiv fiasco and after being humiliated by Eastern countries at recent Shanghai Cooperation Organization meeting the milds started thinking of "retiring" him, he got scared of it and turned to aggressives for support and that's why we see all that shit with mobilization, fast paced referendums, threats of nukes etc. At the same time he angered the aggressives as well with the exchange of Azov fighters and marines protecting Mariupol.



One blunder after the other because going aggressive has only lost him more public support with the botched mobilization. They are so screwed up over there that they were mobilizing the wrong people! It doesn't matter how totalitarian you are and how much power you wield, you still need public support and that is something eroding quickly.


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> He is, but imo he's a cornered rat to some extent, there's basically not much he can do without going nuts since our locals do not want any peace talks without pushing them out of UA territory completely.
> 
> Yesterday there was Piontkovsky's interview (you probably know who's that) and I don't know how credible he is as a source but according to him in short there are two "parties" among top ru ranks, one mild and the other one aggressive. Putler was sticking to the mild at first but after the Kharkiv fiasco and after being humiliated by Eastern countries at recent Shanghai Cooperation Organization meeting the milds started thinking of "retiring" him, he got scared of it and turned to aggressives for support and that's why we see all that shit with mobilization, fast paced referendums, threats of nukes etc. At the same time he angered the aggressives as well with the exchange of Azov fighters and marines protecting Mariupol.



Piontkovsky is an 80/10/10 mix of decent analysis/conspiracy theories/senile Soviet grandpa.

The problem with his moderates and hawks analysis is... who are these hawks? Zolotov, Kadyrov, and Prigozhin? They're assclown thugs. Who'd follow them?

Shoigu? Come on, the guy is a village idgit sycophant. The moment he stops brown-nosing Putler is the last day anybody sees him.

Business mogul "oligarchs"? They've become weak and all of them just want this shit to go away.

Of course there's also the Strelkov-Girkin & Co. lot, but they don't have the scale. They could and WILL be dangerous if the central authority of the Russian Federation implodes and he could well end up as a regional warlord (again). But I don't think he has the connections to be top dog federally.

The most dangerous of them is Strelkov-Girkin. He has the looks, swagger, biography, and rhetoric of the Daddy Fuhrer vatniks have always dreamed of... But he's just a retired colonel with no military power. If anybody in Russian security services has *any* common sense left, that guy is first in line to have an "accident" if any suspicious stirring occurs. Even before Navalny.


----------



## oversteve

Adieu said:


> Piontkovsky is an 80/10/10 mix of decent analysis/conspiracy theories/senile Soviet grandpa.
> 
> The problem with his moderates and hawks analysis is... who are these hawks? Zolotov, Kadyrov, and Prigozhin? They're assclown thugs. Who'd follow them?
> 
> Shoigu? Come on, the guy is a village idgit sycophant. The moment he stops brown-nosing Putler is the last day anybody sees him.
> 
> Business mogul "oligarchs"? They've become weak and all of them just want this shit to go away.
> 
> Of course there's also the Strelkov-Girkin & Co. lot, but they don't have the scale. They could and WILL be dangerous if the central authority of the Russian Federation implodes and he could well end up as a regional warlord (again). But I don't think he has the connections to be top dog federally.
> 
> The most dangerous of them is Strelkov-Girkin. He has the looks, swagger, biography, and rhetoric of the Daddy Fuhrer vatniks have always dreamed of... But he's just a retired colonel with no military power. If anybody in Russian security services has *any* common sense left, that guy is first in line to have an "accident" if any suspicious stirring occurs. Even before Navalny.


I really do hope you're right  
Anyway it's not much till they finish the "referendum" stuff and then we'll see what they will do about it.


----------



## Adieu

oversteve said:


> I really do hope you're right
> Anyway it's not much till they finish the "referendum" stuff and then we'll see what they will do about it.



The "smart" thing would be to wait for winter and lodge the soldiers throughout private houses and apartment blocks interspersed with Ukrainian civilians.

Can't properly attack them/conflict gets frozen along existing lines if you don't.

BUT:
1) referendums don't really go well with kicking people out of their homes two months later
2) could go very sideways with undisciplined green "mobiks"
3) who ever said they were SMART???


----------



## Flappydoodle

It does feel like things are heating up a lot, quite quickly

Mobilisation. Hard to see how it's a sensible strategic move. It's a lot of people - but they're mostly inexperienced and their will to fight is very questionable. If you've been dragged out of your house and sent to Ukraine, your motivation is probably quite low.

It's also not clear whether Russia can actually supplied, feed or transport that many people. I would assume most of them will get put into basic logistical roles, close to the Russian border - like driving trucks, refuelling etc. That means Russia is just seeking to keep the regions they've taken, rather than launching a new assault.

Nordstream pipeline has been blown up by 3 underwater explosions. That's a pretty blatant message that Russia can/will target pipelines to scare Europe. And it's another message of "if I can't have it, nobody can".

"Referendums" will be done and Putin will announce on Friday that the two regions will join the Russian Federation. He's been pretty explicit that attacks on Russia will receive a nuclear response. So that's going to be quite interesting. It is hard to see what options are on the table:

1. Nuke somewhere unimportant in Ukraine as a message. 

2. Nuke Ukrainian positions in the contested land? But that's like nuking themselves.

Then what? Would Ukraine just surrender? Would it actually help Russia "win" and achieve what they want to achieve? I don't know. The West probably wouldn't step in and nuke Russia and start an exchange

3. Nuke Kyiv, Odessa or something else important. Similar question - it's not clear what strategic value that is to doing that. Sure, you can then probably take over the land. But Russia will be pariah state for the foreseeable future. Even their "allies" would be outraged. Apparently the US told Russia that if they use nukes, there will be a non-nuclear, but severe, response - such as sinking all Russian vessels, and maybe a no-fly zone enforced over Ukraine.

My worry is that Putin is very much backed into a corner now. Obviously they are losing the conventional military fight, and mobilisation is a domestic political defeat too. He must feel frustrated and embarrassed. But he still has his most powerful weapons that he isn't using. So the temptation to unleash them grows. It's pretty scary IMO.


----------



## MaxOfMetal

Russian conventional forces have been an absolute joke, what are the odds their nuclear force is any better? Perhaps not bad enough to be non-functional, but maybe easily deterred?


----------



## mmr007




----------



## Adieu

Flappydoodle said:


> It does feel like things are heating up a lot, quite quickly
> 
> Mobilisation. Hard to see how it's a sensible strategic move. It's a lot of people - but they're mostly inexperienced and their will to fight is very questionable. If you've been dragged out of your house and sent to Ukraine, your motivation is probably quite low.
> 
> It's also not clear whether Russia can actually supplied, feed or transport that many people. I would assume most of them will get put into basic logistical roles, close to the Russian border - like driving trucks, refuelling etc. That means Russia is just seeking to keep the regions they've taken, rather than launching a new assault.
> 
> Nordstream pipeline has been blown up by 3 underwater explosions. That's a pretty blatant message that Russia can/will target pipelines to scare Europe. And it's another message of "if I can't have it, nobody can".
> 
> "Referendums" will be done and Putin will announce on Friday that the two regions will join the Russian Federation. He's been pretty explicit that attacks on Russia will receive a nuclear response. So that's going to be quite interesting. It is hard to see what options are on the table:
> 
> 1. Nuke somewhere unimportant in Ukraine as a message.
> 
> 2. Nuke Ukrainian positions in the contested land? But that's like nuking themselves.
> 
> Then what? Would Ukraine just surrender? Would it actually help Russia "win" and achieve what they want to achieve? I don't know. The West probably wouldn't step in and nuke Russia and start an exchange
> 
> 3. Nuke Kyiv, Odessa or something else important. Similar question - it's not clear what strategic value that is to doing that. Sure, you can then probably take over the land. But Russia will be pariah state for the foreseeable future. Even their "allies" would be outraged. Apparently the US told Russia that if they use nukes, there will be a non-nuclear, but severe, response - such as sinking all Russian vessels, and maybe a no-fly zone enforced over Ukraine.
> 
> My worry is that Putin is very much backed into a corner now. Obviously they are losing the conventional military fight, and mobilisation is a domestic political defeat too. He must feel frustrated and embarrassed. But he still has his most powerful weapons that he isn't using. So the temptation to unleash them grows. It's pretty scary IMO.



Many mistakes here.

4 "referendums", not 2. Including about areas that Russia most certainly DOES NOT control.

They're trying to referendum-then-demand Zaporizhzhia, where 50+% of the population is in Zaporizhzhia City and its suburbs, safely across the Dnipro River and thoroughly under Ukrainian control.

This is NOT some "flip de facto to de jure" in Donetsk and Luhansk, for which no such warfare was needed at all. They could have just done the deed and taken far milder sanctions without any shots fired back last winter for that.

This is a brazen attempt to BEG for control of territories far out of reach of the Russian invasion.

Also, mobiks are most certainly NOT getting logistics roles. That's some of the highest "skilled" shit in the Ru ground forces.

According to the old logic:
Sorta-smart: artillery gofer
Not too stupid: here's your AK, welcome to infantry
YES too stupid: here's a SHOVEL welcome to the "construction battalion", and no, y'all ain't getting no weapons


----------



## oversteve

Sofar ru mobilization looks pretty intriguing

Plenty of funny videos with recruits getting stuff like rusty AK's, drunken soldiers, bums, men causing some self harm in order not to get mobilized etc.
Some people mobilized on Sep 21 already surrendered/captured in UA on Sep 25-26, so basically no training for the mobs as expected... 
Some light protests in Dagestan with people openly calling it a war and that Ru is an invader, at the same time no severe actions against them from police/government and the mobilization was paused at that region.
A military commissar killed while recruiting. Funny thing is that the killer can get an 8-year term for killing while mobilization refusal gets you 10 years....
According to ru FSB around 260k men fled in 3-4 days after mobilization was announced and looking at the lines at their borders now there should be much more atm.

That's porbably not all but simply what I could remeber from the get go since there's plenty of news around.

Atm probably the biggest concern is with the nuclear threats but at the same time Peskov says they are ready to negotiate...


----------



## possumkiller

oversteve said:


> Atm probably the biggest concern is with the nuclear threats but at the same time Peskov says they are ready to negotiate...


I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. Everything I've seen showing the state of the rest of their military tells me most of their nukes are probably inoperable due to lack of maintenance or being stripped of parts that were sold off by corrupt officers. Probably don't have enough fuel to get out of Russia.


----------



## sleewell

a nuke would be crazy. the fallout would blow into russia, not that putin really cares about killing his own you have to wonder if his generals would allow it or just kill him.


----------



## p0ke

sleewell said:


> a nuke would be crazy. the fallout would blow into russia, not that putin really cares about killing his own you have to wonder if his generals would allow it or just kill him.



Yeah, the possible fallout is what I'm most worried about. It's not just a big explosion that kills a lot of people, it'll cause environmental issues for a long time... Anyway, you'd expect their nukes to be more or less non-functional, so maybe they'll just blow up into their hands when they take them out ...


----------



## MASS DEFECT

Seeing Russia's planes, tanks, and drones, I would put my bet that their Nuclear missiles and delivery systems would be equally disappointing. Like Afghan War era stuff. Would definitely threaten Europe or be easily deliverable via Subs. But long-range... they would have a high failure rate and can be easily intercepted.


----------



## DiezelMonster

It's kinda disconcerting that they are ratcheting up Nuke talk, There is nothing to gain for either side but Poutine keeps bringing it up like that annoying co-worker who tells the same story for a week. 

It's obvious they are losing, and I love how this 300K mobilization is happening, considering Ukraine has been mobilizing people since the beginning of the war. 

Where do we see this going? The US just okay'd sending long range weapons now, so does Ukraine shoot into the heart of Russia now? As stated above, based on how poorly things have been going for russkyville, do their nukes even work? 

Is it going to be like the fatboy from fallout 4? does Poutine even have a pipboy?


----------



## sleewell




----------



## Flappydoodle

Adieu said:


> This is a brazen attempt to BEG for control of territories far out of reach of the Russian invasion.



Not really IMO. It's a way to legitimise escalation. Now Russia can say that Ukraine is attacking the motherland, thus permitting use of bigger weapons. 

They formally absorbed those 4 territories into Russia yesterday. Now what?



possumkiller said:


> I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. Everything I've seen showing the state of the rest of their military tells me most of their nukes are probably inoperable due to lack of maintenance or being stripped of parts that were sold off by corrupt officers. Probably don't have enough fuel to get out of Russia.



Sorry but this is totally ridiculous. Sure, there have been some elements of corruption and the Russian military has been disorganised. And their performance has been less than expected.

On the other hand, they have launched hundreds of successful air strikes. They have sent thousands and thousands of guided missiles, most of which have hit their targets just fine. Their tanks are also working fine, and they've caused massive losses to Ukrainian forces. Let's not create some sort of alternative reality where the Russian forces are *totally* incompetent. They've still caused a LOT of destruction and killed tens of thousands of Ukrainians. Their main problem has been logistics and tactics - neither of which is particularly relevant for nuclear weapons.

And lastly, until Covid the USA *was* inspecting Russian nuclear arsenals, and the Russians were inspecting ours as part of the START program. That even includes taking things apart to verify that they are working. Both sides know that each others' arsenals work just fine. 

If you're somehow betting that 6,000 warheads, of which 1,500 are deployed, are *all* broken or just a bluff - you are mistaken and you should discount that idea immediately. This is a very, very dangerous assumption, which is not backed by any evidence. Russia's nuclear arsenal works just fine, and we should be scared of it.



sleewell said:


> a nuke would be crazy. the fallout would blow into russia, not that putin really cares about killing his own you have to wonder if his generals would allow it or just kill him.





p0ke said:


> Yeah, the possible fallout is what I'm most worried about. It's not just a big explosion that kills a lot of people, it'll cause environmental issues for a long time... Anyway, you'd expect their nukes to be more or less non-functional, so maybe they'll just blow up into their hands when they take them out ...





MASS DEFECT said:


> Seeing Russia's planes, tanks, and drones, I would put my bet that their Nuclear missiles and delivery systems would be equally disappointing. Like Afghan War era stuff. Would definitely threaten Europe or be easily deliverable via Subs. But long-range... they would have a high failure rate and can be easily intercepted.



Fallout is not really that bad for a modern nuclear weapon. They are very efficient and most of the radioactive material is consumed during the explosion. Of course, it would produce detectable radiation, but it's very unlikely to be a health hazard outside of the blast radius.

This viewpoint of the Russian nukes not working is wrong, and dangerous.









New START - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





The Americans inspected the Russian nuclear arsenal in 2018. Their nuclear arsenal works just fine and we should take it seriously.

Source for "easily intercepted" ? Unless there's some top secret program we don't know about, you can't really intercept modern ICBMs with MIRVs, which also include decoy warheads.

Source for long-range having high failure rates? Russia has a space program and launches satellites, astronauts and space station components just fine. They can put things into orbit just fine.


----------



## philkilla

Flappydoodle said:


> Not really IMO. It's a way to legitimise escalation. Now Russia can say that Ukraine is attacking the motherland, thus permitting use of bigger weapons.
> 
> They formally absorbed those 4 territories into Russia yesterday. Now what?
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but this is totally ridiculous. Sure, there have been some elements of corruption and the Russian military has been disorganised. And their performance has been less than expected.
> 
> On the other hand, they have launched hundreds of successful air strikes. They have sent thousands and thousands of guided missiles, most of which have hit their targets just fine. Their tanks are also working fine, and they've caused massive losses to Ukrainian forces. Let's not create some sort of alternative reality where the Russian forces are *totally* incompetent. They've still caused a LOT of destruction and killed tens of thousands of Ukrainians. Their main problem has been logistics and tactics - neither of which is particularly relevant for nuclear weapons.
> 
> And lastly, until Covid the USA *was* inspecting Russian nuclear arsenals, and the Russians were inspecting ours as part of the START program. That even includes taking things apart to verify that they are working. Both sides know that each others' arsenals work just fine.
> 
> If you're somehow betting that 6,000 warheads, of which 1,500 are deployed, are *all* broken or just a bluff - you are mistaken and you should discount that idea immediately. This is a very, very dangerous assumption, which is not backed by any evidence. Russia's nuclear arsenal works just fine, and we should be scared of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fallout is not really that bad for a modern nuclear weapon. They are very efficient and most of the radioactive material is consumed during the explosion. Of course, it would produce detectable radiation, but it's very unlikely to be a health hazard outside of the blast radius.
> 
> This viewpoint of the Russian nukes not working is wrong, and dangerous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New START - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Americans inspected the Russian nuclear arsenal in 2018. Their nuclear arsenal works just fine and we should take it seriously.
> 
> Source for "easily intercepted" ? Unless there's some top secret program we don't know about, you can't really intercept modern ICBMs with MIRVs, which also include decoy warheads.
> 
> Source for long-range having high failure rates? Russia has a space program and launches satellites, astronauts and space station components just fine. They can put things into orbit just fine.



If nukes go out pandoras box is going to be opened.


----------



## oversteve

Seems like they somewhat backed off on their nuclear threats once again. At least Peskov said it's not something they are thinking on at the moment so idk what's going on in their heads. Maybe they are considering announcing a larger scale mobilization but looking at it now it's already on a larger scale then they have announced.


----------



## oversteve

meanwhile on occupied territories... russia is already filming a movie about ua nazi, biolabaratories and us generals


----------



## DrewH

philkilla said:


> If nukes go out pandoras box is going to be opened.



Highly unlikely. Putin knows if he uses nukes, even low yield tactical ones, he loses support from China and India. He NEEDS China right now. 

Annexation was more of an attempt at an exit strategy versus justification for larger weapons.


----------



## nightflameauto

oversteve said:


> meanwhile on occupied territories... russia is already filming a movie about ua nazi, biolabaratories and us generals
> 
> View attachment 115193


"Boris? Does' Nazi men look American?"
"Fat and ugly."
"Close enough."


----------



## philkilla

DrewH said:


> Highly unlikely. Putin knows if he uses nukes, even low yield tactical ones, he loses support from China and India. He NEEDS China right now.
> 
> Annexation was more of an attempt at an exit strategy versus justification for larger weapons.



I know it's unlikely, the notion is still terrifying.


----------



## oversteve




----------



## Xaios

oversteve said:


>



I imagine the definition of "consult" in this case is "give us every square centimeter of your land as well as your first born children, or you find yourself committing suicide in the most glorious Russian tradition of falling out of a window.


----------



## Drew

DrewH said:


> Highly unlikely. Putin knows if he uses nukes, even low yield tactical ones, he loses support from China and India. He NEEDS China right now.
> 
> Annexation was more of an attempt at an exit strategy versus justification for larger weapons.


Thing is, I don't think the decision to use nukes, if it occurs, will be a rational, carefully and logically thought out one. Going nuclear is a pretty big escalation, period. It's one of the few you can use from a position of disadvantage, as well. I think if Putin realizes he's losing the war, needs to save face to hold onto power at home, and needs to make some kind of a statement to try to break the spirit of western opposition and make them think it's not worth the cost of continuing to support Ukraine... yeah, from a position of desperation, it's not too hard to get to the point where a tactical nuke strike makes sense, China and India be damned. 

China might not even really care.


----------



## wheresthefbomb

Xaios said:


> I imagine the definition of "consult" in this case is "give us every square centimeter of your land as well as your first born children, or you find yourself committing suicide in the most glorious Russian tradition of falling out of a window.



Minor nitpick, suicide-via-defenestration is an OG KGB/CIA collab. Bonus points for getting mysteriously dosed with LSD beforehand, that's a real throwback.


----------



## DrewH

Drew said:


> Thing is, I don't think the decision to use nukes, if it occurs, will be a rational, carefully and logically thought out one. Going nuclear is a pretty big escalation, period. It's one of the few you can use from a position of disadvantage, as well. I think if Putin realizes he's losing the war, needs to save face to hold onto power at home, and needs to make some kind of a statement to try to break the spirit of western opposition and make them think it's not worth the cost of continuing to support Ukraine... yeah, from a position of desperation, it's not too hard to get to the point where a tactical nuke strike makes sense, China and India be damned.
> 
> China might not even really care.



Putin may be irrational. There are other layers of military command that come before that button press. I don't think there is a Russian general that would follow that order. If Putin orders a strike, I believe that is when you see Putin "retired".


----------



## Drew

DrewH said:


> Putin may be irrational. There are other layers of military command that come before that button press. I don't think there is a Russian general that would follow that order. If Putin orders a strike, I believe that is when you see Putin "retired".


That very well may be true... but how prepared are you to risk nuclear war on whether or not Putin has _total_ control over the Russian military, or if there are generals who would stage a coup before allowing a nuclear war that Putin deemed necessary to defeat the West? 

Russia isn't a constitutional democracy like the States, I wouldn't want to bet on their having the same checks and balances against executive power that we do.


----------



## nightflameauto

Drew said:


> That very well may be true... but how prepared are you to risk nuclear war on whether or not Putin has _total_ control over the Russian military, or if there are generals who would stage a coup before allowing a nuclear war that Putin deemed necessary to defeat the West?
> 
> Russia isn't a constitutional democracy like the States, I wouldn't want to bet on their having the same checks and balances against executive power that we do.


I'm picturing a line-up of military personnel, generals, or whatever, standing at the other end of Putin's massive conference room table while he asks, "Push the button for me?"

They shake their head no, they "accidentally slip" out the nearest window.

"Next? Push the button for me?"

I'd imagine somewhere around four or five in somebody'd be willing to do it.


----------



## oversteve

p.s. some ru media agencies wrote the guy was praying and kissing a holy Icon...

p.p.s that looks even more out of place considerring most of russians are strongly homophobic, call Europe a Gay-rope etc


----------



## wheresthefbomb

Two Russian asylum seekers made landfall on St. Lawrence Island, which is part of my home state of Alaska, on Tuesday. The story so far is they are avoiding compulsory military service. If that's the case I personally welcome them. 

Interesting development regardless. 









2 Russians seek asylum after reaching remote Alaska island


JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — Two Russians who said they fled the country to avoid military service have requested asylum in the U.S. after landing in a small boat on a remote Alaska island in the Bering Sea, U.S.




apnews.com


----------



## DiezelMonster

wheresthefbomb said:


> Two Russian asylum seekers made landfall on St. Lawrence Island, which is part of my home state of Alaska, on Tuesday. The story so far is they are avoiding compulsory military service. If that's the case I personally welcome them.
> 
> Interesting development regardless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2 Russians seek asylum after reaching remote Alaska island
> 
> 
> JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — Two Russians who said they fled the country to avoid military service have requested asylum in the U.S. after landing in a small boat on a remote Alaska island in the Bering Sea, U.S.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apnews.com


That's fine but they should be kept in jail until the war is over hahahaha


----------



## DiezelMonster

It's really strange to me that the western media I've watched is REALLY ratcheting up the Nuclear talk almost to fever pitch.

Some of them even quoting Biden today talking about "Armageddon" at a closed event last night.

Yet all Russian state media keeps saying the west is threatening them. It's a fucking gong show out there guys and maybe we are all going to get zapped because of a bad case of the telephone game........


----------



## oversteve

ru miliutants are getting even more supply problems


----------



## philkilla

oversteve said:


> ru miliutants are getting even more supply problems




Ya hate to see it..


----------



## mmr007

wheresthefbomb said:


> Two Russian asylum seekers made landfall on St. Lawrence Island, which is part of my home state of Alaska, on Tuesday. The story so far is they are avoiding compulsory military service. If that's the case I personally welcome them.
> 
> Interesting development regardless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2 Russians seek asylum after reaching remote Alaska island
> 
> 
> JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — Two Russians who said they fled the country to avoid military service have requested asylum in the U.S. after landing in a small boat on a remote Alaska island in the Bering Sea, U.S.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apnews.com


Oh great we already have a crisis at our southern border with asylum seekers now we have one brewing at our Alaskan border? You know if Trump were still in office he wouldn't allow this type of nonsense....oh wait I forgot he let Russians stroll with impunity into Mar-a-Lago, Trump Tower, the Oval office, the....

Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if we learned he was using Air Force 1 while president to smuggle Russians into the US so they could continue to fund the NRA without dealing with pesky exchange rates.

You know what let me have my coffee and I'll come back with a better argument. I didn't fully flesh that one out properly


----------



## mmr007

I'm not kidding...every single day my spam folder gets junk email stating Ukrainian women want to meet me....me? Why so they can kick my ass?.... because that's apparently what Ukrainians do...they kick ass.

In all seriousness, this is very sad. That explosion couldn't have happened to a nicer illegal bridge.


----------



## Metaluna

Ha


oversteve said:


> ru miliutants are getting even more supply problems



Happy birthday Volodya! На многая лета!


----------



## oversteve

Yesterday was one more massive missile strike from russia worth half billion $ with no significant damage on critical infrastracture but sadly some civilians wounded and killed. Few days ago Trump was talking about 'immediate peace'. Today Orban said that russia should strat the piece talks with US and not Ukraine and that Trump is the only hope  

Seems like russians dropped the nuclear threats atm and are trying to instil fear with other means and are pushing the pro-russian lobby over the world in order to force us into some agreement.


----------



## sleewell

putin is mad they blew up his bridge to crimea so he kills more innocent people but cant really do anything on the actual battle field. i dont really believe in religion or the after life but there should be sustained suffering for him beyond however more years, hopefully days, he has left on earth.


----------



## Metaluna

sleewell said:


> putin is mad they blew up his bridge to crimea so he kills more innocent people but cant really do anything on the actual battle field. i dont really believe in religion or the after life but there should be sustained suffering for him beyond however more years, hopefully days, he has left on earth.


Kismet is the this-world consequence for evil actions. “Getting what’s coming to you “.


----------



## DiezelMonster

There was another cruise missile strike this morning.

I also heard some rumblings that Belarus has been building up at their border since the beginning of September.

What is the likelihood that their 30,000 troops last longer than a few days?


----------



## mmr007

Now apparently there are actually Iranian troops in Crimea operating the drone strikes since the Russian troops are proving to have a rather long steep learning curve with using the bomb equipped drones.


----------



## DiezelMonster

mmr007 said:


> Now apparently there are actually Iranian troops in Crimea operating the drone strikes since the Russian troops are proving to have a rather long steep learning curve with using the bomb equipped drones.


I had read that they were also on the ground in firefights, but that could be mis-reported. 

Soon Belarus will be joining in, looks like any day now, so Russia, the second biggest Superpower in the world is going against Ukraine with Belarus and Iran LOL

Kinda sounds like a movie...


----------



## mmr007

This could very well be the start of WW3 and we just aren't fully aware. There is more activity and belligerents engaged now than the phony war period of WW2. You seem to have Russia lining up with Iran and Belarus and China waiting to see if invading Taiwan is in their interest within 2 years or 20. I think our united strong response has them keeping to their original long term timeline but if a change in US leadership, raising Italian fascism, UK clown car like fiascos and German energy issues cause fissures and Putin's long play works then you may see China invade Taiwan in less than 2 years.


----------



## mmr007

Also, apparently Russian spies have been arrested illegally flying drones over restricted areas in Norway, like energy facilities and airports. Not something to ignore when Russia has already sabotaged NG pipelines to Europe, has been accused of interfering with undersea communication cables and people in general are nervous about drones now that Russia is arming them with explosives. Nah, this will turn out fine.


----------



## oversteve

DiezelMonster said:


> I had read that they were also on the ground in firefights, but that could be mis-reported.
> 
> Soon Belarus will be joining in, looks like any day now, so Russia, the second biggest Superpower in the world is going against Ukraine with Belarus and Iran LOL
> 
> Kinda sounds like a movie...


Even if there are Iranian troops involved in ground fight I don't think there's many of them, probably more like single "volunteers" here and there.

Regarding Belarus it's hard to say, seems Luka is not really fond of the idea of being directly involved and getting even more sanctions but at the same time he tries not to offend putler and says he's ready to fight but always finds some stuff that won't let him join the war like Poland going to attack him and moving all the troops to their border etc.

Meanwhile ru troops are moving away from Kherson saying that ua forces are going to blow up Nova Kahovka dam. If you translate it from "russian" that basically means they have it mined and there's a high probability they are going to blow it up causing a flood of nearby settlements after all there's nothing new for them and they did the same thing in 1941


----------



## oversteve

We've got another massive russian missile strike today and they hit Poland...


----------



## nightflameauto

oversteve said:


> We've got another massive russian missile strike today and they hit Poland...



Oh boy. Even if they weren't sent intentionally to that target? That's not a pretty look.

I keep waiting for the trigger event to pull in NATO. Wonder if this is enough?


----------



## tedtan

Well that’s not good.


----------



## Glades

Russian Defense Ministry stated the rockets are not Russian.


----------



## MFB

Glades said:


> Russian Defense Ministry stated the rockets are not Russian.



And I'm sure a murderer would tell you he also wasn't the one who murdered the person he most definitely DID?


----------



## philkilla

I'm just trying to retire without having to be cold in Europe...could someone just do the world a solid and kill Putin??


----------



## bostjan

Glades said:


> Russian Defense Ministry stated the rockets are not Russian.


Polish officials are saying that they believe the missiles were headed toward targets in Ukraine, and we knocked off course by countermeasures. It could be possible. If Russia is saying that those are not their missiles, then I think that's potentially a bigger problem than if they say that they didn't deliberately target Poland. The implication there is that Ukraine bombed Poland to try to rile up political problems for Russia. I think that likely just comes off as far more combative and will do more to encourage NATO to counter-attack if they find evidence that Russia's claims are false.

But, on the other hand, from the response, it really sounds like no one in NATO wants this to be the escalation event. If this was some sort of fake excuse to get involved more actively, then the war drums would be beating louder by now.


----------



## nightflameauto

philkilla said:


> I'm just trying to retire without having to be cold in Europe...could someone just do the world a solid and kill Putin??


Wasn't there a crowd-source fund for that shit a while back? If not, there should be. I don't think it would take long to pass the hit-man line for funding on something like that.


----------



## Randy

NATO mega-cucking response so far.


----------



## philkilla

Randy said:


> NATO mega-cucking response so far.



I'd be concerned if NATO immediately went for the Article V response.

Maybe they're reluctant because the general city center is roughly 5 miles away from the Ukraine border.


----------



## Randy

philkilla said:


> I'd be concerned if NATO immediately went for the Article V response.



Didn't say that but "we're working to gather the facts" ad nauseum when one of their biggest allies had two people killed isn't very reassuring on their dedication to protecting member countries. You can almost imagine the conversation going on in the backrooms as to whether or not they should just let Putin have Poland if he came rolling over the border.

They could/should probably muster something a little more supportive. Feels like they're still playing the _verbal_ kid gloves routine to not agitate Putin thing. I mean, at some point you gotta tell the guy to knock it off and at least sound like you mean it.


----------



## nightflameauto

Randy said:


> Didn't say that but "we're working to gather the facts" ad nauseum when one of their biggest allies had two people killed isn't very reassuring on their dedication to protecting member countries. You can almost imagine the conversation going on in the backrooms as to whether or not they should just let Putin have Poland if he came rolling over the border.
> 
> They could/should probably muster something a little more reassuring. Feels like they're still playing the _verbal_ kid gloves routine to not agitate Putin thing. I mean, at some point you gotta tell the guy to knock it off and at least sound like you mean it.


This feels like a theme for those that like to deem themselves the "good guys" on the world stage. They shrug in the face of any threat because they just can't wrap their heads around somebody being a dick just to be a dick. Or they'd prefer to just ignore them until they motherfucker comes pounding in the door on their house.

A bully like Putin is only ever going to understand one thing: response in kind. He'll keep fucking around until somebody slaps him. If the NATO response is, "Well, they said they didn't do it, and we can't 125% prove that they weren't Russian missiles stolen by Ukraine, so, I guess we can't do anything. Up for a spot of tea?" *SHRUG*

Then NATO would be as useful on the surface as the UN. A nice party for elites every once in a while, and utterly meaningless beyond that.


----------



## wheresthefbomb

ah yes, the ol' "accidentally shot some rockets into Poland" routine 



Glades said:


> Russian Defense Ministry stated the rockets are not Russian.



well, not anymore, at least


----------



## Kaura

One week and no one remembers this. That's sadly the fact. I don't say NATO should attack with full force after this incident but it's higly likely that they won't.


----------



## jaxadam

wheresthefbomb said:


> well, not anymore, at least


----------



## tedtan

I’m seeing some reports that Poland has stated that they are still investigating and that it appears that the missiles could have been aimed at a Ukrainian target and deflected into Poland after being intercepted by a missile defense system.

If that’s the case, this is not reason to invoke Article V.


----------



## Randy

tedtan said:


> I’m seeing some reports that Poland has stated that they are still investigating and that it appears that the missiles could have been aimed at a Ukrainian target and deflected into Poland after being intercepted by a missile defense system.
> 
> If that’s the case, this is not reason to invoke Article V.


Fwiw (red for emphasis)



> *Polish media *reported that the explosions *may* have been caused by the remains of a Russian missile intercepted by Ukrainian armed forces, a much different calculus for NATO than intentional Russian strikes.
> 
> *The strike likely came from a missile and not the remnants of a missile shot down by Ukraine, according to a U.S. official who asked not to be named in order to discuss initial assessments.*


----------



## Glades

So do we want Putin to win or lose? Which alternative doesn’t end in nuclear war that wipes all of humanity from the face of the earth?


----------



## narad

How many dictators threatening nuclear war do you typically root for?


----------



## Kubs

Im from poland. For now there are 3 options that could cause explosion:
-Russian Rockets
-Ukrainian Rockets
-Gas pipe explosion
The most possible is "accidental" rocket from Russians. There are now balistic research teams that will make sure whats the cause. If it was Russia- Duda will ( or already asked ) NATO to implement paragraph 4. This will mean that Nato will be defending its integrity and people by any chance if rockets will hit its territory one more time. Pray for me guys , i dont want to die.


----------



## Glades

Kubs said:


> Im from poland. For now there are 3 options that could cause explosion:
> -Russian Rockets
> -Ukrainian Rockets
> -Gas pipe explosion
> The most possible is "accidental" rocket from Russians. There are now balistic research teams that will make sure whats the cause. If it was Russia- Duda will ( or already asked ) NATO to implement paragraph 4. This will mean that Nato will be defending its integrity and people by any chance if rockets will hit its territory one more time. Pray for me guys , i dont want to die.


The President of the United States said it was unlikely to be Russian.


----------



## jaxadam

Glades said:


> The President of the United States said it was unlikely to be Russian.



"It’s unlikely in the minds of trajectory that it was fired from Russia." - Joseph R. Biden Jr, 11-15-2022


----------



## mpexus

Its basically proven it was Ukrainian Missiles... so all you War Mongers that want to the World to officially dive into WW3 keep waiting...


----------



## Randy

mpexus said:


> Its basically proven it was Ukrainian Missiles... so all you War Mongers that want to the World to officially dive into WW3 keep waiting...


Meh it was still countermeasures against a Russian barrage. It's in the interest of the EU to quiet things down over there.


----------



## Glades

jaxadam said:


> "It’s unlikely in the minds of trajectory that it was fired from Russia." - Joseph R. Biden Jr, 11-15-2022



Polish President Andrzej Duda said the missile that fell on the country, killing two people, is likely to have come from Ukrainian air defenses.


----------



## Glades

mpexus said:


> Its basically proven it was Ukrainian Missiles... so all you War Mongers that want to the World to officially dive into WW3 keep waiting...


Some deep state warmongers were salivating at the mouth yesterday. Going on Fox and CNN and talking about how NATO should attack Russia.


----------



## philkilla

It just so happe


Glades said:


> Some deep state warmongers were salivating at the mouth yesterday. Going on Fox and CNN and talking about how NATO should attack Russia.



The milsim/airsoft/paintball "I would have served, but" types most likely.


----------



## CanserDYI

Okay I know little to nothing about the actual logistics and actual events that led up to the accidental bombing of Poland, my question is why would Ukrainian rockets be shot West or North West into Poland when the Entirety of Russian territory is east of that part of Ukraine? Wouldnt it make more sense that this was an overshot Russian missle?

I have zero sides in this, I'm just genuinely curious. Unless it was aimed at a Russian group that was currently settled in Ukraine East of a Ukrainian group stationed in like central Ukraine?


----------



## bostjan

CanserDYI said:


> Okay I know little to nothing about the actual logistics and actual events that led up to the accidental bombing of Poland, my question is why would Ukrainian rockets be shot West or North West into Poland when the Entirety of Russian territory is east of that part of Ukraine? Wouldnt it make more sense that this was an overshot Russian missle?
> 
> I have zero sides in this, I'm just genuinely curious. Unless it was aimed at a Russian group that was currently settled in Ukraine East of a Ukrainian group stationed in like central Ukraine?


Because war is messy and anyone can become a target at any time for any reason or no reason at all.

As much as people have every right to be pissed off, think of the countless times the US military accidentally blew up a hospital or embassy. It's not right, but two wrongs doesn't help.


----------



## CanserDYI

bostjan said:


> Because war is messy and anyone can become a target at any time for any reason or no reason at all.
> 
> As much as people have every right to be pissed off, think of the countless times the US military accidentally blew up a hospital or embassy. It's not right, but two wrongs doesn't help.


I dont know how their missle systems work, are they typically aimed with a sight? Or do they plug in coordinates and this could be an oversight of a written 4 looking like a 9 or something?


----------



## bostjan

CanserDYI said:


> I dont know how their missle systems work, are they typically aimed with a sight? Or do they plug in coordinates and this could be an oversight of a written 4 looking like a 9 or something?


I would assume that they are fired in the general direction of the barrage and then they have some sort of image recognition or heat-seeking target lock on them to make sure that they hit missiles. Maybe the silos were just missile-shaped enough and warm enough to trigger whatever system. Or, also just as likely, someone might have fucked up. Not saying that I have reason to believe that they did, but in a situation like this there are a lot of weird variables that make everything unpredictable.

It's really easy to sit here and say "they should not have done that," but, when you are getting shot at and a bunch of buzzers are going off, and you have x number of seconds to do y number of steps, it's a lot more likely that you'll fuck something up..


----------



## CanserDYI

bostjan said:


> I would assume that they are fired in the general direction of the barrage and then they have some sort of image recognition or heat-seeking target lock on them to make sure that they hit missiles. Maybe the silos were just missile-shaped enough and warm enough to trigger whatever system. Or, also just as likely, someone might have fucked up. Not saying that I have reason to believe that they did, but in a situation like this there are a lot of weird variables that make everything unpredictable.
> 
> It's really easy to sit here and say "they should not have done that," but, when you are getting shot at and a bunch of buzzers are going off, and you have x number of seconds to do y number of steps, it's a lot more likely that you'll fuck something up..


Oh definitely, I have zero doubt in my mind that this was a mistake, I just have a weird time believing a missle shot West would be Ukrainian, and more likely an overshot Russian missle coming from the east  but yeah, I'd rather it wasn't Russia frankly.


----------



## bostjan

If NATO and Russia get into a full blown nuclear war, it's pretty much no way of avoiding millions, or, more likely tens or even hundreds of millions, of civilians being permanently erased from the phone book. It frankly boggles my mind how many people (sure it's nowhere near a majority, but still) are like "Yeah, just go ahead and start nuking."

Even if China refuses to get involved and the hot war is as contained as it could possibly be, Putin has already promised that hot war of any sort = nukes. And even if the US missile defense system shoots down 90%+ of the ICBMs heading our way, it's still going to be a really really shitty day for everyone.


----------



## Randy

Hey, we've got at least one fan



> Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov is praising President Biden’s response to the deadly missile strike in Poland, saying Wednesday that the U.S. leader is demonstrating "restraint" while other countries are acting "hysterical."
> 
> "Once again, I want to invite you to pay attention to the rather restrained reaction of the Americans, which contrasted with the absolutely hysterical reaction of the Polish side and a number of other countries," Peskov said Wednesday, according to Reuters.


----------



## bostjan

What part of Polish President Duda's response was hysterical, I wonder? Was it him saying that it was "an isolated incident" and not to worry, or was it when he said it was "an unfortunate accident?" Or maybe when he told everyone to hold off on judgement until they had a chance to look into it and deduce a root cause?

I'm glad cooler heads prevailed, but we still have to account for the fact that Russia has been spouting some pretty aggressive rhetoric about there being "grave consequences" when Finland joined NATO, and they have made it clear over and over that they have no qualms with nuking other countries if they feel the least bit threatened. When you beat the war drums that loudly, and then something somewhere blows up, you are going to be suspected of fowl play, so you'll have to strap yourself in for other nations to be on edge when you threaten to blow them up. I'm not sure why anyone in the Russian government is acting surprised that anyone ever suspected them.


----------



## Randy

Yeah, I think my overall kinda gripe is that the "cooling" rhetoric is only expected to go one way.


----------



## jaxadam

bostjan said:


> you are going to be suspected of fowl play


----------



## bostjan

jaxadam said:


>


Oh beak clucking deal, I made a spelling mistake! I hang around birds all day, so what do you eggspect!


----------



## Drew

Randy said:


> Hey, we've got at least one fan


Call me paranoid, but this seems a LOT like an attempt t try to find any wedge between the NATO alliance, and to foster dissent between the US and Europe. As @bostjan said, the EU response wasn't exactly hysterical, so acting like it was seems a little... disingenuous on the part of the Russans.


----------



## Randy

@Drew I think we're both reading that the same way TBH.

That's kinda why I wasn't in love with the rush to "it probably wasn't Russia's fault" _underreaction _(IMO). I'm glad to hear a lot of the NATO allies have been unified in saying "remember that this was result of Russia's illegal war in Ukraine, regardless of where the missile was fired from".


----------



## Drew

Randy said:


> @Drew I think we're both reading that the same way TBH.
> 
> That's kinda why I wasn't in love with the rush to "it probably wasn't Russia's fault" _underreaction _(IMO). I'm glad to hear a lot of the NATO allies have been unified in saying "remember that this was result of Russia's illegal war in Ukraine, regardless of where the missile was fired from".


Just double checking - tough to tell tone over the 'net.  

And yeah, I agree with that take too. If you lead a bull into a china shop and give it a kick on the rump, if it breaks a few plates then, sure, _technically _the bull broke them, but come on... a broader awareness that this isn't just about Russia and Ukraine but even the direct military effects (much less the economic ones) will spill over the borders is probably appropriate here.


----------



## AwakenTheSkies

This is so fucking stupid. I can't believe this is still happening.


----------



## philkilla

CanserDYI said:


> I dont know how their missle systems work, are they typically aimed with a sight? Or do they plug in coordinates and this could be an oversight of a written 4 looking like a 9 or something?


@CanserDYI without hopefully putting myself on a list, most modern anti-air missiles you could find in a generic search would be truck or trailer mounted; in general the software and hardware dictate specific engagement criteria. 

These systems have very specific criteria, and sometimes the guidance gets aggressive and attacks debris from previously destroyed missiles that were engaged.

MAYBE, said missile engaged some debris/guidance was erratic and it went head first into Poland (roughly 5 miles west of the Ukraine border).

Again, hypothizing.


Fuck Putin and any cunt that supports him.


----------



## CanserDYI

philkilla said:


> @CanserDYI without hopefully putting myself on a list, most modern anti-air missiles you could find in a generic search would be truck or trailer mounted; in general the software and hardware dictate specific engagement criteria.
> 
> These systems have very specific criteria, and sometimes the guidance gets aggressive and attacks debris from previously destroyed missiles that were engaged.
> 
> MAYBE, said missile engaged some debris/guidance was erratic and it went head first into Poland (roughly 5 miles west of the Ukraine border).
> 
> Again, hypothizing.
> 
> 
> Fuck Putin and any cunt that supports him.


Appreciate the insight, that helps.


----------



## wheresthefbomb

bostjan said:


> I would assume that they are fired in the general direction of the barrage and then they have some sort of image recognition or heat-seeking


----------



## Jinn

IMO most definitely a Russian mistake. I think this shows that Putin is using old unreliable equipment and is running on empty in terms of supplies. Beginning of the end?


----------



## tedtan

Jinn said:


> IMO most definitely a Russian mistake. I think this shows that Putin is using old unreliable equipment and is running on empty in terms of supplies. Beginning of the end?


He’s had to buy rockets from North Korea and drones from Iran, so he’s definitely running low.


----------



## Randy

> Ukraine is requesting “immediate access” to the site of the explosion in eastern Poland, a senior Ukrainian defence official said. Oleksiy Danilov said Ukraine wanted a “joint study” of Tuesday’s incident with its partners. Duda said both Poland and the US would have to agree before Ukraine could take part in the investigation.


Why does Ukraine need permission from the US to tour the impact site?


----------



## nightflameauto

Drew said:


> Call me paranoid, but this seems a LOT like an attempt t try to find any wedge between the NATO alliance, and to foster dissent between the US and Europe. As @bostjan said, the EU response wasn't exactly hysterical, so acting like it was seems a little... disingenuous on the part of the Russans.


Yeah, that was my first read on that statement. The Russians are experts at trying desperately to not look like they are driving a wedge between those they deem "the enemy," while doing exactly that and making it abundantly clear to anyone with two brain cells to rub together that that is EXACTLY what they are doing.

Thus far it doesn't appear to have done the job.

I still think the universal "meh" reaction to another country getting excess asplody bits gives Putin the wrong signal. Talk about swatting any other country you feel like, another country gets swatted, and the world just turns a blind eye to it? Yeah, that's the message we want to send. "It's fine, bro. Totes our fault. Sorry. Go head and keep playing war. It'll be OK, buddy."

How you think that's gonna play out long-term? When's the next "accident" scheduled?

Not that I think it's implausible this was an accident. I'm just saying the limp-dick response is gonna be seen as a limp-dick response by Putin. And we all know what he thinks of limp dicks.


----------



## Drew

nightflameauto said:


> I still think the universal "meh" reaction to another country getting excess asplody bits gives Putin the wrong signal. Talk about swatting any other country you feel like, another country gets swatted, and the world just turns a blind eye to it? Yeah, that's the message we want to send. "It's fine, bro. Totes our fault. Sorry. Go head and keep playing war. It'll be OK, buddy."


You're not wrong... but the results of the investigation into a 2014 passenger plane shot down over Ukraine and believed to have been shot by Russia are due to be announced today. Might be worth watching that.


----------



## nightflameauto

Drew said:


> You're not wrong... but the results of the investigation into a 2014 passenger plane shot down over Ukraine and believed to have been shot by Russia are due to be announced today. Might be worth watching that.


I'm more looking forward to 2030, when they announce the results of the investigation into the missiles that plonked Poland recently.

I think my WTFer has had enough today. It didn't even raise its head off the desk that it's made a dent in from smashing into it over and over again.


----------



## oversteve

Some more 'conspiracy' regarding the missiles in Poland 

Kyiv coordinates *50.4501° N*, 30.5234°E
Lviv coordinates 49.8429° N, *24.0311° E*

And coordinates 50.4501° N, 24.0311° E is near the place where rockets hit in Poland


----------



## CanserDYI

oversteve said:


> Some more 'conspiracy' regarding the missiles in Poland
> 
> Kyiv coordinates *50.4501° N*, 30.5234°E
> Lviv coordinates 49.8429° N, *24.0311° E*
> 
> And coordinates 50.4501° N, 24.0311° E is near the place where rockets hit in Poland


Wow, not just near, we are talking a literal _couple_ miles near Przewodów. Not even 2 miles. I think this is a case of insane coincidence, because while, yes, the coordinates above are Kyiv and Lviv, aren't literally _thousands_ of other coordinates also technically Kyiv and Lviv?

EDIT: Also, wasn't this, while yes still a missile, a rather low powered missile? I feel if someone was doing a low powered missile, they would have rather specific coordinates of where they were firing, rather than using coordinates that are just essentially just City center Kyiv and Lviv. If I was using a large, really scary weapon, yeah, I'd use a coordinate for the city center, and probably would use a more specific building's coordinates if I was using something "small" like this instance. I hope that makes sense.


----------



## bostjan

CanserDYI said:


> Wow, not just near, we are talking a literal _couple_ miles near Przewodów. Not even 2 miles. I think this is a case of insane coincidence, because while, yes, the coordinates above are Kyiv and Lviv, aren't literally _thousands_ of other coordinates also technically Kyiv and Lviv?
> 
> EDIT: Also, wasn't this, while yes still a missile, a rather low powered missile? I feel if someone was doing a low powered missile, they would have rather specific coordinates of where they were firing, rather than using coordinates that are just essentially just City center Kyiv and Lviv. If I was using a large, really scary weapon, yeah, I'd use a coordinate for the city center, and probably would use a more specific building's coordinates if I was using something "small" like this instance. I hope that makes sense.


That is interesting, but, yeah, probably half of the part of Poland along the border with Ukraine would correspond to two different places in Ukraine if you split the coordinates.

I guess, what is the conspiracy alleging? That the coordinates were entered in incorrectly to correspond with two other different intended targets combined? As horrible as it is, I don't think anyone is trying to argue that Russia is not shooting missiles at Ukraine... I guess I don't get where that is going.


----------



## oversteve

bostjan said:


> That is interesting, but, yeah, probably half of the part of Poland along the border with Ukraine would correspond to two different places in Ukraine if you split the coordinates.
> 
> I guess, what is the conspiracy alleging? That the coordinates were entered in incorrectly to correspond with two other different intended targets combined? As horrible as it is, I don't think anyone is trying to argue that Russia is not shooting missiles at Ukraine... I guess I don't get where that is going.


Well, the thing is first is the capital and 2nd is the largest regional center in West of Ukraine, both are the places that had most of the rockets shot at in their respective regions, not just any random place. 
And yes, looks pretty much like some ruZZian dumb prick making a mistake while entering coordinates from excel sheet while looking for whores on dating websites (there was a belingcat investigation about that recently)
It's not going anywhere, it's just a plausible explanation of the missile hit in Poland.


----------



## oversteve

CanserDYI said:


> Wow, not just near, we are talking a literal _couple_ miles near Przewodów. Not even 2 miles. I think this is a case of insane coincidence, because while, yes, the coordinates above are Kyiv and Lviv, aren't literally _thousands_ of other coordinates also technically Kyiv and Lviv?
> 
> EDIT: Also, wasn't this, while yes still a missile, a rather low powered missile? I feel if someone was doing a low powered missile, they would have rather specific coordinates of where they were firing, rather than using coordinates that are just essentially just City center Kyiv and Lviv. If I was using a large, really scary weapon, yeah, I'd use a coordinate for the city center, and probably would use a more specific building's coordinates if I was using something "small" like this instance. I hope that makes sense.


as you have mentioned it's few miles away so that might be slightly shifted coordinates of some power lines or other electricity related infrastructure in the cities since these were almost exclusively targeted by the missiles that weren't intercepted during that exact 90+ missile strike


----------



## CanserDYI

oversteve said:


> Well, the thing is first is the capital and 2nd is the largest regional center in West of Ukraine, both are the places that had most of the rockets shot at in their respective regions, not just any random place.
> And yes, looks pretty much like some ruZZian dumb prick making a mistake while entering coordinates from excel sheet while looking for whores on dating websites (there was a belingcat investigation about that recently)
> It's not going anywhere, it's just a plausible explanation of the missile hit in Poland.


My point being why would they use the city center coordinates for a "small" rocket like that, versus a known base, building, bus, bridge, etc. I think its just an interesting coincidence with the coordinate numbers. 

This does not give me any bias, I still do not know if this was Russian or Ukrainian and I do not wish to argue who's missile it was because my dumb ass has zero idea. I'm merely speculating on the theory above being an amalgamation of two parts of major city center's coordinates being a "funny" coincidence in a bad situation.


----------



## oversteve

CanserDYI said:


> My point being why would they use the city center coordinates for a "small" rocket like that, versus a known base, building, bus, bridge, etc. I think its just an interesting coincidence with the coordinate numbers.
> 
> This does not give me any bias, I still do not know if this was Russian or Ukrainian and I do not wish to argue who's missile it was because my dumb ass has zero idea. I'm merely speculating on the theory above being an amalgamation of two parts of major city center's coordinates being a "funny" coincidence in a bad situation.


There's an explanation one post above - now we have temporary blackouts all over the country due to those 'small' rockets hitting some power plants/lines. With those last few massive rocket strikes russians tried to bring down the electricity distribution systems all over UA.


----------



## CanserDYI

oversteve said:


> There's an explanation one post above - now we have temporary blackouts all over the country due to those 'small' rockets hitting some power plants/lines. With those last few massive rocket strikes russians tried to bring down the electricity distribution systems all over UA.


No, I'm not disagreeing with that. I'm having a hard time explaining what I mean, it appears. I definitely think the missile that hit poland was an accident of some sort. I think the theory that it was misplaced coordinates of two city centers is just an interesting coincedence because I'm pretty sure Russian and Ukrainian missiles are being shot at more targeted things than literal city centers by coordinate. That's all I'm saying.


----------



## oversteve

CanserDYI said:


> No, I'm not disagreeing with that. I'm having a hard time explaining what I mean, it appears. I definitely think the missile that hit poland was an accident of some sort. I think the theory that it was misplaced coordinates of two city centers is just an interesting coincedence because I'm pretty sure Russian and Ukrainian missiles are being shot at more targeted things than literal city centers by coordinate. That's all I'm saying.


once again - the exact coordinates of city centers are just for a large scale location reference, the exact coordinates of the place where rocket hit is few miles away and might've been coordinates of some infrastructure within cities, not necessarily it's center


----------



## CanserDYI

oversteve said:


> once again - the exact coordinates of city centers are just for a large scale location reference, the exact coordinates of the place where rocket hit is few miles away and might've been coordinates of some infrastructure within cities, not necessarily it's center


I realize the _actual _location of where the missile hits is a different thing than its general entered coordinate for fire. The coordinates you posted are the literally exact city center of both Kyiv and Lviv.  I'm not sure how it would line up exactly with both exact city centers to an almost .001 tolerance. If they are using those coordinates to fire a missile, they would most likely be shooting something a lot larger than these missiles that hit Poland. For those missiles, they would have to be using coordinates more precise. If I was trying to hit a building hiding military or equipment, I wouldn't just plug in the city center coordinates and hope to god it hits them...you know?

EDIT: You know what, I do realize there is the chance that some Russian asshole was just plugging those numbers in as just "random missile strikes" in those cities, and just wherever it hits, he's happy. I'll concede to that I suppose, just seems wasteful and assholish but I guess can't put much past them.


----------



## oversteve

CanserDYI said:


> I realize the _actual _location of where the missile hits is a different thing than its general entered coordinate for fire. The coordinates you posted are the literally exact city center of both Kyiv and Lviv.  I'm not sure how it would line up exactly with both exact city centers to an almost .001 tolerance. If they are using those coordinates to fire a missile, they would most likely be shooting something a lot larger than these missiles that hit Poland. For those missiles, they would have to be using coordinates more precise. If I was trying to hit a building hiding military or equipment, I wouldn't just plug in the city center coordinates and hope to god it hits them...you know?
> 
> EDIT: You know what, I do realize there is the chance that some Russian asshole was just plugging those numbers in as just "random missile strikes" in those cities, and just wherever it hits, he's happy. I'll concede to that I suppose, just seems wasteful and assholish but I guess can't put much past them.


0.001 longitude difference is like half a mile and 0.1 latitude difference is 7 miles so that's not exactly a center, just some area in the cities (vicinity of cities), also these are only one of 2 coordinates matching for each city, the other one might be any within city area


----------



## DiezelMonster

What is everyone's opinion on the Ukrainian President's visit to the US yesterday?

It's amazing how polarizing in comment sections it has been, seriously. I guess everything is these days.


----------



## jaxadam

DiezelMonster said:


> What is everyone's opinion on the Ukrainian President's visit to the US yesterday?
> 
> It's amazing how polarizing in comment sections it has been, seriously. I guess everything is these days.


----------



## DiezelMonster

jaxadam said:


>


Peace sells? But who's buyin!


----------



## Demiurge

I changed the channel because I was trying to watch Jeopardy so I don't know for sure, but the facial expression looks like he was saying, "It's now time for me to say bababooeys, yes?"


----------



## Steo

Interesting thread here from a Russian prospective. It's not good...


----------



## Steo

Also interested story/ history here:








The revenge of history in Ukraine: year of war has shaken up world order


A shared sense of national history is proving to be a crucial weapon, spurring on Ukraine resistance and Russian soldiers




www.theguardian.com


----------

